Is there a storm brewing for YouTube reviewers?

[dgallen]

Over the last few months I and others (via comments I see on various solar technology groups) have noticed a distinct favoritism and/or polarization to particular companies or products which has creeped into the YouTube reviews themselves. This sometimes leads to recommendations that may not have revealed all the facts or fair comparison. I guess it had to happen, as YouTube channels become such serious income or revenue generators for many of the reviewers. As the technology is becoming more mainstream you are also seeing distinct fanboy/girl division a la Android vs. iPhone kind of nonsense... can you say Bluetti vs. Delta Eco. Hopefully true transparency and integrity will prevail, but for now it can be challenging for us buyers, and I assume especially so for the newcomers who depend on these reviews to navigate the technology and make their purchases for increasingly big ticket items.

I wish there was a more designation about the Paid Promotion banner that hangs in YouTube. I know that this is required for any reviewer who although may not receive financial "consideration", but do receive merchandise to review and test which they keep, and hence the generic warning. By better disclosing the arrangement between vendor and reviewer, will help the viewer know whether they are watching a genuine independent review or a partisan advertisement. One comment I read tonight on a YouTube page asked the reviewer for transparency sake what their financial arrangement was with the vendor. The reviewer essentially said that any financial disclosure was none of their business and if they didn't like it to go somewhere else.

The line seems blurred right now and I think a storm of sorts is brewing.

 

[Short_Shot]

This is honestly an old issue.

Just becoming more common as every dingus with a cell phone can start a youtube channel and companies start taking notice of prominent ones.

Also, I don't believe it's legal for someone to not disclose whether or not it's a sponsored review of a product.

If it is sponsored, you can assume that it is highly biased, until and not one second before, that reviewer states that the product sucks and they don't care about losing future sponsorship over it. Not many will go that far.

I would imagine Will knows a lot about this subject.

As for the discussion of financial arrangements, that's none of anyone's business.

 

[DerpsyDoodler]

Over the last few months I and others (via comments I see on various solar technology groups) have noticed a distinct favoritism and/or polarization to particular companies or products which has creeped into the YouTube reviews themselves. This sometimes leads to recommendations that may not have revealed all the facts or fair comparison. I guess it had to happen, as YouTube channels become such serious income or revenue generators for many of the reviewers. As the technology is becoming more mainstream you are also seeing distinct fanboy/girl division a la Android vs. iPhone kind of nonsense... can you say Bluetti vs. Delta Eco. Hopefully true transparency and integrity will prevail, but for now it can be challenging for us buyers, and I assume especially so for the newcomers who depend on these reviews to navigate the technology and make their purchases for increasingly big ticket items.

I wish there was a more designation about the Paid Promotion banner that hangs in YouTube. I know that this is required for any reviewer who although may not receive financial "consideration", but do receive merchandise to review and test which they keep, and hence the generic warning. By better disclosing the arrangement between vendor and reviewer, will help the viewer know whether they are watching a genuine independent review or a partisan advertisement. One comment I read tonight on a YouTube page asked the reviewer for transparency sake what their financial arrangement was with the vendor. The reviewer essentially said that any financial disclosure was none of their business and if they didn't like it to go somewhere else.

The line seems blurred right now and I think a storm of sorts is brewing.

I think its most important to take into account the integrity as well as knowledge-level of the reviewer. The first thing I learned in college is to always evaluate a source of information for credibility.

There will be reviewers who actually know what they're talking about when it comes to certain topics, either due to experience, education, or some combination thereof. It's up to the consumer to evaluate who to trust and when.

There will be times when the reviewer is just throwing something up because a company paid them to advertise on their channel. Sure, maybe they got "whatever it is" for free to experiment and test with. And maybe they are trying to be sincere, but if it's a plant expert reviewing an inverter. uhhhhh....well....hopefully you get my point. That's just a glaring example. It may often be more subtle in practice.

Point being, learn to be an astute consumer of both products and information.

 

[12VoltInstalls]

don't believe it's legal for someone to not disclose whether or not it's a sponsored

Youtube legal? Or legal under law?
under law I think that’s sorta gray area but sometimes not really black or not really white depending on libel parameters. Civil VS criminal.
But I’m not a lawyer

 

[Short_Shot]

Youtube legal? Or legal under law?
under law I think that’s sorta gray area but sometimes not really black or not really white depending on libel parameters. Civil VS criminal.
But I’m not a lawyer

Pretty sure it's law in the UK, and might be in the US.

But neither am I a lawyer.

 

[740GLE]

Wait, I thought all lubetube videos were paid promotions of some schill hawking some product with their biased opinions cause they got paid.

 

[Lt.Dan]

Take everything with a grain of salt...

 

[Short_Shot]

Wait, I thought all lubetube videos were paid promotions of some schill hawking some product with their biased opinions cause they got paid.

Not all of them.

Usually they say it's sponsored or such and such company sent this to me or whatever.

 

[12VoltInstalls]

Wait, I thought all lubetube videos were paid promotions of some schill hawking some product with their biased opinions cause they got paid.

No, there’s good content.

But having been ‘online’ since 1994 and past employment with an ISP back then I do say my bs and schill detector skills are fairly well honed, and I can home in on the trustworthy channels pretty quickly.

 

[740GLE]

Ha the sarcasm still doesn’t make its way through the inter webs as much as I’d like sometimes.

 

[Short_Shot]

Ha the sarcasm still doesn’t make its way through the inter webs as much as I’d like sometimes.

Oh no I got it. But most of the "youtubers" are.

 

[Blackda3]

If I understood ShortShot's response correctly, yes as to duty to disclose, and no as to disclosing the financial arrangements. Personally, I always assume the content provider has a material connection to the brand unless affirmatively stated otherwise (and even then I probably won't believe them). As our host is certainly aware, it's a really gray area, and companies are doing everything "legal" to promote their products.

FTC: If you endorse a product through social media, your endorsement message should make it obvious when you have a relationship (“material connection”) with the brand. A “material connection” to the brand includes a personal, family, or employment relationship or a financial relationship – such as the brand paying you or giving you free or discounted products or services.

Disclosures 101 for Social Media Influencers

Do you work with brands to recommend or endorse products? If so, you need to comply with the law when making these recommendations. One key is to make a good disclosure of your relationship to the brand. This brochure from FTC staff gives tips on when and how to make good disclosures.

www.ftc.gov

(The FTC defines compensation very broadly. Companies cannot insulate themselves from liability by hiring independent contractors who in turn hire YouTube creators.)

It's also required in YouTube Terms of Service:

Add paid product placements, sponsorships & endorsements - YouTube Help

You may include paid product placements, endorsements, sponsorships, or other content that requires disclosure to viewers in your videos. You have to let us know if you include any of those by selecti

support.google.com

(You can also file complaints with the FTC and YouTube.)

 

[Supervstech]

There are the reviews that the creator purchases with their own money, and there are the ones where the product is sent free for an honest review...
Than there are the reviews where it is obvious it is a paid commercial.
The free product reviews concern me, because the company may have hand picked the product for the best review...

 

[Bob B]

Any time there is any room for corruption .... someone is going to show up and try to take advantage of it. It's a pity, but it seems there must be a gene for that propensity.

In the wild west, people would steal other people's cattle and horses .... even though they knew they would be hung on the spot if they were caught.
Seems like they didn't hang enough of them to clear the gene pool .... LOL

 

[schmism]

The free product reviews concern me, because the company may have hand picked the product for the best review...

This is my biggest concern. Cherry picked or otherwise modified in some way for the reviewer that does not represent what the actual product is that normal consumers would get.

Will touched on this a couple of years ago when the review units of bluitte/Delta in kickstarter pre shipped units that had signifanctly diffrent software/hardware than the actual as shipped product.

As for non-critical reviews because they are paid for... seems easy to spot a shill video these days in terms of everything is great and nothing is bad about it.

 

[Supervstech]

The BOTTOM line is…

do you trust the reviewer?

A good reviewer will always show everything about the product, and always have the customer’s best interest in full view in the video.

For instance… even on a paid commercial for a product, Will Prowse strikes me as honest, and fully forthcoming in the review. How many other reviewer youtubers are like this? I can think of a few off the top of my head, but I can think of just as many that seem to be pure pimps…

 

[DerpsyDoodler]

... but I can think of just as many that seem to be pure pimps…

Nah, they're not the pimps, they're the tricks.

 

[dixonge]

On YouTube, subscribers and views = money. Money from ads. Money from brands. Free products.

It literally does NOT pay to bite the hand that feeds you. It biases even the most honest soul.

Like everything else in life, follow the money...

 

[wattmatters]

Set up a youtube channel to review the reviewers.

 

[Will Prowse]

One of the reasons my videos did so well is because I was critical of the inergy Kodiak. Every single YouTuber on the planet was pushing that thing down everyone's throat for months because the affiliate comission was huge.

I am surprised how many channels push whatever they send them. They feel obligated to speak nicely about the product. I have never once felt that urge. And being honest makes the most money at the end of the day, and helps the most people. So I don't get it.

Everytime I find something wrong with jackery, every YouTuber that pushes it tries to criticize my video. Why don't they promote a better product? Or test more? They slam their viewers with endless promotions and give aways. I always unsubscribe from those channels.

I like hobotech, lithium solar and hightec lab, because they do basic testing like I do. They prove what they say with results. It's not hard to do, and we all have a love for electricity.

I did hang out with some other tech YouTubers that are very well known in San Diego and I do not fit in. I couldn't stand them to be quite frank.

I also think YouTubers push products more when they have higher commission. Or if they are on contracts. Those contracts are so dumb, and YouTubers sign them all the time. I don't get it. I deny every single one, and the companies always come crawling back. I have zero loyalty and other YouTubers should do the same. They would be more successful and more helpful to others.