Chapter 39 Exercises: The Ethics of Influence

Exercise 39.1 — The FTC Disclosure Audit

Type: Individual analysis Time: 45–60 minutes Difficulty: Foundational

Choose a creator you follow regularly who monetizes their content through brand deals or affiliate marketing. Collect 20 recent posts across their platforms (any combination of TikTok videos, Instagram posts, YouTube videos, or newsletter editions).

For each post: 1. Identify whether any commercial relationship likely exists (sponsored content, affiliate link, gifted product, brand relationship) 2. Assess whether the creator disclosed the relationship — and if so, whether the disclosure meets the FTC "clear and conspicuous" standard 3. Rate each disclosure on a 1–4 scale: 4 = fully compliant, 3 = mostly compliant but could be clearer, 2 = technically disclosed but not clear and conspicuous, 1 = not disclosed at all

Compile your findings: - What percentage of posts with commercial relationships were fully compliant? - What was the most common failure mode (no disclosure, buried disclosure, ambiguous language)? - How did the disclosure quality affect your trust in the creator?

Write a 300-word memo as if you were advising this creator on improving their disclosure practices.

Exercise 39.2 — Dark Pattern Identification

Type: Individual analysis + small group discussion Time: 30 minutes individual, 20 minutes discussion Difficulty: Intermediate

Find five real examples of dark patterns in creator marketing — one each from: 1. False urgency or artificial scarcity 2. Unsubstantiated health or wellness claims 3. Undisclosed or ambiguously disclosed affiliate links 4. Manufactured social proof (fake or misleading testimonials/reviews) 5. Financial content with an undisclosed conflict of interest

For each example, document: - Where you found it (platform, general type of creator — you don't need to name the creator) - What the specific dark pattern is - Why it qualifies as manipulation rather than persuasion - What an ethical alternative would look like that achieves the creator's legitimate commercial goal without the manipulation

In a small group, compare your examples. Did you have similar or different categories? What patterns emerged?

Exercise 39.3 — The Ethics Statement Workshop

Type: Individual writing Time: 60–90 minutes Difficulty: Reflective/Applied

Write your personal creator ethics statement. This should be a 400–600 word document that you'd be comfortable sharing publicly — on your website, in your bio, or with a brand partner who asked.

Address all five areas: 1. What you will and won't promote (specific categories or values requirements) 2. Your disclosure practices (language, placement, platforms) 3. Your vetting process for brand claims 4. What your audience has a right to know 5. How you'll handle mistakes

After writing the first draft, read it aloud. Does it sound like something you'd actually say? Does it make commitments you'll actually keep? Revise until it does.

Exchange statements with a classmate and give each other one piece of feedback: Is there any gap between what the statement says and what you've observed of this person's actual approach to content? (This requires knowing each other's creator work, so adjust accordingly.)

Exercise 39.4 — The Brand Vetting Decision

Type: Scenario analysis Time: 45 minutes Difficulty: Applied

You are a creator with 85,000 followers in the college financial wellness space. You receive the following three sponsorship inquiries in the same week:

Option A: A budgeting app paying $3,000 for two TikTok posts. The app has genuinely good reviews. You've tried it and find it useful. The catch: the app's premium plan, which they want you to promote, costs $9.99/month, and you personally think the free version is sufficient for most of your audience.

Option B: A cryptocurrency exchange paying $8,000 for three posts. They want you to describe crypto as a "wealth-building strategy for the next generation." You have no strong view on crypto — you neither love nor hate it. But you've read the research on crypto volatility and its disproportionate impact on younger, lower-income investors.

Option C: A credit card company paying $2,000 for one post. The card has a solid rewards program and no annual fee. The brand is conventional and mainstream. You're not excited about it, but there's nothing problematic about it. The catch: you typically position yourself as an "anti-debt, build wealth first" voice, and credit cards feel slightly off-brand.

For each option, run through the six-question vetting checklist from the chapter. Write a 200-word analysis of each option and your recommendation (accept, decline, or accept with modifications). What modifications, if any, would make Options A or C more acceptable?

Exercise 39.5 — The Persona Gap Analysis

Type: Reflective writing + group discussion Time: 40 minutes Difficulty: Reflective

Every creator manages a gap between their private self and their public persona. This exercise asks you to think honestly about that gap — not to shame anyone for having one, but to distinguish between legitimate curation and meaningful deception.

Part 1 (private, not shared): Write a 200-word honest description of your own public creator persona (or the persona you plan to build) and your private self. Note where they diverge.

Part 2 (shared if comfortable): For each divergence you noted, apply this test: "If my audience knew this about the gap between my public persona and private reality, would they feel deceived? Would it change their relationship with me or their purchasing decisions?"

Categorize each divergence as: - Legitimate curation (normal selection, normal performance of authenticity) - Gray area (the gap might matter, worth monitoring) - Meaningful deception (the audience deserves to know this)

Part 3: In a small group (with only the elements you're comfortable sharing), discuss where you drew the lines and why. Was the distinction between legitimate curation and meaningful deception clear? Where was it hard to draw?

Exercise 39.6 — Crisis Response Simulation

Type: Group role-play Time: 60 minutes Difficulty: Applied

Scenario: A creator with 300,000 followers in the parenting/family space (you can model this on a real niche but not a specific person) is discovered to have promoted a baby formula product for 18 months using affiliate links without disclosure. A thread exposing this goes viral. The creator has 48 hours to respond before the story gets picked up by media.

Form groups of three: - One person plays the creator - One person plays the creator's manager/advisor - One person plays an audience member who feels betrayed and is actively posting about it

Round 1 (15 minutes): The manager advises the creator on a response strategy. Consider: What should the response say? What medium (video, text, story)? What timeline? What commitments?

Round 2 (20 minutes): The creator drafts and delivers the response. The audience member responds from their perspective. The manager can intervene once.

Round 3 (15 minutes): Debrief. What worked? What rang false? What did the audience member most need to hear? How did the response affect (or not affect) trust?

Written deliverable: Each person writes a 200-word reflection on what they learned from their role — as creator, advisor, or audience member.

Exercise 39.7 — The Structural Ethics Argument

Type: Short essay Time: 45–60 minutes Difficulty: Analytical/Advanced

Read the ⚖️ equity callout from Section 39.2 about uneven FTC enforcement.

Write a 400–500 word argument responding to one of the following positions:

Position A: Individual creator ethics are what matter. Structural critique (uneven enforcement, financial pressure on marginalized creators) is important but doesn't change what individual creators should do. Everyone should follow the same ethical standard.

Position B: Individual ethical standards cannot be separated from the structural conditions that make them easy or hard to follow. A fair ethics framework has to account for the different pressures creators face based on their economic situation.

Your essay should: - Clearly state which position you're arguing for (or articulate a nuanced synthesis) - Use at least two specific examples from the chapter or real-world cases - Acknowledge the strongest objection to your position and respond to it - Avoid false dichotomy — these positions are not necessarily mutually exclusive

Share your essay with a classmate who argued the opposite position. Read each other's essays and write one paragraph of genuine response.