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

Forums - Gaming - Blowing The Whistle On XB1M13, MS And Machinima's Covert Xbox One Campaign

Machiavellian said:
Izo said:
Machiavellian said:
Izo said:
selnor1983 said:
PenguinZ said:
My favorite part of the article is how it blows the entire situation way out of proportion... At the end of the this is really not a big deal.


Its Microsoft's name involved. Gaming forums love to try and bring Microsoft down. Was the same all last generation.

To be fair to a certain degree Microsoft puts themselves into these situtations. There is enough oposition to Sony that would love to attack them for any small thing as well. Not that this is a small thing. I just find it disgusting that they can't just clean their image up in a legit way. It isn't that hard, I mean up until this they were doing an okayish job. 

This is just another check on a long list of anti-consumer things MS's been involved with. In the case that I am wrong and it was purely Machinima's doing with no pressure or knowledge from MS (unlikely), I would like to see continued consumer friendly actions from MS. 

Marketing has nothing to do with being legit.  Sometimes I really wonder if people just woke up yesterday and found out that companies pay people to say good things about their products.  There is nothing about this whole endorement that is any different than what all companies do every day.  Marketing is all about getting the word about your product to the most people in your target market.  

Do you really think that if MS was pressuring people to sign some contract to endorse their product that we would not see a flood of people making that claim.  The real issue is how naive people are about information on the internet.  Its like this commercial I say where this woman stated that she got some info from the net so it had to be true.  Its even crazy to think that if some YT person is drinking coke on their video, people would not think they are getting paid for it.  This isn't something that just started yesterday people.  Companies have been doing it for years.  

Marketing is one thing. I don't care if someone markets something. It's not mentioning that you are being paid for it. It's pretending that you like something and not saying that you've been paid. I also don't care if this has been happening for years. If someone is promoting something and it isn't clear and mentioned somewhere, they are lieng and misleading you. It isn't okay for anyone to do this shit. Every youtube personality I watch mentions when they are being paid for something (Boogie). 

My point about this is old news is that people are acting like its brand new.  If you thought that business, all business including Sony and Nintendo does not do this, then thats putting blinders on and not understanding the world you live in.  What I find interesting is that people are more forgiving if its the corporation of their choice.  Also per the FTC, a person who is getting paid to endorse a product cannot lie or mislead the public.  The only real problem with endorsements like these is that the people do not state they are getting paid.  From what I read from the FTC Act, this is not required but MS and Mish can be investigated if there are any false advertising from these people.

It is completely possible that Sony and Nintendo do this. I want to see a contract that shows this. Show me one and I'll attack both of them. You've gotta understand people are talking about MS right now because it's a contract that leaked involving them. If it had been Sony in this instance, they to would have gotten it.  Are there people attacking them because they are MS right now? Of course, but there are legit concerns amoung people. 

The issue and I agree with you, is that they are required to not talk about the contract. By all means promote the Xbox brand all day long, but telling someone to not mention the deal is sick. 



Around the Network
Machiavellian said:
Scoobes said:
Machiavellian said:
Fusioncode said:
Machiavellian said:
So let me get this straight. MS paid to have a personality praise their product. Would this be any different if MS paid Tom Cruz to promote the X1. Am I missing something?

The difference being that people KNOW when a celebrity is endorsing a product. They wont have any idea that a youtuber is getting paid to say positive things about the XBO. 

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.

I just read the FTC act on endorsement and it does not state anything about celebrities having to make endorsing public.  The only thing the FTC act states is that the endorsement cannot contain any false or misleading information.  In other words if the person is publicly saying that the X1 does something, it has to be something it actually does and they have proof.  As long as the people who endorse the product was truthful in what they stated then there is nothing wrong or different from any other endorsement.

There is plenty of evidence of people endorsing a product even on twitter where a contract is not stated.  The only thing that would make this marketing venture by MS illegal or even unethical is if there were false or misinformation from people who endorse the product.

Celebs have gotten into trouble over that one too:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/12153686

As long as it's clearly advertising (and stated as such), it's fine. That's why your earlier example of celeb ads is OK (they're clearly stated as ads by simple virtue of being on in the interval of TV shows).