Start Your Own Business or Grow an Existing One

Hundreds of step-by-step video tutorials and tools show you how to find profitable markets, get product ideas, source the best products to sell, build profitable websites easily, and drive qualified traffic. Plus, discover how to outsource it all.

Everything you need to start or grow your own highly profitable web business — regardless of size or model.

  • 1,000s of ready-to-sell products
  • Ideal for any skill level or business
  • Learn anywhere, anytime, 24/7
  • Use it risk-free for a full 30 days

Want More? Click Here For Details »


Give Your Testimonials a Reality Check

Give Your Testimonials a Reality Check

Caution Reality AheadAfter read­ing and re-​​reading the lat­est FTC guide­lines, I’ve come to some impor­tant con­clu­sions that I want to share with you. Par­tic­u­larly as they relate to testimonials.

Last night, my good friend and top copy­writer John Carl­ton called me up, and we had an inter­est­ing dis­cus­sion on this whole FTC thing and the hys­te­ria it has created.

I expressed to John my opin­ions about them, along with a very sim­ple solu­tion. And John agreed with me.

It’s a huge ben­e­fit to those who under­stand copy­writ­ing, because they can actu­ally turn around and use the FTC rul­ings to their advan­tage. Even make more sales as a result.

Part of the solu­tion is actu­ally sim­pler than you think. And it doesn’t involve tear­ing down all your tes­ti­mo­ni­als, plas­ter­ing a bazil­lion dis­claimers around them, or con­duct­ing painful, men­tal con­tor­tions to decide what is typ­i­cal or not.

You can start by doing this one sim­ple thing…

Now, before I give you my opin­ion, I must pref­ace this post with sev­eral key points.

First, this is my opin­ion only. I’m not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. Con­sult with a com­pe­tent, legal pro­fes­sional first. I encour­age you to check out attor­ney Mike Young’s lat­est FTC report, as well as attor­ney Kevin Houchin’s well though-​​out syn­op­sis.

Sec­ond, the guide­lines are still con­fus­ing to some degree. My opin­ions are not final and they may be wrong. But as more clar­i­fi­ca­tions are made pub­lic over time, and given that the FTC won’t pros­e­cute first-​​time offend­ers, we will see if I’m right. Eventually.

(After 20 years in this busi­ness, I’m pretty sure I am.)

My opin­ions are not made as a direct result of read­ing the guide­lines them­selves, but after read­ing, dis­sect­ing, and inter­pret­ing some of the exam­ples included in the report, as well as some post-​​publication inter­views given by FTC representatives.

In fact, the FTC’s exam­ple sce­nar­ios are far more telling than the guide­lines themselves.

Finally, this is going to be my last post on this issue. Enough has been said already. Since the FTC clearly stated they won’t pros­e­cute first-​​time offend­ers but rather give them a chance to com­ply, I’ll wait until they shed more light before I return to this topic.

OK, enough blather. On with the show.

The biggest gripe most peo­ple have is with the “typ­i­cal ver­sus atyp­i­cal” conun­drum, espe­cially because of the chal­lenge they have in ade­quately deter­min­ing, mea­sur­ing, and pub­lish­ing what is con­sid­ered typ­i­cal and what peo­ple can nor­mally expect.

In some cases, this is vir­tu­ally impos­si­ble to pre­dict. There­fore, my opin­ion in here will be par­tic­u­larly use­ful in those cases. Of course, all dis­claimers above apply.

First off, I think peo­ple are need­lessly freak­ing out.

Admit­tedly, my post, “Is This The End of Affil­i­ate Mar­ket­ing?” didn’t help as it stirred up the pot. So I’m just as guilty as the best of them. But my con­cerns are real and justified.

In my defense, I did add updates at the end of the post, includ­ing links to sup­ple­men­tal inter­views given by the FTC. It is from these updates and exam­ple sce­nar­ios from the FTC them­selves that I’m draw­ing these con­clu­sions in this post.

(Plus, aside from tes­ti­mo­ni­als proper, affil­i­ate mar­ket­ing still remains a prob­lem­atic issue as it relates to the guide­lines. It only takes one rogue affil­i­ate who doesn’t com­ply to cause you more headaches and grief than you can pos­si­bly ever imagine.)

Nev­er­the­less, tes­ti­mo­ni­als don’t nec­es­sar­ily need to be “typ­i­cal.” The point I believe the FTC is get­ting at is to ensure peo­ple have rea­son­able, real­is­tic expectations.

Since time immemo­r­ial, there have been truth-​​in-​​advertising laws. The lat­est FTC guide­lines don’t really change much, except that they’re catch­ing up to real­i­ties and tech­nolo­gies of today, such as blogs, social media, and the Inter­net in general.

Here’s what they’re say­ing, in a nutshell.

The truth is no longer good enough.

What the FTC wants is more than just telling the truth. Because, while some­thing can be tech­ni­cally true, it still can be mis­lead­ing. Decep­tive. Delu­sive. Even down­right false.

Until now, you can post a tes­ti­mo­nial that’s 100% accu­rate and true. But it might still be mis­lead­ing if it lacks enough con­text so that peo­ple can under­stand and appre­ci­ate what they can gen­er­ally expect from using your prod­uct. After all, expec­ta­tion is key.

From what I’ve read, it’s not about mak­ing sure the tes­ti­mo­nial is typ­i­cal. It’s mak­ing sure it doesn’t mis­lead read­ers into think­ing such results are typ­i­cal when they’re not.

For exam­ple, say you sell a mar­ket­ing pro­gram. Some­one tries it out and makes $5,000 in one week. This might be true, but what the tes­ti­mo­nial failed to include are the cir­cum­stances, which are unique, under which those results were achieved.

Specif­i­cally, if the per­son who made $5,000 is not your typ­i­cal user — such as some­one well-​​versed in mar­ket­ing, has an estab­lished busi­ness, and pos­sesses a list of 20,000 sub­scribers — then the tes­ti­mo­nial must insure that peo­ple know this from the onset.

Any new­bie, with­out any busi­ness or mar­ket­ing expe­ri­ence, and par­tic­u­larly with­out any list, may not achieve “$5,000 in one week.” There­fore, the tes­ti­mo­nial might be true, but it is still mis­lead­ing because peo­ple now gen­er­ally expect this result to be the norm.

See the problem?

You’ve heard of the say­ing “lying by omis­sion?” This is the case, here. While accu­rate, the tes­ti­mo­nial is inher­ently mis­lead­ing and false. Or false by omis­sion, to be precise.

So tes­ti­mo­ni­als need to be both real and realistic.

In other words, if the testimonial’s results are atyp­i­cal, it needs to be stated in the tes­ti­mo­nial itself or near it — not as a dis­claimer but as qual­i­fy­ing infor­ma­tion that puts the tes­ti­mo­nial in proper con­text so peo­ple know what to gen­er­ally expect.

So what you can do, which is that sim­ple solu­tion I was allud­ing to ear­lier, is some­thing I’ve been teach­ing for many years in copy­writ­ing. Even on this blog. And it is this…

Con­vert your tes­ti­mo­ni­als into case studies.

Case stud­ies are more pow­er­ful than bla­tant tes­ti­mo­ni­als. They give tes­ti­mo­ni­als clar­ity, con­text, mea­sur­a­bil­ity, and weight. And best of all, case stud­ies make tes­ti­mo­ni­als more believ­able and con­crete, which may even boost your sales.

(I know. I’ve tested this thoroughly.)

As John Carl­ton men­tioned on that call we had, when the FTC forced adver­tis­ers to put ‘this is an adver­tise­ment’ near an adver­to­r­ial in mag­a­zines and news­pa­pers, mar­keters rushed to denounce the prac­tice, say­ing it would kill their sales.

But in many cases, quite the oppo­site hap­pened. It actu­ally bumped up response.

I think the same thing is going to hap­pen here. In the hands of a skilled copy­writer, which is why good copy­writ­ing is going to be even more impor­tant as time goes on, these new require­ments will become pow­er­ful tools that will dra­mat­i­cally boost response.

Now, let’s use the FTC’s own exam­ples to illus­trate this.

In their doc­u­ment, the FTC listed a ton of exam­ple sce­nar­ios. I’m going to base mine on their “Weight­Away Shake” sce­nario (i.e., exam­ple #4 under guide­line § 255.2, titled “Con­sumer Endorse­ments”). Here’s a pos­si­ble tes­ti­mo­nial you might come across:

“I ate two Weight­Away shakes each day and lost 15 pounds in one week!”

First, the ques­tion to ask is, can some­one really lose 15 pounds in one week? Let’s say it is true. The tes­ti­mo­nial is not mis­lead­ing only if peo­ple can expect that to be the norm (i.e., los­ing 15 pounds in one week by eat­ing two Weight­Away shakes a day).

But let’s say that per­son did a bit more. More than what her tes­ti­mo­nial revealed. Let’s say she walked three miles every day and ate sen­si­bly (e.g., noth­ing fatty or fried) dur­ing that time. With the help of those two shakes a day, she lost 15 pounds.

There­fore, the tes­ti­mo­nial, while true, is mis­lead­ing because it failed to high­light that the per­son also walked three miles every day and ate sen­si­bly. The tes­ti­mo­nial lacks con­text, and can there­fore be inter­preted, by itself, to be real­is­tic when it is not.

So either the tes­ti­mo­nial needs to state that, or you need to have copy on or around it that says, “Along with eat­ing sen­si­bly and wak­ing three miles a day, Jan­ice had this to say: ‘I ate two Weight­Away shakes each day and lost 15 pounds in one week’.”

That, I’m gath­er­ing, is what the FTC really wants.

The adver­tise­ment accu­rately describes the woman’s expe­ri­ence, and such a result is within the range that would be gen­er­ally expe­ri­enced by an over­weight indi­vid­ual who con­sumed Weight­Away shakes, ate sen­si­bly, and exer­cised as the endorser did.

As the FTC notes within that exam­ple (I’ve edited parts to reflect my exam­ple above):

Because the endorser clearly describes the lim­ited and truly excep­tional cir­cum­stances under which she achieved her results, the ad is not likely to con­vey that con­sumers who use Weight­Away under less extreme cir­cum­stances will lose (15 pounds in one week). If the adver­tise­ment sim­ply says that the endorser lost (15 pounds in one week) using Weight­Away (or using Weight­Away together with just “diet and exer­cise”), how­ever, this descrip­tion would not ade­quately alert con­sumers to the truly remark­able cir­cum­stances lead­ing to her weight loss.

So by adding con­text, the ad is likely to con­vey that her expe­ri­ence is not rep­re­sen­ta­tive of what con­sumers will gen­er­ally achieve, unless they have those same or sim­i­lar cir­cum­stances. Sure, it might com­mu­ni­cate the prod­uct is effec­tive. But it’s not misleading.

In short, it’s about either set­ting up real­is­tic expec­ta­tions, or avoid­ing unre­al­is­tic ones.

Again, a tes­ti­mo­nial needs to be not only real but also real­is­tic.

At best, cou­ple your tes­ti­mo­nial with results one can real­is­ti­cally expect. This is what the FTC wants, as stated in their guide­lines. It’s what con­sumers want, too, I’m sure.

The goal is to con­vey what is gen­er­ally expected from using your prod­uct. To make peo­ple aware of what is typ­i­cal. If you can state what your pro­gram or prod­uct can rea­son­ably achieve in the hands of the aver­age con­sumer, then you must add it.

My ini­tial con­tention is that, in some cases, such as the case of a train­ing pro­gram, all results are arguably atyp­i­cal — as results vary tremen­dously with every individual.

Then the best way is to ensure those excep­tional cir­cum­stances are clearly delin­eated. Not with some blan­ket dis­claimer, which is no longer enough. But with a clear under­stand­ing of how, and under what cir­cum­stances, those results were achieved.

If there are no “typ­i­cal results,” then add con­text so peo­ple can under­stand the endorser’s unique or excep­tional cir­cum­stances, as to pre­vent them from com­ing to the con­clu­sion that such results are real­is­tic and expected in all circumstances.

Again, I might be wrong. I’m sure you will point it out to me, if you think I am. Remem­ber, I’m not a lawyer. But I think that, as time goes on, we’re going to see more and more tes­ti­mo­ni­als pre­sented in the form of case stud­ies. Mark my words.

It’s sim­ply com­mon­sen­si­cal. For one, con­vert­ing your tes­ti­mo­ni­als into case stud­ies help to cre­ate real­is­tic expec­ta­tions. Sec­ond, they make tes­ti­mo­ni­als far more cred­i­ble and believ­able. And third, doing so will, I believe, dra­mat­i­cally boost your sales, too.

Ulti­mately, in the hands of a good copy­writer, this can become poten­tially powerful.

About the Author

Last 5 Posts By Michel Fortin

Other Related Posts


Share
Category: Opinions
This post was written on Wednesday, October 14th, 2009. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Secrets of a 10% Conversion Rate

Secrets of a 10% Conversion Rate

New! Paul Hancox combines direct selling and copywriting techniques to produce online conversion rates as high as 10%. His 127-page report shows you how. Click for more »

  • Awesome job Michel! RT'ed this and sharing it with others now on the Warrior Forum. You helped answer some worries I was having myself as I plan on launching a membership program here in the near future.

    -Mike Stenger
    Twitter.com/MikeStenger
  • Nick_Cifonie
    VERY good points...

    I think another way to use testimonials without risking FTC trouble, is to have people post their own testimonials on your Facebook page... "case studies" as there were. Then, simply link to your Facebook page (or fan page) from a sales page.

    In Facebook, the testimonials are NOT written by you... they're posted by your people, on their own pages. Can that be considered wrong or false, if you didn't even print or post it?

    There was to be a way to link those, that you didn't even write. :)

    Any thoughts, comments? (maybe I'm not explaining my thought perfectly, lol, I'm not a copywriter)

    Nick Cifonie
    REI-TV.com
  • I like it.

    Yet another technique to master!

    If only I had more hours in the day... 6 or 7 might work.

    Michel, if you were to present a brief overview of how to write an effective case study from a professional copywriters point of view, I suspect it would be very widely read.

    Thanks for thinking this through, and clearing some of the smoke.
  • Michel, great thoughts, here. I love the idea of taking this and turning it around and making it work for me. Your (and John Carlton's) thoughts on exactly how to do this have been significantly helpful in this.
  • achintamitra
    Michel,

    I really like your idea about converting testimonials into case studies. IMO, they make a more powerful selling tool because you can follow a simple format like problem, solution and results.

    Case studies would also go a long way in separating you and your business from the competition because you can provide a lot more details about the benefits of using your product.

    Of course, not every situation will lend itself to writing a case study. Under those circumstances, adding additional text to put the testimonial in context as you’ve shown in your example, “Along with eating sensibly and walking three miles a day, Janice had this to say: ‘I ate two Weight­Away shakes each day and lost 15 pounds in one week’.” clarifies it further and meets FTC's intent.

    Thanks a lot for helping us make more sense out of all the confusion.

    Best regards,
    Achinta
  • Oh man, do I need to say it again Michel.

    If you're not trying to cause a storm in a tea cup with this one then we're obviously running at different parallels, which I really wouldn't want to happen, because nothing, let me repeat that NOTHING at all will change, because it's all a lot of nonsense.

    Sure, all of the "copycat marketeers" have jumped onboard with their flaked opinions, just to attract a few readers, much of which they've taken from what you said (which, for you, is rather cool), but I've yet to hear to hear anyone who has offered a realistic opinion about it.

    Nothing has changed. That's the fact of the matter. The FTC is a "complaint driven" organisation, so unless they've brought on another few million staff who are actively seeking out people who are breaking the law, and getting a suitable number of complaints, then nothing will happen.

    Bloggers shouldn't be worried, neither should affiliates.

    Do you disagree with me on that? I can't imagine you will, because it's the truth.

    You can go through the technicalities all you like, but what I'm saying is the truth of the matter.

    Nothing will change.

    That's a fact.

    I'll stand here and place an even money $1000 bet on it if you like.

    If 20 bloggers, which is minimal in the big scheme of things, get charged by the FTC for what you're saying within the next 12 months I'll pay you $1000.

    Take the bet if you like.

    It won't happen. I'm telling you.... it won't happen.

    Big headlines, lots of controversy, empty pockets.

    That's all I see.

    ~ Paul
  • Looks like you missed the point. I'm making a helpful suggestion, one I've made many times, but now applied to this new situation. I'm not sure why you posted this, but I respect your opinion. Just respect mine. Fair enough?
  • No, I didn't miss the point actually, and I always respect your point Michel.

    But this is getting silly.

    As a top-notch copywriter you should know that proof means everything, so let's see it run for a year or so and let the proof of what happens make fools of us.

    Make sense?
  • Proof of what? I don't get it. Maybe I'm the one who's missing the point, I guess. Because I simply offered a technique that one should do, regardless of the latest rulings, too boost response.

    To each his own, then. But I hope my post has provided some value with the tips I offered, regardless.
  • You're talking about this article now.

    Not the first or second, where scaremongery was rife.

    Just go back a few days. You know what I mean. You've gone out of your way now to make sure people realise that this is in no way at all the end of affiliate marketing, nor is it a "game changer" as you first suggested.

    I'm surprised you even asked about "proof", after what you've said in your previous articles. You called it a "game changer" and I'm saying that it's anything but that, because there's no proof that anything will change and there's unlikely to ever be any.

    One week ago...

    "As I said, this may be the end of affiliate marketing as we know it -- not necessarily the end of affiliate marketing in all. It remains to be seen."

    You also said...

    "The lack of clarity may kill affiliate marketing for a lot of good, legitimate marketers, and may even force a few of them out of business as a result."

    Or....

    "This could push some marketers out of business who may not want to take any risks."

    Or (after people started questioning it)...

    "If you think I'm being alarmist, for no reason, I encourage you to read this little update I added at the end of my blog post."

    (Who were you talking about there? I seriously hope it's not the same guy I'm thinking of, because he was definitely up to no good!)

    Or....

    "Game changer, indeed."

    So, asking me why I think you've caused a controversy over nothing, well, that's just silly. And when I talk about "proof" I mean just that.... the proof will be in the pudding. You know the chaos you've caused with your earlier posts and if you actually thought now that what you said was true, I'm sure that you'd stick your cash on the table. I offered you decent odds there - 50M bloggers, and I only want to see 20 convicted.

    The fact is you didn't.

    And that's all the proof we need.

    There's no proof now, there won't be next year, or the year after either.

    That's the truth.

    For sure.

    Disagree?
  • I appreciate your comments and respect your opinion, but I'm giving up. You won. Continuing this conversation is becoming futile. By the way, the person I spoke about, the person who lost $250,000 because of a rogue affiliate, is Frank Kern. Not sure if that's the person you think I meant.
  • Okay, fair enough.

    Yes, that was the same circumstance I was thinking of. There's no smoke without fire. And no fire without smoke ;-)
  • I'm creating a new site that was supposed to have testimonials but with the nature of my business (health & detoxification) there's no way that there can be a "typical" result since every single person has different toxin levels, different nutrient levels, is on different medications, experiences differing exposure to toxins on a daily basis, mercury fillings, past surgeries that cause blockages, etc so results cannot be typical since there's no such thing as a "typical" human being with the exact same level of health.

    Instead of a long list of short testimonials I'll offer a few lengthier, more detailed case studies. This whole issue had really confused me so this has been most helpful.

    Perfect timing! THANK YOU!
  • davidmccauley
    Michel

    I think you are on target with this post, I also see what Paul was trying to say, so I will rephrase what I think he said.

    We all know that the FTC doesn't have the manpower to go after the gazillion website owners out there that don't comply. Case in point. When they made the ruling that mail order type companies must offer a thirty day return policy, there was a lot of hype and complaints screaming unfair. But what happened was the industry eventually turned around- I believe there was a couple of fines issued and a few large companies publicly lambasted (mainly because they had the money and popularity), but in the end, the 30 day policy became a standard.

    Later, some inventive copywriter(s) coined the term Risk-Free and Risk Reversal, which set new standards for the same 30 day policy. That is also deceptive, but acceptable by the FTC. In the meantime, top copywriters made a fortune by twisting the technique a bit to their clients, which has become a standard for todays sales copy.

    What I see happening with this new rule, is that the FTC is going to find one or two of you 'big guns' or your clients, go after and make a public example, then leak press releases for the world to see. and in 5-20 years, real and realistic testimonials will become the norm.

    So- I suggest that you gather up the big guns like John Carlton and the rest, have yourself a Yanik style baja vacation retreat, come up with some creative material on how to produce real and realistic testimonial/case studies, then sell the sh&t out of them.

    Show the rest of the marketers that you are not only the top guns, but can change your tactics for the better and actually come out ahead. Lead by example, and make money doing it. I will buy the material.

    David McCauley
    http://www.passionatecopy.com
  • Michel,

    I think you hit the nail right on the head here. Excellent advice and it makes a lot of sense on so many different levels.
  • I think also in this day and age people want to be told the "realistic" story, because most are natural skeptics at first anyways. It's just like using a damaging admission before going into the close of a teleseminar and webinar. Telling potential customers what makes the circumstances around a testimonial unique let's them find that "snake in the grass" they're looking for anyway, and then naturally they'll start to say to themselves "well even if I don't loose say 15 pounds maybe I can get away with doing nothing and loose 5 with this magic shake stuff." Leading logically, in their mind, to a good reason to "try" or buy or whatever.

    To the top,

    Daegan
  • Awesome. In fact, I noticed that customers, subscribers and visitors LOVE case studies, and I started to use them on my websites, because they are more powerful than case studies.

    However, I didn't think about this 'trick' (or let's say tip).

    Yesterday, I was thinking... "Savvy copywriters will make a LOT of money about these rules", and here you talk about John.

    Thanks for the tip.

    Franck
  • Nice job covering this, Michel. I spent a good chunk of yesterday digging through the rule and guidelines myself. My thought: Honest and talented marketers shouldn't be hit too hard by this -- and if it helps consumers regain some trust, so much the better.
  • rich
    Disclaimer-based marketing has always been a lie. We all know that. It's like saying "yes" and "no" in the same breath.

    Many marketers are looking at this all wrong. You think that you now have to operate under some heavy new rules. No, it's simply that you are finally being made to be reasonably accountable. Marketers have enjoyed a no-responsibility, free ride for years. I don't know a single marketer who hasn't at some point omitted realistic "everyday expectations" in favor of the standout testimonial experience. We all know what's going on with that. And if you've ever used a disclaimer (or wondered about needing one), then you have been a part of that club.

    We're all accountable now. That means we have to actually deliver to make the "average experience" something compelling. It will be hard. It won't always be fun. And the little guy will have a bigger mountain to climb.

    Instead of looking for ways to get around it, look for ways to deliver. Or expect your product to become just another commodity.
  • That's exactly what I said. This is not a "trick" or some "way around it." It's about setting up realistic expectations when, traditionally, some testimonials, while accurate, did not.
  • Vonalda
    Hi MIchel,

    Thank you for this post. Hurray FTC! I am SO tired of the B.S. hype and "We made $800,000 from one email (teleseminar, launch...fill in the blank)" which says nothing about the actual NET, the size of the list, the amount of time and work it took to build the business to that point, etc. Not to mention "fake" review sites which are just blatant promos for affiliate commissions. Stop trying to control, manipulate and seduce the masses. If this ruling helps bring some integrity back to IM, I'm all for it!
  • I'm all for fairness in advertising, and I think most responsible bloggers are all for following these guidelines. One important question I see, time and time again, is "How does this apply to bloggers who are not in the U.S.? Can it be enforced outside the U.S.?" Interesting new world we live in. My thought is that, for the immediate future, it will force marketers to do some of the enforcement - while the bloggers may or may not be held accountable, the U.S. companies that use them for advertising will be. Threat of less business = greater voluntary compliance. Non-U.S. bloggers may also be subject to reciprocal treaties, though these may not always be practical to enforce. So it's still a "buyer beware" world out there, but this should be a welcome step in the right direction - and it really hurts no one except those who are deliberately misleading consumers NOW.

    It does help to READ the FTC Guides rather than to rely on others' analysis of them. They really are helpful, explaining how an existing law applies to "new media." I posted my take on it here: FTC Updates Guides on Endorsements, Testimonials to Include “New Media”.
  • Whew! That makes a whole lot more sense! I need to redesign a site for an MLM company this week and this entire FTC thing had me pretty freaked out! It makes perfectly good sense to include some of the underlying factors of a persons success with your product. And you're right, depending on the personality of the reader/viewer/listener/participant this revealing of additional information can become a catalyst to take up the challenge to meet and/or exceed the results of the testimonial. Thanks for all your great insights.

    Blessings,
    Wendy
  • Great post Michel!!

    I was in the dark as to how we were going to deal with the FTC's new rules. Case studies are great marketing tools anyway and we use them already to market our SEO firm.
  • amyjoyates
    Personally, I think that testimonials while persuasive can be misleading. I am trying a hybrid approach. Create a case study, but include the personal comments. I see so much marketing out there that is misleading, I feel that doing this maintains integrity and realiability for my audiences.

    I am developing a formula for my case studies. I would love to see some good examples if you have any or if you have a formula you use. (maybe I missed that article)
  • What ever happened to the concept of "Caveat emptor"?

    If we really need the new FTC rules, then I submit that the US Government Schools have more than succeeded in their ongoing plan to "Dumb-Down" the US Populous...
blog comments powered by Disqus
Start Making $10K+ Per Copywriting Project!

Start Making $10K+ Per Copywriting Project!

New! Brian McElroy's video lessons show you how to find highly qualified prospects for your services, sell them for instant cash and easily get top dollar. Perfect for copywriters! Click for more »