Mouse Print* – Page 162 – Exposing the strings and catches buried in the fine print.

Updated every Monday! Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Is It a Story or Is It an Ad in the LA Times?

November 14, 2016November 14, 2016 by Edgar (aka MrConsumer)

Every week, MrConsumer searches through thousands of consumer stories trying to find the most interesting and useful ones to present to Consumer World readers.

In a Google news search last week, this story about store brands came up and I thought it might be a candidate as a “Consumer Quickie.”

Google story

Clicking through, here is the story that came up.

Use scrollbar above on right to view.

The L.A. Times story was actually kind of boring and was not put in Consumer World. But, upon closer inspection, another reason for rejecting it became apparent (yellow highlighting below added).

*MOUSE PRINT:

This is not a real story but rather an advertisement made to look like a news story. It is called “native advertising.” Under the recently adopted Native Advertising Guidelines of the FTC, this content had to be clearly labeled as a “paid advertisement” or “sponsor paid content” or similar wording. Indeed, it is so marked but is it really conspicuous enough? The “story” is so designed to look exactly like an LA Times story that one has to wonder whether two small disclosures can overcome the overall impression created by the webpage.

And why is Google indexing advertising and listing it as a news story?

We raised this exact issue two years ago with the LA Times (see original story), which at the time said:

“…the advertisement in question is clearly labeled as such and the only path for readers to find that content was intended to be via an latimes.com panel that is also clearly labeled as advertising. However, your inquiry brought our attention to the fact that although this ad and others of the same ilk is not included in our News SiteMap and the page has “noindex nofollow” directives, there appears to be a technical glitch with Google News. We are working with Google to find out why the content is indexed incorrectly and have the issue fixed as soon as possible. In the meantime, we have removed the advertisement from our site to eradicate potential for further confusion.” — V.P. Communications, Los Angeles Times

We did not recontact the LA Times, but clearly, two years later the problem still exists.

Share this story:

ADV

Updated every Monday! Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

With 100s of Exclusions, Kohl’s Coupons Questioned

November 11, 2016November 7, 2016 by Edgar (aka MrConsumer)

For years, Macy’s coupons were the laughing stock of the retail industry because so many brands were excluded from the discounts offered. Well, it is time for Macy’s to step aside because they are being displaced by a new coupon exclusion leader, Kohl’s.

It certainly looks like a good deal to get $10 off a $30 purchase at Kohl’s with this grand opening coupon:

But then you read the fine print, and learn there are exclusions:

*MOUSE PRINT:

In fact, there are so many exclusions that Kohl’s had to create a web page to list them all!

*MOUSE PRINT:

Use scrollbar above on right to view.

Good going, Kohl’s, you’ve seemingly excluded hundreds of brands. That even challenges the six foot long disclaimer by Sears last year excluding things from its big “Friends & Family” sale.

Share this story:

ADV

Updated every Monday! Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Citi Enlarges the Fine Print, But a Clever Ploy Lurks Within

October 31, 2016October 31, 2016 by Edgar (aka MrConsumer)

We all periodically receive a “card agreement” from credit card issuers. It is usually a small, sixteen panel, accordion-pleated booklet full of fine print about how finance charges are calculated, how fees and payments will be applied, etc.

Citi, however, has seen the light. They just sent out a new and improved version on 8-1/2 by 11 paper, divided into numbered sections, printed using a decent size font, and written in relatively plain English.

The new document is 15 pages long, however, which probably won’t encourage too many people to sit down and read it.

One big change in terms is Citi’s mandatory arbitration provision. They have heard regulators and advocates complain about these legal provisions that prohibit cardholders from going to court or participating in a class action lawsuit against the card issuer. Citi is giving their customers a one-time chance to opt-out of arbitration.

(Larger than usual) *MOUSE PRINT:

You only have until December 22 to notify Citi that you want out of arbitration. But lest we think that Citi has completely become pro-consumer, they required you sent them a physical letter with your request to opt-out. You cannot call (we tried) and you cannot email. You have to write a real letter (remember them) and put a stamp on the envelope.

Citi has certainly taken an approach to assure that the fewest possible cardholders will take advantage of this one-time offer. At least they didn’t require the request to be notarized and sent via certified mail.

Share this story:

ADV