Comments on: Samples and Review Items, Bribery or PR?

By: Chris Garrett

Chris Garrett — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 09:34:48 +0000

While a lot of media outlets do have those sorts of rules it does restrict them to only reviewing things available by the general public. I find the reviews I like most are the early pre-general-release reviews. I want to hear about movies/software/gadgets/games before I can get my hands on them myself.

A major difference between old and new media is the journalist/blogger is part of a conversation. It’s like the difference between a politician standing up on stage or a friend speaking at a party.

By: bgrier

bgrier — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 05:01:57 +0000

I think the one concern that’s not been addressed is one of ‘credibility’ in a new media world.

One of the national newspaper syndicates in Canada will NOT let their staff reviewers receive anything for free (movie tickets, books, dinners at restaurants, software..etc) if the writer is going to be ‘reviewing’ said item. CBC is (was?) the same way (Canada’s national broadcaster). This is to eliminate any doubt about the credibility of ALL news from that source, and sends the subtext to their audience that “we can’t be bought”.

Now to blogs…this is the 21st century; do the philosophies of old media apply to new? Or are our readers more savvy and able to derive their own opinions from the content and can recognize a shill blog when they see it?

In the end, what I’m looking for is quality post and disclosure (if any). Said writer builds a large audience with hi-quality posts; she’s built cred. Well done.

If I get value from reading about that spiffy new windows OS on that spiffy new laptop, then I’ve gained something. As a reader, I could care less if you got to keep those things or not. If you had the huge cred to attract my attention in the first place, then I’d believe you know your stuff: of course I’d not stop there, I do tend to read more than one post about an item I’m considering purchasing.

So yeah, it’s smart marketing for organizations to hit the A and B listers if the product and the blog are a fit.

But if you’re a blogger, and you are approached with such an offer, you don’t have to take it.

And, as always, if you’re a reader of blogs, Caveat Bloggeum!

By: Chris Garrett

Chris Garrett — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 20:02:55 +0000

@HMTKSteve, Ha, the game industry would grind to a halt without review copies, as would the music industry.

@Bes, it seems whenever Microsoft does *anything* people call them evil eh?

By: Bes Zain

Bes Zain — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 19:58:10 +0000

You raise a very important point Chris. Bloggers are not above other people simply because of the popularity of blogs these days. Getting products to sample is what many reviewers, reporters and journalists do every day, and they have been doing it for years. The concept becomes bribery when extra incentive is included on purpose to somehow influence a review.

It’s surprising how many in the blogosphere cited Microsoft being evil when it asked people to return the laptops they handed out to review their software, but people also complain when someone hands out free products [to keep] since that can be considered bribery.

By: HMTKSteve

HMTKSteve — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 17:45:00 +0000

I have no problem with bloggers getting “review” copies of items. I know several people in the gaming industry who both receive and send out free games for the sole purpose of getting reviews published.

This is nothing new and I can’t understand why there is such an uproar about this. We can’t all be Consumer Reports you know?!