Reviewers feathering their nest?

[Nick]

Ok, so I'm still procrastinating about those damn tree lights but I thought I'd dip a toe in the waters of public opinion...

Here's a quick excerpt from a mail I sent to one of the other HEXUS guys, flagging up what I feel is a serious issue:

I was surprised when one member of the press boasted to me about how he had furnished himself with a bunch of Wii accessories, apparently for review but now seemingly permanently living with him as part of his Wii set-up.

The statement was along the lines of “I suggested to one of the guys that we did a round up of Wii accessories, stocking filler stuff for Christmas… he said yeah ok, so I rang up all these companies and said to them to send me all their Wii accessories for review… So now I’ve got myself the Wii Remote play and charge kit, wireless sensor bar, Wii remote gloves and all that stuff, sitting above my TV… which is cool”

When I asked if he was reviewing it: “Yeah, we’ll review it eventually”

And will he send it back? “Why? It’s mine now…”


So my thoughts on this are thus:

Sure, we get kit sent to us which even though we offer to return we are told to keep. Those Sure headphones are a good example (I offered to return them after the review was up but was told to keep them). The difference is, when I get a product in to review, unless review it uses up the product (if say I was reviewing a pack of biscuits) or makes it unusable for anyone else (perhaps limited keys or installs on a game), then I always offer to return the product and, especially with hardware, make it clear we’ll be returning the product once the review is complete.

Sometimes I’ll be told to keep the kit, such as with that Bluedelta SMART-SCART+ box I reviewed, which they told me I could keep even though I had agreed with their PR people that we would return it after review.

But the example from that other journo to me is a different thing altogether. My interpretation is that he decided he wanted some snazzy new kit for his Wii, used his position and influence to get what he wanted and then, and this is clearly the impression he gave me, a review of the kit will maybe be written sometime but regardless, he’s keeping that stuff for himself.


Why is this a problem?

Well I personally feel that beyond abusing his position as a reviewer, he’s now compromised his integrity as a reviewer. Perhaps he feels that he’s NOT beholden to the company or companies whose kit he has nabbed and will give an honest review, but how can we be sure?

Further, if he DOES keep the kit but writes an honest review perhaps slagging it off, how can we trust that? He’s prepared to keep and use the kit even though he tells the rest of us it’s no good?

Next, he’s helping to perpetuate this sub-culture of ‘We gave you the kit now where is our good review’ that some companies expect… if he gives them a good write up it’ll be what they expect having given him the kit… essentially, he’s just allowed himself to be ‘bought’. And even if he personally doesn’t do the review, the perception is that the review, unless it is anything other than a severe slagging, is warped as one of their team is keeping the kit.

Finally, for other journos, who have no interest in keeping the kit and just want to report the facts, it now makes it harder for them (me) to access kit as the company in question will either be expecting a good review if they offer to let us keep the kit or will be unwilling to send kit out as they see no benefit in, as they see it, giving us kit when there’s no guarantee of a good review.

Is this a whole big can o' worms or am I just over-reacting?

[Jiff Lemon]

Far from overreacting I think old chap;

How can you trust a review if theirs any sort of Bias in it? I'm sure a few companies would happily let you keep the product as they think it may help sweeten the review a little. I'd argue in some cases it may actually be worth re-reviewing the same product if a substantial update was realeased than fixed many of the orginal problems.

But to simply feather your nest with goodies just because you can? very wrong.

[tiggerai]

I'm with him ^

Not over-reacting at all, I think the behaviour of the other reviewer stinks, and as you say, puts the honest joe's at a worse off position.

If you knew who it was... is there any point in whistleblowing?

[pollaxe]

Definitely pongs in a bad way...

[MadduckUK]

yep, dont like that at all

[Saracen]

There have been many occasions over the years where I've been left with review kit after a review. I've still got several items stacked in boxes in my garage from several years ago. It's very rare, in my experience, for software to ever be collected.

There are reasons why some companies don't want loan kit back, and they vary a lot. Yes, it's possible that some might think it buys influence, but with any sensible journalist (at least, in any field I've worked in) it doesn't, because your reputation from objectivity is critical. If you're staff and your employer finds reviews are anything but objective, you're likely to be ex-staff, and if you're freelance it's even worse, because you would simply stop getting commissions .... and word spreads.

So why would companies be happy to leave equipment with journalists? Well, one reason is that the more you are familiar with some products, the more you're likely to write about them, or use them for comparisons (because you have them to hand), so if a manufacturer is happy that their product stands well against comparisons with competitive products, by leaving it with a jourmalist, they'll get it used (as mentioned) again and again.

Another reason is that sometimes, it isn't worth collecting. Suppose a product is released and 25 go onto the PR budget for reviews. Each unit will be expected to "pay it's way" on the PR budget, by being sent to several journalists. But .... any new product only has a limited shelf life for reviews. Once everybody has covered it, it's generally of very nominal interest to other publications. So, the PR company (or department) have 25 units out there. They may want to keep two or three on the shelf for occasional requests, but for the other 22, getting them back probably implies the cost of 22 courier collections and it certainly involves finding somewhere to store 22 units, or finding something to do with them. Suppose they're bulky items, like printers. The PR company certainly don't want to store 22 spare printers, especially when you multiply that by several hundred items over the year. True, they could sell them internally to staff, but when they get back from several tripos round the country, probably with battered boxes and quite possibly missing disks, manuals etc, they'd have to test and refurbish before even selling to staff. So .... if the item I get is brand new, it's much more likely to be collected, but if I'm the third or fourth to get that unit for review, it's much more likely to have done it's job, PR-wise, and be written off anyway.

I have a couple of quite expensive items here from one manufacturer ..... about £1500 worth, at the time. They arranged collection, and I waited all day for a courier that didn't show up. A couple of months later, I got a call saying "can we have our kit back please". I explained that they'd organised collection, but the courier didn't show up. So we organised it again, and again, the courier didn't show up - and at a guess, because they'd never been booked. About 6 months later, yes you've guessed it .... "can we have our kit back please?" Another date was booked and another no-show. Well, each time this happens, irt restricts my diary as it commits me to not going out on a given day, so if I get a last-minute call from a customer needing help, I have to decline or delay, and delay isn't always acceptable. So when they asked for a fourth collection, I told them "sure, but if I sit here all day AGAIN and no courier arrives, I'm charging you for a day of my time, and i want that agreed in writing in advance." At that point, they decided they didn't want them back after all, which suggests how likely it was that the courier would have arrived.

And those two items? One is still (about three years later), still boxed and sealed. Eventually, I'll get around to giving it away or taking it to a dump (for recycling). The other I've used .... twice I think.


The attitude of the journalist in Nick's story stinks, IMHO. It's utterly unprofessional. But when a company leaves loan kit with a journalist, it isn't always an attempt to curry bias. It may be self-interest in terms of making kit available and boosting familiarity, or it may simply be that it's surplus to requirements and is easier and cheaper than sending couriers to collect something they don't really want anyway. "Blagging" loan kit for no valid reason is one thing, but having a pile of uncollected kit sitting in a corner of the office is entirely another .... and often a damned nuisance.

[Saracen]

Oh, and PR companies/departments are MUCH more careful about loans these days than they were 10 years ago, partly because so many review requests come from "journalists" who are essentially a one-man web site operated from their bedroom. Unless you are known to PR companies and manufacturers, it's a lot harder to get loan equipment than it used to be, because of the huge increase in .... erm .... dubious requests. Many, perhaps most, requests will now be checked out with the publication (and that publication itself be checked out) before equipment (or software) is sent out, unless the requester is already known, and if you're not known, it may well be on a "buy and refund on return" basis. That tends to sort out the serious from the pee-takers.

[MSIC]

I think Saracen's points as to why kit isn't collected is perfectly reasonable, although to my mind it doesnt change the initial point (not that he seemed to want to BTW).

For me there is a parallel issue of advertising on websites and the way there is either compromised opinions, or even the perception of bias. (just see the whole Kane & Lynch / Gamespot affair).

My worry is with regards to Hexus and Scan in particular - not that i think that any wrong-doing has (or probably even would) occur, and moreover i find both Hexus and Scan to be valuable, reputable businesses that mean alot to me, but still, the perception....
That's why i was concerned a few months back when Hexus advertised a very good value product (on Today Only or something) at Scan and I posted in this forum, only to be knocked back because hexus seem to have no policy against affiliating themselves with a retailer.

Sorry, just my 2 pence worth

Edit: I might actually retract some of this, as i have found the close working relationship between Scan and Hexus to benefit me no end, so i am actually quite torn with my own argument.

[Saracen]

I agree about perception, but it can be that it's more about suspicion than perception.

For instance, manufacturers and retailers both advertise with computer magazines. After all, manufacturers are targeting people interested in their products, and if you buy a magazine, it suggests you're interested. That same logic applies to websites.

Well, I've done several thousand articles, over more than a decade and a half, for a wide variety of magazines and national newspapers, and over that experience, not once, not EVER has there been an occasion where there's been any direct attempt to influence the content of the review, either from the supplier of the equipment, or from magazine staff. I've never met or had any contact of any description with advertising staff, nor have editorial staff (who may or may not have had contact with advertising staff) ever attempted to influence a review.

Yet, I've no doubt that that perception (or suspicion) still exists.

This is not to say I'm claiming such attempts at influence don't happen .... or succeed. Maybe they do, but I've no way to know if they do or not. I just know it's never been tried with me, nor am I aware of any such incident with others.

As for indirect influence, well, that's harder. If you're a journalist, you do get to meet representatives from manufacturers (etc) on a fairly regular basis. So you get to know them. You end up in bar having a drink and a laugh after a launch event. You might get taken out for a meal, but then, you've just spent some hours getting a briefing. As a freelancer, I don't get expenses for going to such events and I don't get paid for my time either. So if a company spends £30 on a meal, is that worth going for? Not when it cost me most of that or more than that in travel costs, and if you factor in the time (during which I'm not earning by staying at home and writing a review) then it actually amounts to a damned expensive meal for me. Influence? Not hardly.

But then suppose it's a week's trip to Japan, or the US? Well, if it's a worldwide product launch it's got to be held somewhere. If it's a factory tour, a demonstration of manufacturing capability and a showing-off a clean room facilities, you kind-of have to go to where the factory is. And besides, you get an insight into the company and a chance to interview staff, from designers and product managers to technical people, right up to CEOs. As a journalist, if I want a face-to-face with the CEO of Epson, HP, IBM, Borland, Lexmark or Microsoft, it's pretty much a case of me going to the mountain not expecting the mountain to come to me. And yes, I've done all those, some several times.

Journalists often work with manufacturers to an extent, and I'm often working under a non-disclosure agreement. I'm constrained as to what I can tell you, and more particularly, when I can tell you. So the downside to that is that there is an element of symbiosis with the manufacturer. A relationship develops. The upside is that you, the reader, get a level of access and promptness of access that simply isn't going to happen any other way. Without the NDA, I simply wouldn't be told anything at all in advance of public announcement, and if I break the NDA, I wouldn't be trusted again.

But loan kit or not, product launches, meals and worldwide factory tours or not, EVERY product gets reviewed on it's merits and ONLY on it's merits, at least by me. Why? Because if I do anything else and get caught at it (and you would, sooner or later), you're out of a job and probably out of a career. It simply isn't worth it.

I can't do much about perception, and I can't say that bias doesn't happen .... just that it doesn't happen to me.


But there's another side to the coin, too.

I did once receive a call from an editor about a manufacturer that wasn't, erm ... totally happy with a review. They'd threatened legal action if a retraction wasn't issued. The editor asked if i was sure of my ground. I was. They asked if I had notes, test results, etc. I did. They told the manufacturer "So sue then. We stand by the review". Nothing more was heard about the manufacturer suing.