October 19, 2009
Time To Clean Up Tainted Journalism
The Monday Note: In Countless Ways, Small And Large, The Product Reviews Process Is Failing Readers By Lack Of Transparency
-
(AP Photo/Paul Sakuma)
A few weeks ago, professional blogger Kevin Dixie received a strange proposition: a US based company offered to buy from him 30,000 reviews for a new iPhone application at $1 per review. Positive reviews, needless to say. Moreover, the marketing company proposed to extend the deal for 30 applications, about 10 to 20 times a month. A huge potential windfall for Kevin Dixie - who declined the offer. This British entrepreneur living in France created two specialized consumer products reviews sites: FuelMyblog, and its recent offspring, FuelMyApp.com, launched in September.
In both cases, the idea is same: a casual blogger from the network writes whatever review he or she wants to in exchange for a free product. The item can be an electronic appliance worth a few dozen dollars or it can be a trip worth a thousand dollars. The brand pays FuelMyBlog $40 per review. (The process also results in those brands getting higher Google page rankings).
With the explosion of the iPhone applications business, Dixie decided to roll out a dedicated site based on the same idea: the blogger would purchase the app, then test and write a review; FuelMyApp then reimburses him via its PayPal account.
I met Kevin Dixie last week at Eurovision's NewsXChange conference in Malta. Although I found his little system quite clever, I told him I couldn't help but feel queasy about the flexible ethics involved. It's OK to get a new disposable razor to test, but staying a week in a resort for free and expecting a true and honest independent review is a totally different story. Having lived and breathed journalism for twenty five years, I don't buy the idea of freebies being compatible with independent reviews.
It is actually a question of degree. Getting a book or a CD from a publisher is OK because it's only a $20 item. Getting a $200 software product, or a $500 weekend for free and expecting a balanced review is more problematic, to say the least.
I happen to live in a country where entire segments of journalism - I'm talking of mainstream media - are corrupt. I could tell countless stories of reporters covering the auto industry who call an automaker's PR department of to get a car for a weekend escape with their girlfriends, or who get flown abroad to test a new car model (four days, five star accommodation.) I know one journalist from a major women's magazine, who is so deluged with free stuff that she has to organize a private sale twice a year to clear her closets. Sports reporters I know feel "so close" to their beat that they refuse to explore controversial chemistry or money issues. I'm familiar with certain tech reporters who are literally warehousing software and computer games. These same journalists have not bought a single PC in the last ten years.
Of course, many an editor has tried to take action against such practices. At
Fact is that media is increasingly subject to a soft form of corrupting pressure from merchants. And as news outlets cut costs, many yield to the temptation of press junkets. PR firms or in-house flacks are happy to fill the gaps, in a pure and disinterested way, of course. For the same reasons, a greater number of technology reviews are provided by poorly-paid freelancers instead of staff writers who are supposed to be paid enough money to be clean.
Is it then any wonder why publicists, marketers, and others intermediaries are now lusting after the blogosphere? Think about it: thousands of blogs, most of them written by penniless amateurs, not bound by any ethical rules - it's a dream come true for the flack crowd. Blogs represent a new playground in which to buy influence. Actually, the Word of Mouth Marketing Association (Womma) estimates that such spending has grown from $300 million in 2003 to $1.54 billion last year. It is expected to reach $3 billion by 2013. Besides the blogs, there are also many venues dedicated to product reviews, such as the iTunes Store.
"The more positive reviews you get, the higher you rank," says Kevin Dixie. For a costly, paid-for application, that could translate into hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue. Thus, spending big time for a positive review is quite worth the initial expense. Because of this, Dixie says that the App Store review system cannot be trusted. In many cases, he adds, the first five reviews have been paid for."
This suspicion recently led the U.S. Federal Trade Commission to issue a directive forcing bloggers to disclose any conflict of interests. Violating these rules could bring a $11,000 penalty. Good idea, perhaps, but poorly executed. The blogosphere and many professional technology sites erupted in anger, saying this directive was impossible to enforce. The FTC had to back down, explaining that it won't actually fine any blogger. This was just a shot being fired across the bow for the most blatant cases. The other main argument against the ruling was its unfairness as the MSM was not being held accountable to the same rule.
A couple of thoughts about best practices.
Whether anyone writes a blog post or a column in a mainstream publication, authors owe readers the same sort of disclosure requirements. At a minimum, they ought to refrain from writing about companies with which they do any business. The ecosystem ought to take care of the rest. I bet readers will be good at sorting out the good from the bad. Some blogs - or review systems - will fall into the fishy (or corrupt) category while others will emerge as trusted brands. There is no shortage of trusted sites and reviewers on the Internet; they range from pure players such as TechCrunch, ArsTechnica, Gizmodo, CNet, ReadWriteWeb, or DPreview (for digital photography), to MSM writers such as Wall Street Journal's Walt Mossberg or New York Times' David Pogue. Both are "brands" in their own fiefdoms and are paid accordingly.
Second point: Clumsy as it was, the FTC directive had the merit of shedding light on unacceptable practices plaguing the blogosphere. I think some version of the FTC guidelines, in the form of non-enforceable recommendations, should be considered by the European Union as well. The blogosphere is a fantastic space for free expression. It should be kept transparent and free of deceitful content.
By Jean-Louis Gassée and Frederic Filloux
Special to CBSNews.com
More From Opinion
Add a Comment
- To clean up tainted journalism, you would have to clean up the rich, greedy, right wing corporations that run the media, the military and the government. A tall order indeed but what We the People MUST do. And soon.
- Reply to this comment
- The FTC is barking up the wrong tree as traditional journalism sells more product still than any blogger I know. Yes, it might persuade a handful of people in most cases to seek out a hotel, a restaurant, a particular cell phone model but at the end of the day when someone needs to purchase it is traditional journalism's articles that they will find through Google to direct the consumer.
- Reply to this comment
- And just who are we going to put in charge of cleaning up this tainted journalism. The Government, they can not even clean up their own house. Semper Fi
- Reply to this comment
- Time To Clean Up Tainted Journalism
---------------------------------
Ya think? There hasn't been true "Investigative Journalism" since the days of Dan Rather, Walter Cronkite, ETC. those days are long gone. - Reply to this comment
- "Journalism"? propagandist stooges is a better term,as mercenary is for contractor,lie is for spin,etc etc etc...
- Reply to this comment
- What we now have is a case of money talks & BS walks.
It would be wonderful is you could find the next Cronkite, Severide, Mike Wallace, Rather, etc....instead of the soccer mom news you now have. - Reply to this comment
- You have to clean up our corrupt, tainted system of the big corporations running the media, the military and the government. As in most other fascist countries like this one, you have to attack the root cause of the problem, the big money and big corporations.
- Reply to this comment
- Well. Let my clarify few points here.
1 / The first conversation I had with Kevin Dixie was about the FTC directive. Kevin stated such disclosure was not a problem for him and his bloggers, because he was willing to be clean with its readers. Fine. We'll see how transparent his network of bloggers will be.
2/ I didn't depict the two services as the receptacle for bogus reviews. The fact that any reviewer is free to post a negative post about a product is clearly stated in my story. (We had two conversations, I took notes in front of Kevin and I asked him if he was OK to be quoted -- no trap whatsoever).
3/ I stick to my point: maybe you can expect to get a fair review for free book or a CD. Not for a $1000 trip. Especially if freebies are incentives to write reviews.
Let's say a reviewer has just written five negative reviews ; will he risks his little stream of freebies by being to harsh for the sixth evaluation, especially if it is an expensive stuff? Of course not. The blogger is human after all. Plus he is probably impecunious. "Fuelmyblog/app" is not a dishonest or cynical review system, but it is not flawless either...
-- frederic.filloux@mondaynote.com - Reply to this comment
- Frederic this article is not factually correct and is the result of a two minute bus ride, not an interview as the article suggests.
We do not give products to people based upon random reviews, fuelmyblog sends bloggers products to physically test and review honestly on their blog. As I stated to you many times during our brief conversation we ask the blogger to write the review on the product once they have physically used the product. The review is honest and can be negative as much as positive. Fuelmyblog is actually a social network, not a review service.
Fuelmyapp is nothing at all to do with bloggers - again as stated during the bus ride. It was also not started because of the offer. It is a marketing service and one that will actually clean up the many many false reviews on itunes - the average review so far is 3* with a very very honest review, which I prefer to see than 5* and "great app" - don't you??
The first 50 reviews of any app could be spam as the developer has 50 to give away. Not 5 as stated above.
I am not, as stated many times, a professional blogger.
I find it very strange that this article missed the point of the two services, we want to clean up the false reviews everywhere, if a blogger discloses the holiday was free and then writes a hugely negative review on the resort, I see no problem in that - I'd rather that happened then read a review that is sponsored and overly positive.
kevin@fuelmyblog.com - Reply to this comment
