By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Microsoft paying YouTubers for positive Xbox One coverage ( edited with more info )

Tagged games:

Normchacho on 21 January 2014
Mr Puggsly said:
ganoncrotch said:

lol at the first bit and only portion I read of your comment. wow example of exactly what's going on here, I'll ignore it.

Paying someone to break the law is a crime in itself, also getting someone to sign a contract which in itself is breaking the law means the contract holds no value whatsoever. But feel free to ignore that too, keep in mind I'm referring to EU trade laws here not US ones so not sure if they would cover machinima but I know any of the European youtubers would not be able to sign into this form of advertising.

Right now there is only speculation of a law being broken. Even if a law was broken, I don't have to agree it was unethical.

I don't feel this contract is asking users to mislead people. That's why I have no problem with it.

It's asking for people to talk about a product but leave out anything negative. They are therefore being paid to give an impression of there product regardless of whether it is actually there true impression. How is that anything but misleading?



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Around the Network
Mr Puggsly on 21 January 2014
Normchacho said:

It's asking for people to talk about a product but leave out anything negative. They are therefore being paid to give an impression of there product regardless of whether it is actually there true impression. How is that anything but misleading?

Advertising generally makes people aware of a product without saying anything negative.

Hence, they were looking for typical advertising. There are ways to accomplish that without selling your integrity.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Aerys on 21 January 2014
Normchacho said:
Mr Puggsly said:
ganoncrotch said:

lol at the first bit and only portion I read of your comment. wow example of exactly what's going on here, I'll ignore it.

Paying someone to break the law is a crime in itself, also getting someone to sign a contract which in itself is breaking the law means the contract holds no value whatsoever. But feel free to ignore that too, keep in mind I'm referring to EU trade laws here not US ones so not sure if they would cover machinima but I know any of the European youtubers would not be able to sign into this form of advertising.

Right now there is only speculation of a law being broken. Even if a law was broken, I don't have to agree it was unethical.

I don't feel this contract is asking users to mislead people. That's why I have no problem with it.

It's asking for people to talk about a product but leave out anything negative. They are therefore being paid to give an impression of there product regardless of whether it is actually there true impression. How is that anything but misleading?


No, that's not the problem, this is not misleading because they are being paid, this is misleading because the contract ask them to lie.

This wouldnt be a problem if we all knew who is being paid , but they dont want us to know what opinion is bought, hat's one of the worst thing i've ever seen in the industry.

 

 

and i dont think MS is important, industry was find without them on the PS1 era, and they were almost non existant on the PS2 era.



Predictions for end of 2014 HW sales:

 PS4: 17m   XB1: 10m    WiiU: 10m   Vita: 10m

 

mibuokami on 21 January 2014
Mr Puggsly said:
ganoncrotch said:

lol at the first bit and only portion I read of your comment. wow example of exactly what's going on here, I'll ignore it.

Paying someone to break the law is a crime in itself, also getting someone to sign a contract which in itself is breaking the law means the contract holds no value whatsoever. But feel free to ignore that too, keep in mind I'm referring to EU trade laws here not US ones so not sure if they would cover machinima but I know any of the European youtubers would not be able to sign into this form of advertising.

Right now there is only speculation of a law being broken. Even if a law was broken, I don't have to agree it was unethical.

I don't feel this contract is asking users to mislead people. That's why I have no problem with it.

I don't think it has to be a review, just the context that any editorial or commentary in which a person is getting renumeration for an endorsement must have a disclaimer.

These videos are not advertisement, and thus need to have disclaimer about the renumeration to satisfy the FTC. The actual promotion itself is a decent idea and i see nothing wrong with it. The problem is that the agreement is explicitly stating that you cannot mention the renumeration.




mysteryman on 21 January 2014
Mr Puggsly said:
mysteryman said:

A review is a discussion.


In your opinion. I feel a review is a much more in-depth analysis of a game.

I can discuss a game without reviewing it.

Regardless of your opinion of what constitutes reviewing, any discussion on your behalf would be your personal opinion. If you opinion has been paid for, irrespective of whether or not it aligns with your personal opinion, it needs to be noted, as there is now a potential for a conflict of interest.



Around the Network
Normchacho on 21 January 2014
Mr Puggsly said:
Normchacho said:

It's asking for people to talk about a product but leave out anything negative. They are therefore being paid to give an impression of there product regardless of whether it is actually there true impression. How is that anything but misleading?

Advertising generally makes people aware of a product without saying anything negative.

Hence, they were looking for typical advertising. There are ways to accomplish that without selling your integrity.


The issue here is that they are not telling people it's an advertisment. They actually explicitly telling people not to tell the viewers it was an ad. There are plenty of ways to advertise without losing your integrity, this is not one of them.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Normchacho on 21 January 2014
Aerys said:
Normchacho said:
Mr Puggsly said:
ganoncrotch said:

lol at the first bit and only portion I read of your comment. wow example of exactly what's going on here, I'll ignore it.

Paying someone to break the law is a crime in itself, also getting someone to sign a contract which in itself is breaking the law means the contract holds no value whatsoever. But feel free to ignore that too, keep in mind I'm referring to EU trade laws here not US ones so not sure if they would cover machinima but I know any of the European youtubers would not be able to sign into this form of advertising.

Right now there is only speculation of a law being broken. Even if a law was broken, I don't have to agree it was unethical.

I don't feel this contract is asking users to mislead people. That's why I have no problem with it.

It's asking for people to talk about a product but leave out anything negative. They are therefore being paid to give an impression of there product regardless of whether it is actually there true impression. How is that anything but misleading?


No, that's not the problem, this is not misleading because they are being paid, this is misleading because the contract ask them to lie.

This wouldnt be a problem if we all knew who is being paid , but they dont want us to know what opinion is bought, hat's one of the worst thing i've ever seen in the industry.

 

 

and i dont think MS is important, industry was find without them on the PS1 era, and they were almost non existant on the PS2 era.

Yes sorry I actually thought I had a line in there about not being open about it.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Pemalite on 21 January 2014
Normchacho said:
Pemalite said:


Agreed. It's like the whole purpose of "infomercials". - You NEVER see them say anything bad about the product, they just mindlessly drone on for hours about all the good stuff.

Anyway, I see no bad in this, Microsoft is kicking it's advertising gear into full to take the fight to it's competitors, which isn't bad by any stretch. (Ultimatly I would LOVE for all consoles to have a perfectly even amount of marketshare, it's what drives innovation and reduces prices in a capitalist world, but that's an idealism which probably won't occur.)

What? Except of course that at the begining of that infomercial it tells you it's a paid advertisment. It doesn't pretend to be an impartial, informative program and then try to sell you something. How is that so hard to see?


No, I doesn't always say it's a paid advertisement, at-least here.
However there is more to advertising then a commercial on Television.

Hows about adverts on a Billboard in a video game from the likes of Coca Cola? The game says nothing of such adverts.
Or hows about when you watch a movie and you see someone eating a Big Mac? That's also advertising.

I've also seen companies hand out/sell Hats, T-Shirts and Coffee Mugs for free with their company name and/or product/logo which is also advertising.

So by your logic, everything needs to have "advertisement" written all over it, which simply does not occur in the real world, people need to use some common sense and see that in a capitalist society, everything is advertising right down to the positive reviews someone might leave on Newegg.

Why people are so bent out of shape about this I will never know, Microsoft is behind Sony in sales, anything that allows those two to be on parity sales wise is good for everyone.

It's up to the consumers whether they will buy into it or not.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite on 21 January 2014
KylieDog said:
Pemalite said:


No, I doesn't always say it's a paid advertisement, at-least here.
However there is more to advertising then a commercial on Television.

Hows about adverts on a Billboard in a video game from the likes of Coca Cola? The game says nothing of such adverts.
Or hows about when you watch a movie and you see someone eating a Big Mac? That's also advertising.

I've also seen companies hand out/sell Hats, T-Shirts and Coffee Mugs for free with their company name and/or product/logo which is also advertising.

So by your logic, everything needs to have "advertisement" written all over it, which simply does not occur in the real world, people need to use some common sense and see that in a capitalist society, everything is advertising right down to the positive reviews someone might leave on Newegg.

Why people are so bent out of shape about this I will never know, Microsoft is behind Sony in sales, anything that allows those two to be on parity sales wise is good for everyone.

It's up to the consumers whether they will buy into it or not.


If you check the credits of movies/games you will see acknowledgment of paid ads.
Branded Hats/T-Shirts/mugs are themselves acknowledgement of advertising.

Knowledge of advertisement needs be public info that someone can check.  What MS tried to do was hide the ability of public to check.

Poor defense.

In the same idea of branded Hats/T-Shirts etc' are aknowledgement of advertising so are Youtube videos dedicated to an entire platform.

Besides, you don't see me complaining how the PC never see's advertising in movies like Real Steal. :P



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite on 21 January 2014
KylieDog said:
Pemalite said:

 

In the same idea of branded Hats/T-Shirts etc' are aknowledgement of advertising so are Youtube videos dedicated to an entire platform.

Nope, not if you don't know MS are suddenly paying them and have no way to find that out.


I have to beg to differ in that regard.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--