Are Broke Straight Boys breaking the law?

I was looking at Just Us Boys and noticed that Broke Straight Boys is number 1 on their top ten list of user favorite sites. Correct me if I'm wrong, but BSB bought JUB last year did they not?

I seem to recall some new Federal Trade Commission rules that said bloggers must disclose if they are financially connected to the products or sites they promote. I wonder if this applies to BSB? I couldn't find anything on the JUB site that said it is owned by BSB.

I wonder if the users of JUB would be surprised that the number one site supposedly ranked by them is actually the parent company of JUB?

Intense Cash purchased the JUB property. Broke Straight Boys is merely one of several sites Intense Cash produces.

And...

Every time CNN runs a review or story about a Warner Bros movie, it publishes as disclaimer "we're both owned by the same company".

I'm glad this matter was brought up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bec

Intense Cash purchased the JUB property. Broke Straight Boys is merely one of several sites Intense Cash produces.

---

Which legally, it (JUB) is required to disclose on their blog but then again, so are the rest of us according to the FTC whenever we include an affiliate link.

Regards,

Lee

I wanted to clarify that I'm not trying to cause trouble for JUB, BSB or Intense Cash, and who knows, maybe BSB really is the number one ranked site by JUB users (although Alexa rankings would seem to indicate that other sites like Sean Cody and Randy Blue are more popular).

If I was the owner of the other nine sites on that list I would probably wonder if I was getting shafted. Then again, you might not want to say anything for fear of getting dropped from the list altogether.

It just seems like there should be an asterisk next to BSB being ranked as # 1 that says "oh, and by the way, this site happens to be owned by the same company as JUB".

The truth is, I haven't seen a single blog or affiliate site that's disclosing that they are paid a fee for each join they refer. And that's required under the new regulations as well.

My guess is that enforcement of this law is going to be extremely low on the priority list. It would probably be FTC that would do any enforcement action, and they generally only go after really egregious violations, like the totally fraudulent penis enlargement crap that was being sold on TV.

TV stations get a cut from infomercials but they don't disclose it either so...:crazyeyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jIgG

TV stations get a cut from infomercials but they don't disclose it either so...:crazyeyes:

---

Sure they do. I recall seeing at the beginning of every infomercial and sometimes after something like "the following program is a paid presentation...".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seth

Sure they do. I recall seeing at the beginning of every infomercial and sometimes after something like "the following program is a paid presentation...".

---

Thats actually said/written on the screen so that viewers don't think the TV station is actually showing a 'real' show, being America, most people are so dumb if the stations didn't have that disclaimer they'd probably end up getting sued because the viewer wouldn't realize it was a commercial.

Its the same reason that McDonalds now prints 'Contents may be hot' on their hot coffees.

Regards,

Lee

I don't think the new rules apply.

I don't see anywhere on justusboys.com where the publishers of the site express
an opinion of brokestraightboys. Yes, it's listed as "most favorited by users", but
that's a fact about what users did, not an opinion by the publisher which might be
erroneously taken as objective.

If in fact it's true that it is the most favorited by users, they are simply reporting a
fact. It's it's false, that's simply false advertising. Either way, it's not the publisher
endorsing the site, stating that THEY like it, so the new rules don't apply.

i very much doubt it

Quote:

---

I don't see anywhere on justusboys.com where the publishers of the site express an opinion of brokestraightboys. Yes, it's listed as "most favorited by users", but that's a fact about what users did, not an opinion by the publisher which might be erroneously taken as objective.

---

How do we know that it is in fact the users opinion and not BSB/JUB "doctoring" the results?

Oh wait, I forgot... everyone who works in porn is 100% honest, reliable and trustworthy. If BSB was actually ranked as number 10 or lower I'm sure JUB would honestly report that.

$0.02

Really? Do you people not have anything else to do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sc32803

How do we know that it is in fact the users opinion and not BSB/JUB "doctoring" the results?

Oh wait, I forgot... everyone who works in porn is 100% honest, reliable and trustworthy. If BSB was actually ranked as number 10 or lower I'm sure JUB would honestly report that.

---

First, read the next sentence in my post, the one after the one you quoted.
Next, go work on your own site and stop worrying about other people's sites.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dzinerbear

Really? Do you people not have anything else to do?

---

LOL this made me laugh for some reason!

I think one real gray area of this law are spam blogs, which aren't really even blogs.

If I run a more traditional blog and say "Oh by the way, I found this awesome new product. Go check it out here...", that obviously falls under this.

But what about blogs that are really just one big ad themselves?