Bummer...
I make my living reviewing Rain Tinge.
DeKay
No More Fake Reviews - So Who’s Gonna Tell Us What To Buy?
Very interesting and with a fairly profound impact on our audiophile community:
Some strong language in the ruling. How are some of our YouTubers going to be able to sustain their channels without gifted products?
59 responses Add your response
Very true ,,I spoke to a friend in Canada who personally had met two of these reviewers and yes they have received Free components and speakers .with much more expensive products up to 65% off with no shipping or taxes . Shocking but true . I assume this too pertains to TAS and Stereophile , as well as online magazines on Audiogon we get much more realistic honest opinions of actual gear .fortunately for me I am semi retired and get to hear a lot of gear and go to many group comparisons which is like going to a Audio show but in a much more relaxed setting. |
It should change, based on the ruling. Assuming there are any teeth involved and resources to police/implement the ruling. It cuts pretty deep if you read the whole thing, beyond the basic sub-title:
Is it even worth the risk for some of our guys, I mean our niche is so small, the majority of small reviewers can't be making much money out of it even with the occasional manufacturers' swag bag thrown in. I hope it doesn't change too much in our industry, other than a couple of obvious violators I don't think there's much wrong with it as it stands... Just my opinion and I could be wrong (again). |
We can only get 50$ a year from the drug reps in food and stuff called the sunshine act our brilliant government passed.worked all through lunch on regular basis was great for every one including staff and patients to feed and see people in need.how do they get insider trading.not much we can do .so we enjoy the music and stay healthy. |
The only reviews I trust are where reviewer bought the item with their own money at retail price. [Plus gear that is made available by friend who bought it: the Amir ASR approach] Everything else is an infomercial. I would welcome a disclosure mandate on every video/article, maybe even a required "infomercial" banner displayed during entire video/every page. I currently subscribe to TAS and am dismayed about the uncritical content. E.g. Fremer writing that 1 arc second is audible [physical nonsense, as an angular measurement is no indication of speed stability]. Or in a cartridge review giving impedance with mV value. Or extolling the virtue of the latest old tech R2R DAC, ignoring the many R2R DACs around. Needless to say, I will not renew. High time for FTC to clamp down. |
@dekay, I always wondered how you amassed your great wealth. Enjoy the music |
| Post removed |
In addition to any suspected bias from any payola or financial incentives, even a legit honest review is written according to the reviewers preferences and natural bias, which may or may not match my preferences. Sort of like depending on someone else to season your food. Not that a review can't be interesting and/or useful, but it should not be a substitute for auditioning audio gear for yourself and forming your own opinion. I think too much emphasis is put on other's opinions. |
@jayctoy I think the argument made is that being honest and truthful doesn't go hand-in-glove with being paid: "As long as the reviewer is honest and truthful. Perks benefits is ok with me." I suspect nothing much will happen until someone we know is made an example of. Then everything will change. |
Audio is a luxury product. Obviously manufacturers take care of reviewers. It's part of capitalism. As a consumer you must be ruthless. Government intervention is not the solution. Just take a break if it stops being fun. As an older guy I look at these older guys with their idioms and genuflections telling me some circuit board has a slightly bigger soundstage that is beautiful when it is angry. It's a sales job and a pretty decent one at that. I used to work for rich people. They eat that stuff up. |
It looks that many of you are expecting too much from this FTC ruling. For the most part, it applies to "consumer reviews." Those are reviews written by consumers, not by ostensibly "professional’ reviewers that would be writing for a real publication, such as TAS or Stereophile. Even many of the YouTube audio "experts" are arguably "professional," especially if their YT channel generates revenue. |
@jayctoy + 1 - I trust YouTube or any other reviewers no less than I trust people on forums, who are much more anonymous. I read and I watch opinions and I listen to what gear I can, and I decide what makes sense to me. Nobody tells me what to buy. |
Pay to play has been a factor in reviews for years and is even happening with the large Stereo magazines when it comes to what products they review. I see some of these reviewers with CRAZY expensive systems that they own, and I would imagine being a stereo reviewer doesn't pay that well. I've always had my suspicions and still do. |
I may be wrong, but my guess is this is an attempt to weed out the 4,217 positive reviews tomorrows' newly introduced gadget gets on the day of introduction, all posted by bots from different IP addresses in the first few hours the product has existed. Amazon, et. al. are going to be, if not already, rife with this nonsense. Personally, I tend to read the 1-star reviews first, as they are least likely to be fake, although often over represented since moderately satisfied folks are usually more sanguine, and don't bellow their feelings as often. Unfortunately, a lot of reviewers will see a change in the nature of their revenue stream. Hopefully, the market will adjust. I remember when I was working in a small HI-Fi shop back in the 70's and one key reason I worked there was to get 50% off retail from almost every line we represented. Working for a couple of bucks an hour plus commission, that was a major incentive, and items I purchased were chosen after extensive in-store comparitive demo'ing of the exact item. There were also "spiffs" where extra commission was paid on occasion to highlight certain items, but if a product wasn't a good one, it wouldn't be in our store in any case. I still have most of those purchases which were based on weeks, not hours of evaluation. The market moves too fast today to allow such luxuries except on a forum like this where the discussions are only "tainted" by the difference in hearing ability and personal taste, as it should be. If you love Wilson, you may not choose a set of Mag's for your second system, but that does not mean either are "bad", just different, and perhaps each is best for the listening environment it serves in. As always, YMMV. |
@cleeds I think 'consumer reviews' means reviews for the consumer not specifically 'reviews by a consumer', so professional reviewers generate consumer reviews and are affected by the ruling. You could also consider that many consumers who are unpaid generate reviews, but I can't see a situation where a consumer who isn't being paid for the review could do or say anything that would lead to prosecution by the FTC.
|
There's nothing to suggest your interpretation of the FTC announcement. The ruling addresses "Fake Reviews and Testimonials" and is explicit:
You're reading w-a-y too much into this ruling. |
Reviews make good bathroom reading.... If I can't see it and hear it in person I am generally not interested. Lack of in home demo or decent return policy is usually a deal breaker for me. I actually prefer reading about how great something is that I just bought NOT based on a review but by hands on, real world listening .
|
I review equipment for an online audio zine. I have reviewed gear for 30 years. In that time, I have received exactly two freebies: a pair of Linn interconnects and a set of vibration absorption feet for a turntable. I reviewed the interconnects favorably because I thought they were quite outstanding and I use them to this day. I've never used or reviewed the turntable feet because I don't believe they are necessary for my set up. In my career, I've written more than 120 published reviews, I know there are a few reviewers who write good reviews in the hopes of getting the piece for nothing but I sincerely do not believe it is all that common. Believe what you wish but I think most reviewers are honest. |
All it takes is one or two or three anecdotal accounts of knowing someone who knows someone who's confessed to receiving something for something and it's off to the conspiracy races. It actually happened a lot back in the days of print so it's become something like a Sasquatch sighting. Toss in the internet and everyone's in on something and can't be trusted. This had been discussed to death with the qualifier being getting to know your reviewer and ascertaining if his/her tastes align with yours. It doesn't need to be as deep and wide as some make it out to be. Times change but morals and ethics don't, as much. What used to be verboten is now normal (as a courtesy) so the values needed to do an honest review can still occur. @larsman +1, It's so simple a way to do things but there has to be something to complain about. All the best, |
I’m not into fake reviews but the FTC can barely do its day job. How about let’s make sure that we have competition in grocery stores before we worry about what freebie someone gets for posting their whatever online. Sorry... I just haven’t been a fan of the recent FTC. What with wading into employment law and now nanny-ing consumers. When you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail. |
Maybe 90% of the time reviews are just promoting a product advertised in the publication or website running the review. On the rare occasion when the product is not advertised and there’s no financial incentive to praise it, you might find a sincere review. (Absolute Sound was like that many years ago, when the late, great Harry Pearson was the publisher.) And if that reviewer thinks highly enough of the product to actually buy it - at the retail price, you can be reasonably sure there’s some genuine value in his opinion. Here are some examples of that sort of review: |
FTC is brilliant… at rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Read Lina M. Khan‘s bio. She is a classic study in Ivy League machinery-cog dynamics. With her PhD (Probably hasn’t Done it), she will slay the dragon…of what? Human behavior? What actual laws broken will be applied to such cases? These people have a crushing lack of understanding Homo sapiens. She would last 5 minutes on the real mean streets of business. The expended energies and capital on such endeavors reminds us of why an understanding of “Gulliver’s Travels” is far more valuable than that PhD… in the real working world. Our tax dollars at work targeting fluff. Cats chasing laser pointers. |
The last thing the FTC will care about is audio. At least buyers can hear a product themselves and decide it it is good or not. Youtubers who get equipment samples to keep or flip are not their concern. Reviewers who get gear to review who require the vendor to cover all shipping costs both ways are not an issue. The targets will be mass online promoters of products who get cash or significant "emoluments" from their work will be targets (think TikTok "influencers raking in big money for promoting certain products, celebrity shills, etc.) Target industries will be ones where there are significant information differentials between sellers and buyers: health and medical, financial services and investment products, expensive capital personal goods like home construction, renovation and automobiles. Luxury goods like high-end audio carry a bias of "if you have that kind of money you should be smart enough to know better" and won't attract much interest. It isn't like audio anywhere is making billionaires. |
@y'all....."...problem solved...." What?! Don't trust 'The Experts' anymore?! Silly 'phile.....next you'll be claiming that your ears 'n emotions Don't get in Your Way....even if you've just gotten 'gifted' with the gadget AND the tour and golden shower option.....🙄 Guess it'll come down to dragging your ears and the rest of you off to the site and Listen To said gadget for yourself and making the yay/nay call on it.... "...the Pasttence 4100 sounded like a brick encased with overused stall sweepings..." That'll make friends.... ;P |
My two cents. In the end, every reviewer is getting paid, whether it working for a magazine or YouTube likes. I for one can’t remember ever seeing a truly bad review, I have seen some with some dislikes. I have also heard many reviewers say that they won’t do bad reviews and that they turn down some products and that all makes perfect sense to me. |
