I read this review about reviewers

@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.

Interesting topic. Let’s assume his service is valued by the consumer. If he gets paid by the manufacturer it calls into judgment his bias- even if it is after the fact- and even if the bias were unconscious. If he has ads from manufacturers I believe that would still be the case. The only way to avoid bias, is if he sells his services directly to consumer- such as a subscription, or if his reviews are picked up by traditional print or e-sites. I think the whole internet monetary model challenges unbiased review, reporting, etc. How many would pay $5/ month to subscribe if the content was exceptional? Certainly some. The issue would be he would be under tremendous pressure to keep the content value  proposition high. My largely uninformed opinion is he wants the reward without the pressure of going all in.