BrokerExamThe Registered Insurance Brokers of Ontario (RIBO) published RIBO Guidance 006, Online Conduct (Social Media and Review Manipulation) on June 1, 2026. In RIBO’s words, it “interprets existing Code of Conduct obligations in the context of licensees’ online conduct more generally,” and its summary of requirements rests on O. Reg. 991 under the Registered Insurance Brokers Act. RIBO’s announcement adds that it gives Principal Brokers direction for updating their firm’s Plan of Supervision.
What it covers
The guidance is about social media used for insurance brokering, not personal accounts. RIBO does not guide personal use, but warns that personal activity “may be scrutinized and used as part of a complaints or discipline proceeding” where there is a sufficient nexus between the conduct and the profession. Social media here means public platforms where content is shared with or viewed by several people, down to liking, sharing and commenting, and it includes public advertising. Private one-to-one messages are outside it, and so is using messaging apps such as iMessage or WhatsApp to talk to clients; for those, RIBO sends licensees to their employee manual or their Principal Broker.
No quotes, advice or transactions over social media
RIBO’s summary says social media “must not be used to provide quotes, advice, or process client transactions.” A licensee must not give the impression that the public can get a quote or advice, or send an application, an address change or a vehicle substitution, through a social platform. When a prospective client asks for a quote there, RIBO says the conversation should move to the firm’s designated platform for business communications. General information stays open: how insurance may apply to a scenario, insurance concepts, educational posts.
RIBO adds a reminder tied to By-Law No. 3, s. 8.1 (a): only an individual who is sponsored or employed can use social media to advertise broker services or give personalized advice. That provision is the rule that an individual licensee who stops being employed or sponsored by an Active Firm, or stops acting as a sole proprietor, holds an inactive registration and may not carry on business as an insurance broker.
Educational content has to be accurate and factual, and RIBO asks for extra care on lines of insurance a licensee does not know well, because advice from a licensed professional can shape a consumer’s financial decisions.
Advertising and AI-generated content
RIBO expects Principal Brokers to run an internal approval process for all online advertising, the brokerage website, Google and social media included. The guidance lists what that process checks: content that is accurate, truthful and complete; nothing that disparages other brokers; the legal name, or the legal name and trade name, of the firm as registered with RIBO on every advertisement; no advertising as a general insurance agent or in any role the licence does not allow; and proof of permission for any copyrighted material.
Two of those points track the misconduct list in O. Reg. 991, s. 15 (1), though the guidance does not cite them: paragraph 6 (holding out under a name other than the registered one) and paragraph 10 (conduct that would lead a reasonable person to believe the member is an insurance agent). That link is this site’s, not RIBO’s.
On AI, RIBO says AI-generated content has “dubious copyright protection” and asks for caution. AI content used in advertising must be vetted by the Principal Broker, a delegate, or a process that confirms it is accurate, factual and within RIBO’s requirements and other applicable legislation.
Client information
A licensee may not share client information on social media without the client’s informed consent or proper anonymization. RIBO’s outline of an informed consent policy tells the client what will be shared, on which platforms, how to have it deleted and what the risks are, and offers to leave the client’s name out. The guidance does not cite a Code paragraph for this; paragraph 5 of s. 14, the duty to hold client information in strict confidence unless the client authorizes disclosure, is the one that fits, on this site’s reading.
The Principal Broker’s plan
RIBO cites By-Law No. 3, s. 6.1 (d) (i), under which a Principal Broker’s direction and supervision includes seeing that every licensee they supervise complies with the Applicable Laws. The guidance asks for a section on professional social media use in the firm’s Plan of Supervision, the written plan s. 6.1 (d) (viii) already requires (this site’s reading; the guidance does not cite it). Its suggestions: a social media policy saying whether individual licensees may advertise on social media at all, rules such as showing the individual’s licence number on their profile, training before anyone posts in a professional capacity, and a person or team to monitor use. RIBO does not prescribe how a firm complies, but a Principal Broker should be able to show RIBO how firm advertising on social media is monitored.
Review manipulation
The longest section of the guidance deals with online reviews. RIBO defines review manipulation as any act, direct or indirect, that “maliciously alters, distorts, or misrepresents” the reviews or ratings of a licensee or a competitor, whether done by the licensee, staff, contractors or a marketing agency acting for them. RIBO considers it a deceptive and misleading marketing practice and misconduct under paragraph 1 of s. 15 (1) of O. Reg. 991, which names solicitation and advertising methods “not compatible with the honour and dignity of the vocation.” It also reads review manipulation as contrary to paragraphs 1, 9 and 11 of s. 14: integrity, encouraging public respect for the vocation, and maintaining its integrity.
RIBO names two forms: review farming (buying, selling or incentivizing reviews, or fabricating them) and review gating (filtering reviews so the public cannot reach some of them, for example so only positive ones show). RIBO’s examples include a fake one-star review of a competitor, a manager telling staff or family to post reviews they did not write, a bought bundle of five-star reviews, sending happy customers to Google and unhappy ones to a private email, AI-generated testimonials presented as real, rewriting a consumer’s comments before publishing them, and a gift card offered for a positive review. Its list of prohibited practices also includes failing to disclose that a reviewer received an incentive.
RIBO also names what it does not treat as manipulation: responding to a review, including a negative one, to offer help or explain how the issue was handled; asking, without requiring, a consumer to delete a review; suppressing fake, malicious or offensive reviews; reporting fake or malicious reviews to the platform; and asking consumers to leave reviews. A licensee who solicits reviews should keep a documented process for handling negative ones, and RIBO warns that an unprofessional reply may breach the duty to encourage public respect for the profession.