Question to reviewers

[Phaedrus2129]

At what point does taking something from a company become a conflict of interest when reviewing said product? I know that Jeremy is allowed to keep many of his review samples; several companies have allowed me to keep mine. I assume that's safe. It saves shipping costs for both parties, allows the reviewer more time to study the product and he can help cover his costs by selling it if cash is tight. Companies can hope that the small gift improves the product in the reviewer's eyes, without it being a bribe.

On the other end, obviously taking money from a company or working for a company would be an obvious problem when reviewing, clear cut conflict.

But what about things in between? What if I'm offered the role of product tester for a company on a volunteer basis? Would reviewing products that I'd had input on be a conflict? Or what if it was a product I helped design, would be a conflict of interest then if I was to review it? The latter seems more likely to be wrong since I'd have a clear motive to promote a product I played a major role in designing, but with the former it's far murkier since the input is indirect; my input affects the engineers, managers, and sales people indirectly, rather than directly affecting the product. But since I still had input on the final design I might want to cast it in a better light? Would that be a major enough interest that it would be unethical to review said product?




Aaaagghrargharagh. :wall:


At least I don't have to deal with this directly, not right now. I've established with the company that I'll review the product they've sent me, but if I take a role as a product tester I won't review any of their products for a period of some months after I have stopped being their product tester. They seem happy with this arrangement; I've already provided some major advice on how to improve a certain upcoming product that could make the difference between it being a moderate hit and it flopping.


But anyway, reviewing is hard on the brain and conscience. At least I get to play video games instead of filling TPS reports. ;) Wait, fall semester is starting? Calculus? Genetics? ME?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbeR6uYxU50&feature=related

[jonnyGURU]

I don't know. I draw a pretty thick line. Like, I had input on Ultra's X-Pro and X3 line and refused to review them. That's when both Wolf and Matt would review them instead of me.

I think if you had input on a product, that's good. Good use of resources for the company and good side income for you if they pay you. I'm not going to frown upon that. But I would say if any product was available to review, you should do whatever it takes to get OTHERS to review it for you and then drive traffic to those reviews. There's no conflict of interest in that.

[Spectre]

But what about things in between? What if I'm offered the role of product tester for a company on a volunteer basis? Would reviewing products that I'd had input on be a conflict?

Yes, conflict

Or what if it was a product I helped design, would be a conflict of interest then if I was to review it?

Yes, conflict

[Phaedrus2129]

Thanks for the candid replies, about in line with what I was thinking.

[Phaedrus2129]

Bit of a different question. What do you do when a company you want to get in contact with does not list an email address for contacting sales or marketing, only returns and technical support? Is it best to call?

[jonnyGURU]

Yes. It is best to call if you can't get through via email and always confirm whatever you're reporting then report anything at all.

[cypherpunks]

At what point does taking something from a company become a conflict of interest when reviewing said product?

At the point you're tempted to slant your reviews because of it. It's kind of subjective, but an ongoing revenue stream can have a major effect. Magazines don't like to offend major advertisers, charities don't like to offend donors, etc.

That's why at the least you should disclose such things. But the problem is that it's not what you've received in the past that affects your actions, it's what you hope to receive in the future. The very uncertainty of it is what tempts one to not queer the deal.

But what about things in between? What if I'm offered the role of product tester for a company on a volunteer basis? Would reviewing products that I'd had input on be a conflict? Or what if it was a product I helped design, would be a conflict of interest then if I was to review it? The latter seems more likely to be wrong since I'd have a clear motive to promote a product I played a major role in designing, but with the former it's far murkier since the input is indirect; my input affects the engineers, managers, and sales people indirectly, rather than directly affecting the product. But since I still had input on the final design I might want to cast it in a better light? Would that be a major enough interest that it would be unethical to review said product?

Really, the issue is whether it's an ongoing thing. It's not what you did in the past, but whether you'll be fired in future if they don't like your review.

[Redbeard]

As a journalism major (Advertising) the strict rule is - if you have any financial tie or obligation to the company, there's an appearance of conflict of interest.

In the real world, though, most reviews in the hardware industry (and the car industry, and the audio industry, and the record industry, and the food industry, and the architecture industry, etc) are in publications that have advertising to support them. It's how magazines typically stay in business. (Consumer Reports being the exemption to that rule) Web sites work the same way - they rely on advertising and sponsorship through contests, products for review, etc. Each website is managed differently, but this is usually the case.

So I think customers expect reviewers to be honest and trustworthy, even though most people know this. Even so, most sites maintain at least a level of civility in most reviews. Even if a product sucks outright nowadays, most reviewers will be civil and give it a low rating with a "Better luck next time, but at this price, this product is just not worth it" or something instead of "Oh my God, what were they thinking? What a piece of crap!"

To be honest, the best way to get a real review of a product is to read more than one review. Which is why we send our products to tons of different sites - we don't want people to think that we bought off some site somewhere with some ads and that they only write glowing reviews of our products - so we invite as many reviewers to review our parts as possible. That being said, sometimes review samples get expensive and we can only limit ourselves to a few reviews a month, and in those situations we pick sites we think do the best, most in-depth reviews of that particular product line, because we're confident in our products.

Also, being a hardware reviewer isn't exactly champagne, caviar, and yachting all day long. Even the biggest review sites out there don't really pay their reviewers huge sums of money - especially in the last few years with ad budgets drying up due to the economy and some review sites are tightening their belts.

A lot of times, a reviewer is a member of the staff of a website owned by somebody else (or a large firm that owns a number of sites) and he or she gets paid per review. I know reviewers that only get paid in that they get to keep or sell the hardware they get.

For an example of what you're talking about, I believe Mike Chin at Silent PC Review helped to design the Antec P180 case initially by giving feedback to Antec on sound dampening techniques. He publicly acknowledged that HERE (http://www.silentpcreview.com/article249-page1.html) I believe.

Strictly from a journalism standpoint, you should acknowledge any connection you have with any product or company that may give the appearance of a conflict of interest during a review. It doesn't mean you can't do the review - just that you should come out and say it right away.

Just my opinion and not the opinion of my employer.