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

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

Tagged games:

Azerth on 20 January 2014

the only bad thing is the not being allowed to tell there being paid



Around the Network
RawrJa on 20 January 2014
Mr Puggsly said:
Why is this a bad thing? MS is paying for advertising, no big deal.

If Youtubers are misleading people for money though, that isn't MS's problem.

It is bad because it is illegal. Youtubers are not to blame, MS is.



KingdomHeartsFan on 20 January 2014
Mr Puggsly said:
Why is this a bad thing? MS is paying for advertising, no big deal.

If Youtubers are misleading people for money though, that isn't MS's problem.

Because they can't say they are under contract and they are not allowed to say anything bad about the X1, its good feedback or nothing.



Damagon on 20 January 2014
Acevil said:
To those siting the FTC, how strong is the FTC in internet domain like youtube? Namely with the internet sometimes having many loopholes like different countries and different methods.

Well here's a few links that are oddly similar to  what's happening now, and what role the FTC had in them. You'd be surprised.

http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/are-you-disclosing-what-you-need-to-know-about-ftc-rules-and-social-media/

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/mommy-bloggers-held-liable-product-reviews/story?id=8764885

http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2011/03/firm-pay-ftc-250000-settle-charges-it-used-misleading-online

Also the FTC has some very specific examples on their official guidelines  regarding endorsements and testimnials in advertising, I'd suggest you check those as well.

 

 

 



KingdomHeartsFan on 20 January 2014

Its funny that peopel are actually trying to defend this



Around the Network
Figgycal on 20 January 2014
KingdomHeartsFan said:

Its funny that peopel are actually trying to defend this

To be fair, the OP does leave out what makes this scandalous. And if all they read was the thread title, I wouldn't blame them for not understanding why this is news-worthy.



Mr Puggsly on 20 January 2014
RawrJa said:
Mr Puggsly said:
Why is this a bad thing? MS is paying for advertising, no big deal.

If Youtubers are misleading people for money though, that isn't MS's problem.

It is bad because it is illegal. Youtubers are not to blame, MS is.


Paying someone to advertise and say good things about your product is not illegal. That's just how advertising works.

You ever see commericals where someone shits on a product? Ofcourse not, nobody would pay for that.



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)

Damagon on 20 January 2014
KingdomHeartsFan said:

Its funny that peopel are actually trying to defend this


It's not funny , it's quite depressing actually. People are waving this off  without paying attention to actual issue at hand.  They're clearly not reading what's in front of them. Basically they're just troll posting. 



Pemalite on 21 January 2014
Mr Puggsly said:


Paying someone to advertise and say good things about your product is not illegal. That's just how advertising works.

You ever see commericals where someone shits on a product? Ofcourse not, nobody would pay for that.


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.)




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

Figgycal on 21 January 2014
Mr Puggsly said:
RawrJa said:
Mr Puggsly said:
Why is this a bad thing? MS is paying for advertising, no big deal.

If Youtubers are misleading people for money though, that isn't MS's problem.

It is bad because it is illegal. Youtubers are not to blame, MS is.


Paying someone to advertise and say good things about your product is not illegal. That's just how advertising works.

You ever see commericals where someone shits on a product? Ofcourse not, nobody would pay for that.

I'll repost my comment since you missed it:

OP is missing the bit that actually makes this news worthy: The arrangement as described might go against the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) guidelines for the use of endorsements in advertising, which demand full disclosure when there is "a connection between the endorser and the seller of the advertised product that might materially affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement."

Read the full article on ArsTechnica. Cinemablend's article is very comprehensive as well.

This could be illegal as according to the contract, participants in the promotion weren't allowed to mention that they were being paid for their endorsement. Which is a big no-no.