« 2013 Boulder Conference on Consumer Financial Decision Making | Main | Daniel Schwarcz on the Lack of Transparency in Insurance Consumer Protection »

Disclosure Debates (. . . same old, same old)

posted by Amy Schmitz

We talk about disclosures, and the importance of reading our consumer contract terms before committing to any deal. However, does anyone really care about contracts? Let’s face it: Contracts have become largely meaningless until we run into problems and want to use the “terms” for ammunition to get a remedy. I am a Contracts Professor and often bypass e-contract terms when I am in a hurry or know that I could never get the terms changed. We are all lazy in reading contracts. I have confirmed this in my own research, which I wrote about in Pizza-Box Contracts: True Tales of Consumer Contracting Culture, published in the Wake Forest Law Review.  Disclosure debates are not new.

At the same time, texting and tweets as forms of disclosure have augmented shrouding and other tactics for effectivley hiding terms and contract modifications. The Federal Trade Commission hosted a one-day public workshop on Wednesday, May 30, 2012 to consider the need for new guidance concerning advertising and privacy disclosures in online and mobile environments. The workshop focused especially on challenges of making disclosures clear and conspicuous in social media and mobile marketing.

As again confirmed at the FTC hearing, disclosures should be (1) accessible before one must consent, (2) informative without being overwhelming, and (3) relevant to making consent decisions. That is all fine and good . . . but is it feasible? Complexities of social platforms such as Facebook and restricted space media like Twitter may not even be conducive to providing disclosures that consumers will take the time to read. This is especially true with respect to the targeted audience of young adults. I know I could never get my nephews to read the terms before downloading music!

Nonetheless, consumers at least should know when “Tweets” and Facebook postings are really traps, and that clicking could result in a contract. Yes, we are lazy in reading contracts, but we may actually take the time to read short disclosures that simply alert us that we are buying something and/or our private information is being passed to others. Indeed, one can imagine a curt announcement to this effect followed by a working link to a site or document that provides further information. That’s just one idea. Let’s think creatively and use technology to the advantage of consumers.


The comments to this entry are closed.


Current Guests

Follow Us On Twitter

Like Us on Facebook

  • Like Us on Facebook

    By "Liking" us on Facebook, you will receive excerpts of our posts in your Facebook news feed. (If you change your mind, you can undo it later.) Note that this is different than "Liking" our Facebook page, although a "Like" in either place will get you Credit Slips post on your Facebook news feed.



  • As a public service, the University of Illinois College of Law operates Bankr-L, an e-mail list on which bankruptcy professionals can exchange information. Bankr-L is administered by one of the Credit Slips bloggers, Professor Robert M. Lawless of the University of Illinois. Although Bankr-L is a free service, membership is limited only to persons with a professional connection to the bankruptcy field (e.g., lawyer, accountant, academic, judge). To request a subscription on Bankr-L, click here to visit the page for the list and then click on the link for "Subscribe." After completing the information there, please also send an e-mail to Professor Lawless ([email protected]) with a short description of your professional connection to bankruptcy. A link to a URL with a professional bio or other identifying information would be great.