Pressure put on hardware reviews sites to produce good reviews

[sbp]

nV News talks about this issue in a news post called Tail Wags the Dog (http://www.nvnews.net/#1030863775)

"However, over the last few months many professional sites who take much effort in producing many wonderful reviews now seem to be coming under attack from the Hardware manufacturers, or in some cases ‘Ah you won’t get our hardware to review if you do not do it exactly this way’. Why you ask, well more often than not the results do not meet the expectations of the hardware manufacturers and that is fact!

I personally know of three other web sites that have been hit with the same response. One in particular stood up and told a very famous graphic's company "to take a long walk off of a short plank" and trust me this is the polite version. All of us who take time and effort to produce reviews sit down carefully to accurately report back what we see using the items in question."

[LPMiller]

That sucks. However, it is a risk when all you really ever try to do is be first, or exclusive. In doing so, you really open yourself up to being trapped.

Of course, there are a lot of traps when you do this. Hell, you can give what you think is a good review, and still have a company rep on your case over something you see as minor, pointless, etc. They try to control you all the time.

But, most don't try too hard - just the biggies. The smaller companies tend to believe "any press is good" and they are actually easily to work with. They are more likely to answer your questions, work through problems that may or may not be your fault, etc.

Then there are the few that are actually honest, and even admit to what is wrong, etc. Those tend to be the up and comers but not always - they feel they still have a good product, but realize it isnt' perfect.

I've never had too much trouble - I won't change what I see as my opinion, but I will correct informational errors - but I realize I'm kind of a wimpy reviewer. If I like something, I like it period. I'm not a very subtle person. Still, I have gotten heat from companies a few times, and maybe one company I won't mention doesn't send us product anymore. Another company I re wrote the review before we published - not because they wanted me to change it, though they did - but because I really needed to better explain what I didn't like, which was really only fair to both company and reader.

I hate writing bad reviews. It's not that I hate hating things - they are just bloody hard for me to write. Wintasks is a great example. What should have been an easy review was a 3 day nightmare that I finally gave up on - because I hated it. It's just the dumbest damn program ever. I mean, it's handy enough, but it's not near 50 bucks handy. Everybody, and I mean everybody who reviewed wintasks gave it positive reviews, and I'm thinking it's ass, wondering if I'm wrong.

Well, I don't think I am - but I never published the review. For thing, it was a lousy piece of writing, and I couldn't seem to make it better. As much as I can rant for a few paragraphs, it is really hard for me to grumble for 3+ pages without coming off just...bored. The company bugged me for a publish date and I said, "You know what, this sucks. I'd rate it a 5, but I'm not publishing it." I just couldn't be sure if it was because the product really sucks, or if it was the concept of the product that just bugged me. If I can't stand by what I said by anything more than a shrug and a "I dunno, I just didn't like it," I'm wasting my time and the readers.

Well, they were fine with that, naturally enough, though I didn't do it for them. But then - and this was really funny - asked that I make sure to link to all the positive reviews. Like I was their personal marketing tool. Well hell, I mean we cross link with sites all the time - we support each other because we all want readers. I would have posted some of those links anyway. But every time I did, I also said,"Overclocker Cafe reviews WinTasks, which they liked but I think sucks donkey butt."

You know, I might as well as published the stupid review, because I spent weeks doing that. I hate putting out bad writing though.

I guess my point, for those still reading, is that for me personally, each review is a moral battle, usually within yourself. Am I being fair? I'm I too happy with this, too mad at it? Am I just being nice/mean? Do I make any sense at all? Do I even know what the hell I'm talking about?

That battle is hard enough for me without having to deal with some whiny marketing rep bitching because I don't like the color of their PCB or something. Screw 'em, if they won't send me future product, someone else will, or I'll buy it my own self. I don't need the grief and won't put up with it. As long as I believe I'm being as fair to myself, my readers and the product as possible, I'm happy.

[Devhux]

Great response there LPmiller -- I can definately relate to your comments.

[sbp]

Good post and points LP.

3DGPU Editorial-Industry Big-Wigs Playing Hardball (http://www.3dgpu.com/editor/hardball.php)

"We all know crap like this goes on behind the scenes, but few of us want to bother blowing the whistle because we know there will be significant fallout that could really hurt our careers and our sites. I remember writing a review of a speaker set for a site I worked for that was very thorough, very detailed and very honest. The problem was, the result was not the one that the manufacturer of the speakers was looking for, and as a result, they refused to supply any more speakers for review unless the rating was changed. The head of the site was a very solid guy with serious integrity, and he did not bow to the pressure. He told them to hit the road, and I've always thought highly of him for it.".

[Showtime]

Screw the big companies.
If they don't send a sample than buy it when it comes out and critique it anyways. If its accurate than people will trust the reviewer/website. When your rep gets good, people will go there and the site will do well. Later, those companies will want to send product and the website can still do accurate reviews.
Seems simple to me........

-jel:halo:

[LPMiller]

Originally posted by the jello is jigglin
Screw the big companies.
If they don't send a sample than buy it when it comes out and critique it anyways. If its accurate than people will trust the reviewer/website. When your rep gets good, people will go there and the site will do well. Later, those companies will want to send product and the website can still do accurate reviews.
Seems simple to me........

-jel:halo:

Sure, in theory. In practice, most sites can't afford to do that - you'd have a lot less radeon 9700 reviews if not for the freebies. Actual samples you have to send back aren't really a great idea - because you get a beat up, oft looked at PCB that may not be up to what a customer would get in the store, and the manufactuter has no use for said beatup product. So it's easier all around just to give 'em away.

However, these makes some companies think they can pull some strings. What some sites don't understand is that they still don't have to cave in - if word gets around to this kind of practice, no one will review their product. While 1 site that gets 30,000 people may not seem like much more than chump change, 5 or 10 sites that do 30,000 people is a hell of a lot of bad press. But, people cave, because they fear not having any product to review, therefore not having any reason for people to come to their sites. Doesn't help that too many of these sites are run by 19 year olds with little or no experience in business - they will fold more often than not, because of fear.

Most of us here, though, have been around the block once or twice - hell, I spent 11 years at one of the largest privately owned companies in the world, and I'm a crabby bastard to boot. Sure, sometimes you accept things you'd rather not - that is how business is done, sometimes. But you learn over time that there is just some things you don't - and can't - put up with.

Luckily, my experience tells me it just doesn't happen all that often anymore. But I imagine where it is the worst is with those small sites run by young'uns who don't know when to say no.