Full disclosure:  A family member has a small side-business creating handmade decorative pillows.

On February 10, a new law will go into effect that makes it illegal to make or sell anything intended for children (under 12) without testing for lead.  Each unit needs to be tested (component testing does not count.)  As of today, it makes no distinction when it comes to size of business, how much is sold, where the source materials come from, or what kind of product it is (except for electronics).

"Not suitable for children under 12"

The law, though well-meaning, could negatively impact small businesses and online retailers.  Thousands of small hand-crafted producers could be put out of work (since lead testing can run in the thousands of dollars range, per item).  Consumers will have less choice for their kids.  It also puts online retailers/resellers (i.e. eBay, Etsy, and thousands of small drop-ship companies) at risk of liability or total shut-down.

To increase awareness and rally support, businesses owners are now blogging to their readers, Twittering furiously to their customers, using Change.org, and spreading the word on Facebook.

What strikes me is how users are using the same technology to unite and spread the word as they did to grow their businesses to begin with.  How effective this all is remains to be seen, but I am hopeful they are successful in further advancing “online citizen activism.”

So the question is:  how can we properly balance the public’s safety without being draconian when it comes to the online economy?

This much is certain: we have to find ways and channels to effectively educate our government on the downstream impact of potential (and/or existing) laws to our online economy.

The internet gives us an amazing ability to quickly and effectively influence people, friends and businesses. From blogs to message boards and from Yelp to Facebook, the power of user-driven, or “grassroots” content (I’m not a big fan of the term “netroots”), has never been greater.

I’m exited about this year’s election because it is our first real intersection of this power with politics. Sure, Howard Dean first used the internet to raise money, but now we’re seeing mass text-messaging, Facebook apps, Twitter feeds, YouTube uploads, Flickr albums, blog entries, etc.

There are so many innovative and interesting ways individuals can organize, evangelize, and campaign for the candidate of their choice. And so much of it’s driven by user-empowerment through social media.

Here’s an example of how the Obama campaign is equipping their supporters with web 2.0 tools as ways to organize and campaign.

"Here, YOU do it..."

So between now and November, who will have the most interesting example(s)? Who will be more effective? Will social media change politics forever? Or will politics help drive advancements in social media?

And ultimately, will it really matter on election night?

I enjoy a glass of wine. Or two. Sometimes three. And as a beginning oenophile, I’ve been using the interweb quite often to expand my universe of wine knowledge. This includes reading tasting notes, looking up new wines to try, buying suggestions, and which local restaurants have great wine lists.

"Ernie, if you continue to read about booze on the internet, you and your liver are gonna wind up like this guy!"

Which brings me to the dustup over Wine Spectator’s recent award to an imaginary restaurant. Apparently, someone invested a fake restaurant in Italy, built a fake website, constructed a fake wine list that included very low-scoring wines, and entered it into the famed magazine’s award submission. Presto! They won an “Award of Excellence.”

Apparently, as part of their “research,” committee folks read some (fake) reviews on Chowhound and also successfully Googled the restaurant’s name in order to verify its legitimacy.

What a great illustration of how social media and the easiness + ubiquitous nature of search can make us all so lazy. And not just drunk-lazy.

How does this apply to us and our clients? For starters, I think the term “authenticity” takes on a deeper meaning. While secondary (market) research has its place, there’s still no substitute for good ol’ fashioned primary research. If anything, it underscores the importance of user/stakeholder interviews, surveys, in-person (and hallway) conversations when it comes to any project or endeavor.

Secondly, companies need to be even MORE diligent in their online and offline activities to effectively convey and support any brand authenticity to their current and potential customers.

Any slight whiff of inauthenticity, exacerbated by the locust-like nature of online social media, can do some serious damage to a brand.