Beyond even just unethical not to disclose that they got it for free, it is actually a violation of the Federal Trade Commission rules on endorsements. Both Disney AND the blogger could be fined for not disclosing.Some do, others don't. But the ethical one's that do make that clear in their posts that they got the trip for free.
Not sure those are rules or guidelines. I know in the cruising world that many Vloggers seem a little casual about disclosing which trips they paid for and which trips they were invited on for free. And many of those Vloggers are also Travel Agents and in the normal course of business cruise lines give travel agents free passage. Or if they lead a group of a certain number of people, they get their passage for free.Beyond even just unethical not to disclose that they got it for free, it is actually a violation of the Federal Trade Commission rules on endorsements. Both Disney AND the blogger could be fined for not disclosing.
I've actually been really surprised to see how few of them have been disclosing that they are sailing free. Maybe only one or two? I don't want to assume that they are all there for free but it is hard to know when most of them aren't saying either way.
Surely the cruise itself (or the hotel stay) is an in-kind payment of sorts. I don't see a real difference between "sponsored" and "hosted" here.So for influencers, it's hosted vs sponsored. Sponsered is if they are being PAID to by the company. Hosted is if they're just invited and are showing things on their own accord. Of course, I think companies expect for people invited to share things, but it isn't contact-based. (that I am aware). But if you watch some of the TikTok/Instagram stuff there's usually a tag that says hosted or invited.
Griff & Alyssa are also part of the Disney Creator Lab or whatever they called it. I suspect others in the program were hosted on the Wish. G&A were even permitted to take two others with them so they are taking Alyssa's parents.Disney also has their core group of "creators" who they've been bringing out to the parks at various points over the past year. Griff and Alyssa were invited (i.e. hosted) to be on the cruise right now. Pete from the Dis has indicated that he is sharing but not reviewing the cruise because he is not paying for his stay.
I don’t believe the Trackers were on this cruise. They haven’t posted about it. Pretty sure they’ve paid for all their recent cruises, too.I think only Timtracker got invited, as his audience is one of the biggest with an audience they want to attract. People who already love Disney and need to make the switch to the cruise.
All other Disney vloggers will probably pay. As they will want to show the new things anyway. I don't think Tim had cruised before he got invited for the first time.
The only other that might get invited is Adam Hattan, if they want to attract the UK audience. But while I love his videos, they are not for everyone due to their length and style. Are there British vloggers who do daily updates on DCL and WDW?
Non-Disney vloggers probably get invited if Disney thinks their audience is interested in a Disney cruise.
I don't think Disney will invite (many) cruise vloggers, as they and their audience know they can get a better price for a cruise elsewhere and they are not that into Disney to pay for the brand. When you look at cruise vloggers going on a Disney cruise, because they want to inform their audience about all the different cruiselines, there is often the discussion 'Is it worth it'.
They should have specifically mentioned it during their video, a hashtag isn't enough per FTC regulations.I went back and checked the hashtags on the video of this family I follow. They put hosted. Lucky them!!!
They definitely do not. Maybe people don’t know they should do that?They should have specifically mentioned it during their video, a hashtag isn't enough per FTC regulations.
Perhaps, but I beleive YouTube is pretty clear in their guidance. They also have a box that creators are to check if it is a paid promotion. A free cruise like this is expensive enough to probably qualify as paid. It is there so the audience is aware that the review of the product may not be 100% unbiased since it was either free or they were paid for it. Ignorance of the law isn't an excuse.They definitely do not. Maybe people don’t know they should do that?