Reverb Communications, Inc.

The FTC alleged that Reverb Communications had employees post iTunes reviews of clients' games while posing as ordinary consumers and failing to disclose paid relationships. A final FTC order barred misrepresentations and required removal of certain endorsements.

1Official action

Resolved. Refunded, settled, ceased operating, or the claim did not hold up. Kept for the record.

Identity

Published so you can confirm this entry refers to the party you are checking, and not to somebody who shares a name.

Registrations: FTC action against Reverb Communications, Inc. (FTC File No. 0923199, 2010)
Jurisdictions: United States (federal)

Final order addressed undisclosed game reviews

Reverb Communications provided public relations, marketing, and sales services to developers of video game applications, including mobile games. The Federal Trade Commission alleged that between November 2008 and May 2009, Reverb and its owner, Tracie Snitker, posted reviews of clients’ games in the iTunes store using account names that made the writers appear to be disinterested consumers.

According to the complaint, the reviews did not disclose that Reverb had been hired to promote the games or that it often received a percentage of sales. The FTC said those connections would have been relevant to consumers evaluating the endorsements and deciding whether to buy the applications.

The proposed settlement required Reverb and Snitker to remove previously posted endorsements that misrepresented the writers as independent users or ordinary consumers and failed to disclose a connection with the seller. It also barred them from misrepresenting an endorser’s independence or making endorsement claims without disclosing relevant connections. After a public comment period, the FTC approved the order as final on November 26, 2010.

What is not established

The FTC’s first release states that the administrative complaint was not a finding that the respondents violated the law. It also states that the consent agreement was for settlement purposes only and did not constitute an admission of a law violation.

Sources

Every claim above rests on one of these. Open them and check.

Right of reply

If you are named here and something is wrong, dispute this entry. There is no charge, the route never expires, and your response is published unedited.

Other marketing & creative entries

See all marketing & creative entries, or browse the full record.