I read this review about reviewers

I agree with the point that getting paid by the company whose products are being reviewed presents conflict of interest.  That is the reason why, for example, Consumer Reports purchases all the products they review and doesn’t even accept advertising from manufacturers — they aren’t obligated to review products positively unless that is their finding.

On the other hand, I understand that he wants to make a go of reviewing as a career and needs compensation for the hours he spends reviewing, recording, editing, etc.  Mr. Price indicates that he has a Youtube channel — perhaps he should seek advice from those reviewers who are already financially successful due to advertising revenue on Youtube and see if he could benefit from any of those suggestions.  He would still need to attract a subscribing audience and “likes” of his work.  

@wolfie62 - I think he may be contorting British Law to meet his own benefit. I don't think the Brit's laws are at all to serve the lazy at all, and I don't think it's an us and them situation either.

News media is evolving, for example when I go to open my emails, I use a site not unlike Hotmail (as well as hotmail) and there's always news articles, which is where I found this one about the music industry by Mr Price. The news has moved across to internet, and I am betting (guessing) hard copy sales of newspapers has dropped??

I guess a well respected reviewer, with a talent for expressing his findings in a credible manner (because let's face it there's been a lot of verbage been frowned upon by us here in Agon, industry sales speak that's not got any credibility), he is actually an influencer?

Which is why forums like this are such a wealth of knowledge and experience. We all know that, at least I know of myself, I am (we are) somewhat proud of and biased towards purchases I've (we've) made, and want to share the good I (we) have found. That's why loads of people put up their products they have found when others ask for speaker, amplifier, room treatment, interconnects etc. It's not bad, it's simply human nature.

Getting your products reviewed is certainly an intelligent part of an advertising campaign, he's complaining that the PR guy is getting paid, and he's not. The PR guy is getting a commission and he's not.
It does get a little convoluted when that is a consideration, well to me anyway.

Yes his business model is the reviewers responsibility, agreed.

Lets all say that there is bigger problem in audio industry and in the world....

Reviewing is supposed to be neutral, without ties to the product reviewed...

Who want to read reviewers that are paid for reviewing?

I prefer to read the company that sell the product and the users than the paid reviewer....

There will always be reviewers that does it for the pleasure to write anyway....

If i was the company that created a product the last thing i want is to be reviewed by a paid reviewer....The consumer i am agree with the company here....

:)

Talking about b--ching and moaning. You make the deal before you do the review not after. No banner, No review. This fellow needs to get some business savvy. 

There is always secondary gain or the threat of loss in any review business. It is why you can never make a purchase decision on one review alone. 

I can understand why the company edited his review. In my opinion, he's not really a good writer. As long as they didn't change the meaning, he shouldn't have a problem with it.

I know a guy who formerly reviewed audio equipment too. If he liked the speakers, he was allowed to buy them at cost. Then he could sell them for profit if he found something he liked better. Not a bad way at all to constantly upgrade a system.