1、 Directorate-General for Consumers 2018 EUR 6 EN Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency Specific contract No. 2015 85 01 under Framework contract No. Chafea 2015 CP 01 Prepared by the GfK Consortium Revision:27/06/2018 Specific contract No. 2015 85 01 under Framework contract No. C

2、hafea 2015 CP 01 Prepared by the GfK Consortium Final Version: June, 2018 Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency BEHAVIOURAL STUDY ON ADVERTISING AND MARKETING PRACTICES IN ONLINE SOCIAL MEDIA Final Report Directorate-General for Consumers 2018 EUR 2 EN EUROPEAN COMMISSION Produced

3、 by Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (Chafea) on behalf of Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers Unit 03 Economic analysis and evaluation Contact: Unit 03 E-mail: JUST-03ec.europa.eu European Commission B-1049 Brussels EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Justi

4、ce and Consumers 2018 EUR 3 EN Behavioural Study on Advertising and Marketing Practices in Online Social Media Final Report EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers 2018 EUR 4 EN LEGAL NOTICE This report was produced under the EU Consumer Programme (2014-2020) in the frame o

5、f a specific contract with the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (Chafea) acting on behalf of the European Commission. The content of this report represents the views of GfK Belgium and is its sole responsibility; it can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European

6、Commission and/or Chafea or any other body of the European Union. The European Commission and/or Chafea do not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this report, nor do they accept responsibility for any use made by third parties thereof. Project number: 2018.3823 Title: Behavioural study o

7、n Advertising and marketing Practices in Online Social Media Final Report Language version Format/Volume Catalogue number ISBN DOI EN PDF PDF/Volume_01 EB-01-18-679-EN-N 978-92-9200-945-8 10.2818/290217 European Union, 2018 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Directorate-

8、General for Consumers 2018 EUR 5 EN Table of contents 1 Introduction . 7 Study objectives and report structure 7 Methodological approach 8 Definition of Online Social Media 10 2 Online Social Media in the EU . 13 Key Online Social Media providers in focus 19 2.4.1 Facebook Inc. 20 2.4.2 YouTube 22 2

9、.4.3 Twitter 23 2.4.4 Reddit 23 2.4.5 LinkedIn 24 2.4.6 Snapchat 24 Revenue streams of Online Social Media providers 25 Delivering marketing content to Online Social Media users 27 Commercial practices on Online Social Media 29 3. Disguised Advertising Practices . 30 Introduction 30 3.1.1 Native adv

10、ertising 30 3.1.2 Influencer marketing 32 3.1.3 Advertorials 33 Consumer issues 34 3.2.1 Evidence from the qualitative research 34 3.2.2 Evidence from the behavioural experiments 37 3.2.3 Conclusions 44 Legal assessment and remedies 45 3.3.1 Options for regulatory action 46 3.3.2 Options for enforce

11、ment action 49 3.3.3 Options for self-regulatory action 50 3.3.4 Other remedy options 52 4. Social Proof Practices . 54 Introduction 54 4.1.1 Artificial boosting of social proof indicators. 55 4.1.2 Extrapolation of social endorsements 56 4.1.3 Other practices linked to social proof 58 Consumer issu

12、es 59 4.2.1 Evidence from the qualitative research 59 4.2.2 Evidence from the behavioural experiments 62 4.2.2.1 Artificial boosting of social proof indicators 62 4.2.2.2 Extrapolation of social endorsements 66 Conclusions 68 EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers 2018 EUR

13、 6 EN Legal assessment and remedies 69 4.4.1 Options for regulatory action 71 4.4.2 Options for enforcement action 73 4.4.3 Options for self-regulatory action 74 5. Data Gathering and Targeting Practices . 76 5.1 Introduction 76 5.1.1 User tracking 76 5.1.2 Audience targeting 77 5.1.3 Social media l

14、ogins 78 5.2 Consumer issues 79 5.3 Conclusions 82 5.4 Legal assessment and remedies 83 5.4.1 Options for regulatory action 84 5.4.2 Practice-specific options for enforcement 85 5.4.3 Other remedy options 86 6 Other Problematic Practices . 88 6.1 Description of specific practices identified 88 6.2 C

15、onsumer issues, legal assessment and conclusions 89 6.3 Legal assessment and remedies 89 6.3.1 Options for enforcement action 90 7 Conclusions . 91 7.1 The OSM Landscape in the EU 91 7.2 Disguised advertising practices 92 7.2.1 Introduction and evidence of consumer issues 92 7.2.2 Options for regula

16、tory action. 92 7.2.3 Options for enforcement action. 93 7.3 Social proof practices 94 7.3.1 Introduction and evidence of consumer issues 94 7.3.2 Options for regulatory action. 94 7.3.3 Options for enforcement action 95 7.4 Data gathering practices 95 7.4.1 Introduction and evidence of consumer iss

17、ues 95 7.4.2 Options for regulatory action 96 7.4.3 Options for enforcement action 96 7.5 General discussion of the current legal context 96 8 Appendix Limitations and Future Research . 99 9 Lists of Annexes . 101 EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers 2018 EUR 7 EN 1 Intr

18、oduction Study objectives and report structure The key objective of this multi-method, exploratory study was to investigate advertising and marketing practices in online social media (OSM) from the perspective of consumer behaviour and consumer protection. It aimed to identify and assess commercial

19、practices in the context of OSM that could be potentially unfair or misleading for consumers. Furthermore, the study aimed to investigate the factors that contribute to their prevalence, and to identify and assess potential remedies to these problematic commercial practices. The purpose of the study

20、 was operationalised via five key objectives. As a first step, it aimed to depict a comprehensive landscape of OSM providers in Europe and to describe their business models. The second objective was to investigate the commercial practices carried out in OSM in Europe and to assess them systematicall

21、y from the perspective of consumer behaviour and consumer protection. The third objective was to study the drivers behind the effectiveness and propagation of these commercial practices from the perspective of both traders and consumers. The fourth objective was to assess the level of involvement an

22、d responsibility of OSM providers and other players in the design, implementation and follow up of the relevant commercial practices identified. Lastly, the study aimed to draw conclusions and suggest specific remedies for the problematic practices identified, based on the evidence collected, which

23、would translate into options for policy and enforcement intervention. The Final Report consists of seven chapters, which summarise the key insights from several pieces of research conducted over the course of the project. The current Chapter 1 introduces the studys main objectives and outlines the d

24、ifferent methodological approaches taken in order to systematically address these objectives. The chapter also provides a definition of online social media and highlights the topics relevance for consumer protection online. Chapter 2 introduces the OSM provider landscape, focusing on the top OSM pro

25、viders in the EU and differences in OSM usage across the EU. Chapters 3 to 6 present an overview of specific commercial practices in OSM identified during the study with each chapter dedicated to a group of practices, which can be tackled together in the context of consumer protection. Each chapter

26、first defines and describes the practice studied in its most common forms using visual examples. Next, the practice is assessed from the perspective of consumer protection and its potential to be problematic for consumers. These assessments are based on key findings from four qualitative studies1 an

27、d four behavioural experiments conducted over the course of the project. Furthermore, each chapter proposes remedies to the risks identified for consumers, after assessing gaps in the current legislation and analysing the potential liability of OSM providers. 1 In-depth desk research; online communi

28、ties conducted in four EU Member States; a B2B stakeholder survey with relevant stakeholders; and a mystery shopping exercise. EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers 2018 EUR 8 EN More specifically, Chapter 3 focuses on Disguised advertising practices, Chapter 4 explores p

29、ractices related to Social proof, Chapter 5 focuses on Data gathering and targeting practices, and Chapter 6 discusses the remaining practices identified. The overall conclusions of the study are presented in Chapter 7. Limitations and suggestions for future research on the topic are discussed in th

30、e Appendix. Due to the comprehensive nature of the research conducted during this project, the Final Report serves as a summary of the key insights. Detailed reports for all research activities conducted are available as Annexes and are clearly referred to where relevant throughout this report. Meth

31、odological approach The projects broad scope and exploratory perspective required a multi-method approach. The study was divided into three main Tasks or phases2. Task 1 was defined as an extensive preparatory phase, including several data gathering exercises and laying the groundwork for Task 2 and

32、 Task 3. It consisted of several parts or subtasks, each utilising different qualitative research methodologies described shortly below: Literature review a broad literature review was conducted to identify relevant existing literature used as background across various subtasks within the preparator

33、y phase; Provider mapping An in-depth provider mapping exercise was conducted, which identified (based on available data and pre-defined selection criteria) 1) the top OSM providers by Member State (20 websites and 10 apps), described in detail in dedicated country fiches and 2) the top 30 OSM provi

34、ders in Europe, described in detail in dedicated provider fiches. All country and provider fiches as well as the corresponding data collection and selection methods are available in Annex 1.1; Desk research an in-depth, systematic review of the content on the most relevant OSM providers identified w

35、as conducted to build a typology of commercial practices in OSM, and to identify practices that could be misleading or unfair from a consumer perspective. The research was conducted from three perspectives: advertising and marketing options offered by the OSM to traders (which provided the necessary

36、 context), marketing content OSM users are actually exposed to, and problematic marketing practices promoted in online forums. The core of the desk research took place in January and February 2017. For the full desk research report, please refer to Annex 1.3.1; Online communities a qualitative study

37、 via online communities (similar to online focus groups but engaging consumers in both individual and interactive tasks) was conducted to investigate consumer experiences with OSM providers, including participants awareness of and susceptibility to commercial content. The study involved individual t

38、asks as well as online discussions between consumers 2 Detailed descriptions of the methods applied during different data collection exercises conducted within the scope of the project are available in their respective reports which are cited as separate annexes where relevant throughout this report

39、 as well as in the current section. EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers 2018 EUR 9 EN on these issues. One online community was held in each of these four countries: Belgium, Italy, Hungary and Latvia. Fieldwork took place in late November and December 2016. Each commun

40、ity ran for a minimum of 7 days with a sample of 25 participants per community and task in every country. For the complete online communities report, please refer to Annex 1.3.2; Stakeholder survey - aside from consumers perceptions, the role of OSM providers in commercial practices was investigated

41、 from an industry perspective. As part of this approach, we conducted in-depth interviews in six Member States with six types of relevant stakeholders: B2B clients/traders, local intermediaries, global intermediaries, consumer organizations, advertisers organizations, and academics, representing a t

42、otal of 53 organisations and companies. An interview guide was used to structure the 30- to 40-minute conversations, containing open- ended questions on the key topics. Fieldwork took place in between December 2016 and February 2017. For the full stakeholder survey report, please refer to Annex 1.4.

43、1; B2B Mystery shopping exercise as a second part of the industry approach, a mystery shopping exercise was conducted through a sample of fictitious and real companies. Top OSM providers and intermediaries were contacted with the intention to conduct a specific marketing campaign based on pre-define

44、d scenarios. A total of 50 mystery shopping exercises were conducted with 13 of the EU Top 30 OSM providers identified in Task 1.13. Five Intermediaries4 were also included in the Mystery Shopping in order to understand the role of these business partners of OSM providers5, which have in-depth knowl

45、edge of them. Using this approach, a diverse sample of providers was covered with multiple observations per provider possible within the scope of the 50 exercises foreseen. Fieldwork took place in March and April 2017. For the full mystery shopping report, please refer to Annex 1.4.2; Legal assessme

46、nt the commercial practices identified during the preparatory phase were further assessed from a legal perspective in order to be able to make recommendations for specific remedies. An early legal assessment took place between April and June 2017 and was updated several times as additional evidence became available, but before the GDPR became applicable. For the full legal