I am in the online marketing industry and have mixed feelings about this.
On one hand, I think it's very good because it will create more transparency which keeps the public from getting screwed. Believe me, there is A LOT of deception in this field, and it's always the consumer that takes the hit. As a practice though, I believe it's more valuable to the company to make sure the blogger is being completely honest about the product, and this decision would promote that - or at least let consumers know that they are dealing with a biased opinion.
On the other hand, I wonder if this is an infringement on our constitutional rights. Take publications for example. I'm in the home theater industry - when we want a review in a publication of any sort, it is expected that we are going to advertise with that company. I've even had publications hold our product review hostage until we signed a year-long ad agreement. Everyone does this. Everyone. And you better believe that it effects what is written in the review. There's no way a publication is going to bash a product, even if it is completely deserved, if a year-long ad agreement is at stake.
My point is that practically everything is biased for a myriad of reasons - don't even get me started on the News - but the question is, by cracking down on this system, are we restricting our Freedom of Speech?
"Time is money and money can't buy you love and I love your outfit" - T.H.U.N.D.E.R. #1