Regulators – mount up!

With projections for more than 18 million people to be using Twitter by the end of 2009 and another 200 million currently using Facebook, it’s clear that social media is here to stay. The essence of the Web 2.0 phenomenon is the rise of user-generated content (UGC) and the power it gives average citizens to express their opinions – and have others listen. There is a reason why everyone and their mother is using some form of social media, be it reading and writing blogs, sharing photos on Flickr, laughing at videos on YouTube or commenting on stories in their favorite newspaper’s digital edition.

As more and more people are getting their news online, making purchasing decisions based on Google results, and using social media not just to interact with friends but to keep themselves and others informed on the issues/causes/products that matter, it seems traditional media is hip to the game (note Ashton Kutcher v. CNN, and Oprah’s overnight Twitter success) and are increasing their social media presence in droves.

As the influence of “the web” on American culture becomes omnipresent, the federal government is taking notice and is stepping in to decide how these communications should be framed. In October, the FCC ruled that bloggers should have to disclose whether they are paid for the posts on their blogs. (Editorial note – as a PR person, I greeted this news with a cheer! If I had to explain to one more novice blogger why I wouldn’t pay $50 to have them write about my client - what the difference between editorial and advertorial is - I was going to lose it.) It’s my opinion that government regulation of blogs in this way will serve to legitimize this medium in the eyes of “naysayers” who doubt the value of a blogger’s recommendation.

Most recently, the FDA stepped in with a public hearing on pharmaceutical companies’ use of social media for prescription drugs. Information garnered here will be used “to help guide FDA in making policy decisions on the promotion of human and animal prescription drugs and biologics and medical devices using the Internet and social media tools.” (source, FDA.gov)

As more and more businesses turn to social media as a cost effective method of communicating with current and potential customers, it’ll be interesting to see how governmental rules and regulations affect the ability of both companies and peoples to communicate.

It remains to be seen what this regulation will mean – simply a disclosure requirement, or something more? It begs the question – is government regulation of a “for the people, by the people” medium a form of censorship? Does it infringe on our freedom of speech? What do you think?

By Meagan Ellis, Kel & Partners

VP of Social Media for the Publicity Club of New England

(@redheadmeag, www.facebook.com/redheadmeag)