/ Thread
2 Likes
LMG also makes training videos for Intel’s Retail Edge program.
Linus explains this all in a video. Sponsers are required to sign a contract that guarantees journalistic integrity and Independence.
There can be a separation. This is a non issue as far as I’m concerned and just seems to be a “gotcha” thing created by a YouTuber who can’t take criticism and needs attention because he can’t actually get hardware to review himself and knows little about what he is actually talking about
Also about the comments of other publications lashing out at him. I find that laughable. He always plays the victim. I guess he is ignoring his tirades on YouTube and Twitter where he has lashed out multiple times or his temper tantrums on Reddit which he then goes back and quickly deletes all of his comments.
Adored has some good content, some meh, and some of the worst fanboy followers.
He put the video back up btw… Idk what that means. He said he got a response which he says raises valid points but didn’t cover all the issues so “he has no choice” to put it back up. Seems like he just did it to cover his ass and look like the good guy. Whole thing is insane.
With that I am done with this nonsense drama
3 Likes
This needs to be locked.
The parties are polarized and the civilised part of the civilised discussion is fading…
1 Like
My god…
Amazon affil sales rules:
You earn advertising fees on any qualifying items placed in a customer’s Shopping Cart within 24 hours of their arrival at Amazon.co.uk via your Associates link. However, this 24-hour window closes once the customer submits his order or reenters Amazon.co.uk through another Associate’s link. Once the window is closed, you will not earn advertising fees on any subsequent purchases. However, if the customer then returns to Amazon.co.uk through one of your Associates links, this opens a new 24-hour window.
It is of course possible that a customer may arrive at Amazon.co.uk via your Associates link, add an item to his Shopping Cart, and then leave Amazon.co.uk without placing an order. As long as the item was added to the customer’s Shopping Cart during this 24-hour window, you will still earn a referral fee if the order is placed before the Shopping Cart expires (usually after 90 days). The referral fee will not be credited to your Associates account until the customer has purchased the item, accepted delivery, and remitted full payment to Amazon.co.uk.
So they wouldn’t just have made commission off VegaFE sales, but off any ‘qualifying product’ added to a shopping basket during a 24h period after someone visited amazon via that link.
As of right now the video has been removed entirely.
See Jim’s twitter for ongoing details:
I implore everyone to only engage in civil discourse and avoid posting memes or engaging in speculation.
Nothing any of you can contribute can aid in resolving the situation, that is now between between Jim & Ryan.
Rather learn from this that you must evaluate and understand your own biases and take account of that when you read something that you implicitly feel inclined to align yourself with.
In particular with regard to confirmation bias and in-group favoritism.
In-group favoritism is particularly prevalent whenever Intel/AMD/Nvidia are mentioned.
1 Like
I for a tech reviewer he does not know how youtube and twitter work 
While confirmation bias is certainly an issue in discussions like these, most of the time escalation occurs once the ‘move along, there’s nothing to see here, citizen-consumer’-brigadiers turn up (whose main worry is either papering over or shutting down any talk about having and living up to principles, calling out illegal or shady behavior, etc.). That choice to refuse to acknowledge that there may be a problem because they are certain that they understand ‘the rules’ is generally what makes continued discussion impossible (which is their second-best preferred outcome), because there is no way to get them to reconsider their understanding of those ‘rules’.
That is literally how all Amazon affiliate links work. You can even choose to make it permenant if you wish to support a specific content creator. This isnt shocking or some other “gotcha.” All techtubers that use Amazon affiliate links do this and there are tons.
Linus showed how much revenue it brings in and they also know everything you buy. Linus made a video about it and the weird shit people purchased lol
1 Like
“The damage done to consumers while my video is inactive is a larger risk than the possible damage to PC Perspective while the video is active.”
This guy really thinks he’s hot stuff. Even if his allegations were true, and mattered, it isn’t the Bhopal disaster.
1 Like
Seems like the allegations were serious enough to have PC Perspective worried…
Should we really avoid criticizing youtubers for this type of stuff? Even if it is the norm, shouldn’t consumers know when tech channels are getting paid by the companies of the equipment they’re reviewing?
Easy to attack the guy that stirs the pot. I certainly would appreciate greater transparency when it comes to this type of stuff.
3 Likes
I didn’t get to watch the video before it got taken down but from what I’ve read, PCper did not disclose their owners had a separate business relationship with Intel and the hardware was provided free of charge. Those are certainly mistakes worth correcting!
This should have been handled by the Adored guy shooting PCper a private message “Hey, what is your policy regarding disclosure? I noticed this article didn’t mention you got the hardware for free and were working with Intel.” If PCper didn’t reply or told him to buzz off, then you maybe send out a critical tweet, and if nothing results then you put up an attack video. You don’t go nuclear out of the gate.
Honestly, most YouTubers are pretty lax about disclosure except when a video is outright straight-up sponsored. You don’t see L1 or Hardware Canucks or Linus consistently pointing out that they got the $1200 videocard they’re reviewing for free. In fact, it really stuck out when Nvidia didn’t provide Titan V samples-- every channel that reviewed it mentioned that they paid out the $3k themselves. Of all the channels I watch, only Lon.TV is really conscientious about this. And it does admittedly disturb the flow of his videos.
The impression given was that PCper was well aware that many tech channels didn’t approve of how their practice.
also, i’m pretty sure when tech channels are given review hardware, they’re required to sent it back afterwards, to avoid being “paid”. The shady stuff is when they treat some channels differently than others. Give someone a item earlier than other reviewers for example, which allows them to have a timed exclusive and make more money from it. Or if someone gives them a negative review, they can certainly not give them their next product, and then the person misses out or has to pay for it out of pocket.
1 Like
That is one interpretation. The other is that he deems the “damage” to PcPer to be mostly special/snowflake pleading – ego damage to people who’d rather not have to think about the consequences of their actions. Conscientiousness pays, etc.
The “damage” to consumers if PCper’s article is technically accurate and supports its conclusions is essentially zero. They should have disclosed their connection to Intel. Not a big deal, but certainly worth correcting.
If the article is biased and misleading, if they disguised an advertisement as an article, if they deliberately deceived their readers, that’s another story entirely.
@Atatax: Was hoping for evidence, not impressions. They do usually return the hardware after review, but of course that’s worth money. If Nvidia didn’t send them a $1200 graphics card, they would have to buy one to produce their review.
Not to repeatedly point to Lon.TV as a paragon of YouTubers, but that’s exactly what he often does. He buys the hardware then resells it slightly under cost. That’s a lot of overhead.
This thread has been a giant circle of going nowhere. Technically this thread shouldn’t even be in this category because the category is tech news and policy. Which has been defined as policy that affects tech. However I felt this topic might have some merit of discussion so I allowed it to stay. However it has gone into an endless spiral that isn’t going anywhere remotely productive. As such this thread is locked.