Machiavellian said:
I still see no difference. As the article stated, this is not something new where a company pay a YT celebrity for advertising. Actually, the more I think about it, I really do not see any difference. If a YT celebrity have a million people watching their content, that would make them a Celebrity. If that person is willing to endorse a product for money, that YT person is no different than some basketball player, Movie star or anyone else who has a following that endorse a product for money. I see people do this all the time with Twitter so I really cannot see a difference here.
If people are so gullible to purchase a product because some YT, Basketball Player or Movie star endorse the product then why has this become some big issue. |
It's not quite the same thing though. Even those celebrities have to make public that they're endorsing an item and the fact they're getting paid is in the public domain.
In this case, the youtubers cannot reveal they're getting paid to endorse the X1. It's fine for them to get paid to endorse a product, but the fact they're getting paid to do so has to be revealed and publicly stated.








