Bloggers, Youtubers and Podcasters Giving Financial Advice

ASIC cracks down hard on finance influencers

"ASIC reportedly told the group that its definition of an “influencer” is a social media account with more than a thousand followers, and that even “broad” discussions of financial products or stocks could violate the law."

 

One defn of "social media account" - means any websites, applications and similar electronic means by which users are able to create and share information, ideas, personal messages, and other content (including, without limitation, text, photos and videos) or to participate in social networking.

Looks like we might be going back to post-it notes and snail mailing lists.

Maybe it"s just the speed and convenience of information exchange of financial education that our "protectors" object to?

 

Btw my guess is that asic will only go after the very loud, abnoxious and clearly commercially orientated purveyors - if at all. Sensible and restrained information (advice?) sources will be ok - particularly if they stay at the "community" rather than "commerical" level.

 

As requested

.

 

Seems even postit notes could contain bad advice now .

Here's my advice. Tune out the noise,




Definately very loud, possibly abnoxious, absolutely not commercially orientated.

 

I know. I do attempt to restrain myself but it is usually without success.

 

From Aussie Firebug

ASIC Crush Independent Content Creators & the End of Ask Firebug Fridays

 

Their enforcement of the decision and who they deem worth pursuing is questionable, but without a doubt this acts as a serious deterrent to those who were considering making this content, or already are creating content that may now be deemed unlawful.

For the demographic of people (many including young people who want to get ahead in life) who turn to online content creators, podcasts, etc, will likely lose a significant amount of current a future content; many of whom are locked out of paid financial advice to begin with due to cost.

There is some room for the creators, but one would question the risk versus reward given the ambiguity in guidelines:
Discussing financial products and services online | ASIC - Australian Securities and Investments Commission

 

In saying that, with the amount of unregulated rubbish that was being uploaded and profited off by some creators (with no regard to the outcomes of their audience), some regulation was highly needed. Not a fan of the way they've gone about it, imo.

 

And only affects Australian creators

 

He he. A post I made on a blog back in April this year. My mind works certainly in curious way.

"As an example of how stupid is the concept, suppose a family member places something on Facebook or other media source about investment products and I started a discussion on the merits or otherwise of the proposal, I would be in breach of the legislation according to ASIC as I may be influencing others of my family group."

 

Doesn't require anyone to be a follower as such. It could be anyone who reads the posts and is influenced by it.

 

Probably no one would go to gaol, but there are chances of fines for anyone breaking the law. They also could be sued by those who relied upon the financial advice, and would have no insurance to cover that.

 

Throwing the baby out with the bath water!
Looks like coffee and chicken burgers from now on

 

How discriminatory!

Surely this should rate a mention?

 

face palm......

 

Property is open slather though as not a financial product, no ASIC oversight

 

Some getting paid for content or advertising, and others getting paid for affiliate links, then someone posting about their personal investing journey (web log) all thrown in the same bowl

 

There’s a mate of mine that works in the wine investment industry, also unregulated. It’s dodgy as hell unsurprisingly.