Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Verizon’s Trade In “Any Phone” Offer for a Free iPhone 16 Pro Questioned

Regular reader and commenter Joel V. recently caught a bit of nasty fine print by Verizon Wireless in a new TV commercial.


Most viewers would understand the ad to say that if you trade in any cellphone in any condition, Verizon will give you a free iPhone 16 Pro. It would be reasonable to assume that you have to buy a plan from the company because they are simply not just handing out free phones without any catches.

*MOUSE PRINT:

What our consumer caught was this tiny disclosure that was on the screen for about one-and-half seconds:

Verizon "any phone" fine print

Rather than the trade-in offer being good on “any” phone as the commercial explicitly states, it is only valid on these three brands: Apple, Google, and Samsung. What about people who own a phone from Motorola, LG, ZTE, OnePlus, or another brand? They’re out of luck apparently.

Additional terms of this offer are not orally stated in the commercial. But like a similar offer we dissected last December (see prior story), Verizon buries the full details in a three-second on-screen disclosure in tiny print toward the end of the commercial. Those terms include the requirement to purchase the iPhone 16 Pro for $999.99 (either pay upfront or be charged equal monthly payments) and get 1/36th of the purchase price back in a billing credit rebate each month for three years. You also have to sign up for Verizon’s most expensive plan, Unlimited Ultimate, for about $100 a month.

We asked the company why it advertised this trade-in offer as applying to “any” phone when in fact it only applies to three specific brands, why it doesn’t orally disclose other important requirements, and whether they are going to change the commercial. The company did not respond to multiple inquiries.

Consumer World has asked the National Advertising Division of BBB National Programs to take on this case because of the deceptive nature of the commercial.

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Do Political Influencers Have to Disclose Paid Posts?

More and more political campaigns are trying to get their messages out to younger generations. How do they do this? Both major parties are paying internet influencers to create content, usually video messages, in various social media like TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, X, and others.

So the question is, do these influencers have to disclose to viewers when they were paid to espouse a particular point of view (which probably was there own anyway)? Here’s what one influencer says:

And here’s what the law says. The Federal Trade Commission has specific rules requiring infuencers to clearly disclose material connections they have with companies if they were paid for their opinions. In a commercial context, they believe that since this is a kind of paid advertising, anyone seeing it has a right to know what they are seeing or hearing may have been influenced by the money the person was paid.

But the FTC regulates trade and commerce and opinions spouted by internet influencers about politcal issues and figures is not within their jurisdiction.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) oversees political advertising. Last December they endeavored to modernize regulations governing internet communications, but decided not to require internet influencers to disclose to viewers and readers if they were paid by a political entity. Some of commissioners at the FEC disagreed saying this was a missed opportunity.

Some states have begun requiring social media influencers to disclose if they were paid to espouse a particular political opinion on a candidate or issue. Last year, California passed such a law. And in June, the Texas Ethics Commission passed a requirement that influencers have to disclose if a post or video is a paid political advertisement.

Various social media platforms have their own rules that posters must follow.

*MOUSE PRINT:

TikTok has the strictest policy — banning political advertising entirely, including branded political content from creators. Instagram and Facebook, owned by Meta, allow for paid political ads and sponsored political content from creators as long as the group is registered in its ad library. … And X, formerly Twitter, lifted its political ads ban last year. — Politico

What is your opinion? Should influencers who are paid to espouse a particular political point of view disclose that fact, whether the law requires it or not?

[Please do not turn the comments into a Trump vs. Harris, or democrats vs. republicans discussion.]

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Getting So Many Search Results Makes Shopping Harder

Have you ever noticed how bad some retailers’ online search results are? You are searching for a pretty specific thing, but the search results you get show you tons of irrelevant products. Other sites provide you with exactly what you were searching for, but display so many results that you could never review all of them.

For example, having just bought a blood pressure monitor from Amazon, MrConsumer decided to check Wayfair during their Way Day sale. So he entered “blood pressure monitor” in quotes in their search field.

Look at the results.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Wayfair search results

It spit back a 200-page list containing 9,868 results! How many were actually blood pressure monitors? It appears to be four! And when I double-checked to see if they had the brand I bought, Omron… I got 45,861 results only one of which appeared to be an Omron brand product!

More recently, Wayfair improved. Now searching for “blood pressure monitor” provides “only” 4,410 results, 10 of which were actually those devices.

By comparison, Target provided 59 results, all of which were blood pressure monitors.

Amazon and Walmart had a different problem. Amazon offered about 450 relevant results. And Walmart provided about 1,250 results, virtually all of which were blood pressure monitors. How can any human deal with whittling down so many choices?

The abundance of relevant search results at Walmart is even prevalent when searching for grocery items making shopping online far more difficult.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Walmart Search Results

This whole concept of having too many choices has a name – the paradox of choice.

It is hard to say which is worse — too many irrelevant search results or too many relevant ones. What do you thnk and what has been your search and shopping experience?