• Connect
  • Bookmark Us
  • AF Twitter
  • AF YouTube
  • AF LinkedIn
  • Subscribe
  • Subscription Link
Arent Fox
  • Firm

    • History

    • Awards & Recognitions

    • Diversity

      • Overview
      • Diversity Scholarship
      • Employees on Diversity
      • LGBT Initiative
      • Women’s Leadership Development Initiative
    • Alumni

    • Pro Bono

      • Overview
      • Current Pro Bono Work
      • Community Involvement
      • Pro Bono Newsletter
      • Pro Bono Awards & Honors
      • FAQ: Pro Bono & Working at Arent Fox
    • Leadership

      • Firm Management
      • Administrative Leadership
  • Deals & Cases

  • People

  • Practices & Industries

    • Practices

      • Advertising, Promotions & Data Security
      • Government Relations
      • Antitrust & Competition Law
      • Health Care
      • Appellate
      • Insurance & Reinsurance
      • Bankruptcy & Financial Restructuring
      • Intellectual Property
      • Commercial Litigation
      • International Trade
      • Communications, Technology & Mobile
      • Labor & Employment
      • Construction
      • Municipal & Project Finance
      • Consumer Product Safety
      • OSHA
      • Corporate & Securities
      • Political Law
      • ERISA
      • Real Estate
      • Environmental
      • Tax
      • FDA Practice (Food & Drug)
      • Wealth Planning & Management
      • Finance
      • White Collar & Investigations
      • Government Contractor Services
    • Industries

      • Automotive
      • Energy Law & Policy
      • Fashion, Luxury Goods & Retail
      • Government Real Estate & Public Buildings
      • Hospitality
      • Life Sciences
      • Long Term Care & Senior Living
      • Media & Entertainment
      • Medical Devices
      • Nonprofit
      • Sports
  • Newsroom

    • Alerts

    • Events

    • Media Mentions

    • Press Releases

    • Social Media

    • Subscribe

  • Careers

    • Lawyers

    • Law Students

    • Professional Staff

  • Contact

    • Washington, DC

    • New York, NY

    • Los Angeles, CA

    Alerts

    • Newsroom Overview
      • Alerts

        Alerts by Criteria

        E.g., 1 / 21 / 2013
        E.g., 1 / 21 / 2013
      • Events
      • Media Mentions
      • Press Releases
      • Social Media
      • Subscribe

    You are here

    Home » Newsroom » Alerts

    Share

    • Printer-friendly version
    • Send by email
    • A Title
    • A Title
    • A Title
    • A
    • A
    • A

    To “Like” or Not to “Like”?

    February 9, 2012

    We all want to be “Liked” and have others “Like” us. It seems like that is one consistent thread in all of social media: Like Me! Therefore, it’s a natural progression for marketers to attempt to capitalize off of this need by launching promotions that involve the “Like” feature on Facebook. However, a promotion involving the “Like” feature requires some management before proceeding.

    For one, you have to be aware of Facebook’s rules. Facebook has established a fairly clear policy on whether the “Like” feature may be incorporated into a brand owner’s promotion. In this regard, as of the date of this article, Facebook prohibits a company from using a consumer’s act of “Liking” a page as an automatic entry into a promotion or from using the act of “Liking” a wall post or picture as an entry into a promotion. Facebook’s guidelines do, however, appear to allow a company to require people to “Like” a page to view a brand page. Once the user has access, the user may then enter a promotion available through an application on the page. Similarly, you may not utilize the “Like” feature for a voting mechanism in a contest. This means that you may have a promotion that incorporates votes on Facebook, but the votes may not be lodged via the “Like” feature. There are other brand usage guidelines that users of the “Like” feature must also be aware of, see Facebook’s Brand Permissions Center for more details.

    Next, and perhaps less obvious, you must consider the promotion through the eyes of a regulator. In this regard, the regulators have commented on marketers’ use of this feature. Consider the recent case at the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureaus (NAD), In re Coastal Contacts, Inc. (NAD Case #5387 10/25/11), which evaluated a challenge filed by 1-800 Contacts, Inc. against Coastal Contacts in part for Coastal Contact’s use of the “Like” feature in advertising. The promotion was launched through Facebook and involved Coastal Contacts offering "free" products to consumers who "Liked" its Facebook page, via the statement: “Like This Page! … So you too can get your free pair of glasses!”

    This type of promotion—called a “like-gated” promotion—is one that involves the consumer “Liking” a product in order to obtain some benefit. In the case of Coastal Contacts, those who “Liked” Coastal Contacts’ Facebook page thought they were to receive a free pair of glasses. And, when a consumer “Liked” Coastal Contacts’ Facebook page, additional terms and conditions were revealed that explained the limitations on the offer.

    One of the issues the NAD considered was whether the “Like” element of the advertising campaigned was false and misleading, as proposed by 1-800 Contacts, since many of the “Likes” were a result of Coastal Contacts’ eye glasses giveaway. In this regard, the NAD explained that the display of the total number of "Likes" on Coastal Contacts' Facebook page could mean a number of things to consumers, including that consumers “Like” the company or Coastal Contacts’ product. The NAD stated that the use of the “Like” feature in advertising constituted "general social endorsement[s]." The NAD found that because actual consumers “Liked” the Coastal Contacts’ page, and those consumers who participated in the “like-gated” promotion received the benefit of the promotion, Coastal Contacts could substantiate the general social endorsement that the “Likes” conveyed.

    The notable part of the decision is that the NAD also explained that the outcome of the case may have been different if the evidence had demonstrated that consumers who participated in the “like-gated” promotion could not or did not receive the benefit of the offer, or that the advertiser used misleading or artificial means to inflate the number of Facebook "Likes." For example, if the “Likes” were attributed to employees, the ruling may have been different.

    “Like-gated” promotions are very useful marketing tools for brand owners. For example, Tory Burch has a “Facebook Shop” that is only visible to fans of the Tory Burch Facebook page, including a “Fan Favorites” section with fashion items that are popular among Tory Burch fans. Such use of the “Like” feature is likely to gather numerous visitors to the Facebook page and create additional interest in the brand.

    Keeping this in mind, the potential benefits as well as the regulatory restrictions of like-gating must be considered when developing an advertising model based on the popularity of a brand. It is important to accurately convey the Facebook users who actually “Like” your product, as well as ensure that your advertising does not mislead others into believing that you are more popular – or more “Liked” – than the evidence supports.

    For more details on this issue, please contact Sarah E. Bruno or Eva Pulliam.

    Related People

    • Sarah L. Bruno
    • Eva J. Pulliam

    Related Practices

    Advertising, Promotions & Data Security
    • Firm
    • Deals & Cases
    • People
    • Practices & Industries
    • Newsroom
    • Careers
    • Contact

    Footer Main

    • Firm
    • Deals & Cases
    • People
    • Practices & Industries
    • Newsroom
    • Careers
    • Subscribe
    • Alumni
    • Diversity
    • Legal Notice
    • Privacy Policy
    • Social Media Disclaimer
    • Nondiscrimination
    • Site Map
    • Client/Staff Login

    Offices

    • Washington, DC
      1717 K Street, NW
      Washington, DC 20036
      Tel: 202.857.6000
    • New York, NY
      1675 Broadway
      New York, New York 10019
      Tel: 212.484.3900
    • Los Angeles, CA
      555 West Fifth Street, 48th Floor
      Los Angeles, California 90013
      Tel: 213.629.7400
    • © Copyright 2013 Arent Fox LLP. All Rights Reserved.

      Legal Disclaimer
      Contents may contain attorney advertising under the laws of some states. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.