Was the ultimaker video another swap for airtime? Update Ultimaker confirms YES

[Quincy15]

I dont know if you know. but a pretty big investigation was concluded regarding very similar things regarding Machinima. 

So yeah its a big deal. 

 

Then report him to the Canadian Government

[TetraSky]

(It's the FTC, not the FCC, btw)
But they did disclose it in audio form... There's no actual rules that says you have to put it in your title or in bold text all over your reviews. At most it's a mention at the beginning of the video. And do not forget, they are not in the US. While it could be argued that the FTC rules still apply since they use Youtube, they are still in Canada.

 

Also, this
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/ftcs-endorsement-guides-what-people-are-asking#about
 

Does the FTC hold online reviewers to a higher standard than reviewers for paper-and-ink publications?
No. The FTC Act applies across the board. The issue is – and always has been – whether the audience understands the reviewer’s relationship to the company whose products are being recommended. If the audience understands the relationship, a disclosure isn’t needed.
 
If you’re employed by a newspaper or TV station to give reviews – whether online or offline – your audience probably understands that your job is to provide your personal opinion on behalf of the newspaper or television station. In that situation, it’s clear that you did not buy the product yourself – whether it’s a book or a car or a movie ticket. On a personal blog, a social networking page, or in similar media, the reader might not realize that the reviewer has a relationship with the company whose products are being recommended. Disclosure of that relationship helps readers decide how much weight to give the review.

 

I believe that anybody who watched more than 1 or 2 videos will understand this very well about LinusMediaGroup. Because there's no way they could simply acquire all that hardware out of their own pocket. (And no, this doesn't just apply to newspaper or tv station employees, those are just examples given)

[LinusTech]

I dont know if you know. but a pretty big investigation was concluded regarding very similar things regarding Machinima.

So yeah its a big deal.

You are ASSUMING a similar arrangement has been made to the machinima scandal, which, had we ever MADE an arrangement like that WOULD require the kind of disclosure you're talking about.

If we DIDN'T, and it's NOT an ad, and there is NO agreement about the positivity of the content (which as I've already said there wouldn't be for a review) then we COULD say more and I've already covered in the last thread that we intend to review this internally to figure out the best way forward.

This will be my last response to this on the forum though. I've already said my piece in the other thread

[LogicalDrm]

First, I'd like to thank @LinusTech for being good sport and keeping this going (for now). @M2GR did good job closing last when it went way out of civilized conversation. And last, thx OP for letting me have another go arquing with you and raising my post count without spamming.

 

that's illegal !

 

Lets start by repeating what I said in the other thread. FTC applies to US companies only. UK one does same in UK. Machimia is US company. You can see how they got asses whipped? LMG is Canadian company --> US/UK laws don't apply to them. They have to follow YouTubes and other platforms ToS. But you haven't provided any proof that YT has something in ToS that makes leaving viewer unsure of disclosure against it. So best any of departments can do is either region lock video or issue takedown. But it isn't illegal.

 

Linus has alluded many times. that THEY MUST get this video out TODAY in a few of his videos. 

So they even have agreed dates when they will release them. otherwise they would send out expensive 3D printers and no one would do anything. or would be done too late to serve any marketable purpose

Time constrains are because of NDAs. You can't release video too early. But many times they receive unit same day or day before and have to do all testing and filming in very short period. TTL mentions this multiple times in his videos.

[colonel_mortis]

Let me preface this by saying that I am not employed by, and do not represent, LinusMediaGroup. Any opinions in this post are my own, etc.
 

Hey Prof. 
actually youtube laws must be followed and they are based in the US. so apparently the youtube guidelines have to be followed regardless. and they are based off the US ones.

 

I am in the UK, and in the Terms of Service that I am obligated to follow, it says

14.6 The Terms, and your relationship with YouTube under the Terms, shall be governed by English law. You and YouTube agree to submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England to resolve any legal matter arising from the Terms. Notwithstanding this, you agree that YouTube shall still be allowed to apply for injunctive remedies (or other equivalent types of urgent legal remedy) in any jurisdiction.

That means that, as a user from the UK, I am required to comply not with American law but with British law (and there is no mention of America or the USA in those terms). That means that, unless YouTube is being very weird, LinusMediaGroup, a Canadian company based solely in Canada and with their YouTube nationality set to Canadian, is bound not by American law but by Canadian law, and Canadian law is different to the laws in the US. It is my understanding, and I might be wrong, that they don't have the same advertising transparency laws.

 

 

[Quincy15]

 I might be wrong, that they don't have the same advertising transparency laws.

 

You are wrong, Canada has similar laws to the UK and America

[TetraSky]

You are wrong, Canada has similar laws to the UK and America

Honestly, I can't find anything on this subject in Canadian laws... With the US, I found it immediately, a single google search, first result at the top. With Canada, I'm on my tenth search and I still don't find anything relevant to this.

[Quincy15]

Honestly, I can't find anything on this subject in Canadian laws... With the US, I found it immediately, a single google search, first result at the top. With Canada, I'm on my tenth search and I still don't find anything relevant to this.

 

Look in the old thread that was closed down. There is a link to the Canadian site.

 

I really dont care anymore tbh, if there a problem Linus can sort it out himself

[MourningSouls]

Isn't every review video on Youtube an ad? Positive, negative or otherwise, it's all for marketing.

[ckarpysz]

but you can't pay for a review can you. this is  the issue. it becomes an ad at that point. 

and make no mistake giving someone a gift for the review (exactly is happening here) positive or not. makes it an AD pure and simple 100%

and  this is the issue. 

thats why it needs disclosure so people know what the difference is.

 

What is wrong with your brain? You need to grow out of this internet warrior thing quickly because it's not endearing.

[Vivilacqua1]

There was a thread just the other day in wich Linus responded to a situation almost just like this, 'do the google" As my old English teacher would say.

 

EDIT- Scroll down a bit     http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/443860-deceptive-reviews-and-shoddy-advertisement-practices-being-cracked-down-on-in-youtube-re-machinimaxbox-1/page-3

[spwath]

There was a thread just the other day in wich Linus responded to a situation almost just like this, 'do the google" As my old English teacher would say.

EDIT- Scroll down a bit http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/443860-deceptive-reviews-and-shoddy-advertisement-practices-being-cracked-down-on-in-youtube-re-machinimaxbox-1/page-3

it's the same guy

[Vivilacqua1]

it's the same guy

Well then he already got his answer. 

 

Valid question, but not once he/she/it denies evidence

Edited September 10, 2015 by MG2R
ad hominem

[nunya bus]

Well then he already got his answer. 

 

Valid question, but not once he/she/it denies evidence

the reason I did this again. Is pure and simple. Linus said he was going to look and change process if necessary. yet here he is 4 video's later. still doing the same thing 

This isnt going away. And I have been trying to get Linus to disclose properly why he did the review. 

Again I don't care that he got the products for free in exchange for the review. Also Linus you cant tell me.

if Ultimaker emailed you and just said hey here is our brand new $1200 buck printer. and that is the end of the email. NO. The email would be Hey linus we were thinking of sending our new unit if you can do a review on it (this implies at least a video will be made here) So they are paying for the exposure clear as day.

advertising standards Canada 

http://www.adstandards.com/en/

states

(f) The advertiser must be clearly identified in an advocacy advertisement. (aka the ppl giving the unit to Linus FOR FREE)

2. Disguised Advertising Techniques

No advertisement shall be presented in a format or style that conceals its commercial intent. (so it must be disclosed its a paid placement, or what was done in exchange for it 

this is funny but kinda true lol

12. Advertising to Children

Advertising that is directed to children must not exploit their credulity, lack of experience or their sense of loyalty, and must not present information or illustrations that might result in their physical, emotional or moral harm.

Child-directed advertising in the broadcast media is separately regulated by the Broadcast Code for Advertising to Children, also administered by ASC. Advertising to children in Quebec is prohibited by the Quebec Consumer Protection Act.

Canadian advertising LAW 

http://www.canadianadvertisinglaw.com/

Edited September 10, 2015 by MG2R
ad hominem in quote

[Vivilacqua1]

keep in mind that it will take awhile for videos to catch up, the ultimate was on vessel even before pax was on YouTube, so there is quite a bit of delay. But I understand where you're coming from, but the thing is, is that reality gets in the way and people aren't gonna stick to a set script, they will deviate a bit depending on what they do, even if ...and I forgot what I was gonna say. Gg

the reason I did this again. Is pure and simple. Linus said he was going to look and change process if necessary. yet here he is 4 video's later. still doing the same thing 

This isnt going away. And I have been trying to get Linus to disclose properly why he did the review. 
Again I don't care that he got the products for free in exchange for the review. Also Linus you cant tell me.
if Ultimaker emailed you and just said hey here is our brand new $1200 buck printer. and that is the end of the email. NO. The email would be Hey linus we were thinking of sending our new unit if you can do a review on it (this implies at least a video will be made here) So they are paying for the exposure clear as day.


advertising standards Canada 
http://www.adstandards.com/en/
states
(f) The advertiser must be clearly identified in an advocacy advertisement. (aka the ppl giving the unit to Linus FOR FREE)

2. Disguised Advertising Techniques
No advertisement shall be presented in a format or style that conceals its commercial intent. (so it must be disclosed its a paid placement, or what was done in exchange for it 


this is funny but kinda true lol
12. Advertising to Children
Advertising that is directed to children must not exploit their credulity, lack of experience or their sense of loyalty, and must not present information or illustrations that might result in their physical, emotional or moral harm.

Child-directed advertising in the broadcast media is separately regulated by the Broadcast Code for Advertising to Children, also administered by ASC. Advertising to children in Quebec is prohibited by the Quebec Consumer Protection Act.

Canadian advertising LAW 
http://www.canadianadvertisinglaw.com/

[nunya bus]

The competition Bureau of Canada states 
http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/03946.html#s1_4

1.4 Disclosure Issues in the Digital Economy
Many of the kinds of representations that mislead consumers online create a false or misleading general impression because the advertiser has not adequately disclosed information necessary for consumers to make informed choices. The true state of affairs, if revealed at all, is often buried in fine print disclaimers or is obscured because of its formatting or placement in the context of the overall advertisement. The following outlines some of the more common examples.

1.4.1 When information is actually advertising
One of the most powerful ways for consumers to protect themselves when shopping is to become informed. The online world has opened infinite gateways into new sources of information where consumers can educate themselves about products and services by referring to studies, articles and expert reviews, and also by tapping into the experiences of fellow consumers. This is an intensely pro‑consumer development.

However, in many instances this can be completely undermined by advertisers who design online advertisements for a product or service to look like something other than promotional material. Some are made to look like unbiased news articles or headlines, others like independent sources of information such as expert reviews or blogs, while still other commercial representations masquerade as consumer reviews and testimonials.

As consumers seek out and rely on information found online in order to help them make choices in the marketplace, advertisements that falsely pose as arms‑length information can be seriously misleading, and erode confidence in the digital economy.

[Pomfinator]

I think OP's problem was that Linus was given a keeper, and didn't CLEARLY say that it was a keeper in the video, and he suspects that the company is going to pay him money at some point to do a brand deal.  Problems with the argument? We have no, and I mean NO evidence that any sort of deal was negotiated between LMG and Ultimaker.  We KNOW that Ultimaker sent LMG a keeper to review the product, OP says he's fine with that....and thats the end of the story.  Ultimaker gave Linus a keeper.  

 

OP, you pull TB out as an example, he gets review codes, do you think he decides to just relinquish his codes once he's done with the game? No, all of the games he receives are for him to keep, review, or heaven forbid, play on his own time AND he often uses his own recorded gameplay not included in his WTF is in things like vlogs.  Is that not the same situation as the product in question? Linus was given this product and told he could keep it.  The company can basically hope that he will make more videos with it, or if they want something specific they will offer a brand deal.  THIS DOESN'T MEAN THE REVIEW WAS COMPROMISED.

 

Just because Linus got a keeper unit doesn't mean he was paid to do some kind of brand deal. This thread is even more ridiculous than the other one.  At least the other one criticized what was clearly grey-area ethical practice, this one is literally moaning about getting a keeper.

[nunya bus]

I think OP's problem was that Linus was given a keeper, and didn't CLEARLY say that it was a keeper in the video, and he suspects that the company is going to pay him money at some point to do a brand deal.  Problems with the argument? We have no, and I mean NO evidence that any sort of deal was negotiated between LMG and Ultimaker.  We KNOW that Ultimaker sent LMG a keeper to review the product, OP says he's fine with that....and thats the end of the story.  Ultimaker gave Linus a keeper.  

 

OP, you pull TB out as an example, he gets review codes, do you think he decides to just relinquish his codes once he's done with the game? No, all of the games he receives are for him to keep, review, or heaven forbid, play on his own time AND he often uses his own recorded gameplay not included in his WTF is in things like vlogs.  Is that not the same situation as the product in question? Linus was given this product and told he could keep it.  The company can basically hope that he will make more videos with it, or if they want something specific they will offer a brand deal.  THIS DOESN'T MEAN THE REVIEW WAS COMPROMISED.

 

Just because Linus got a keeper unit doesn't mean he was paid to do some kind of brand deal. This thread is even more ridiculous than the other one.  At least the other one criticized what was clearly grey-area ethical practice, this one is literally moaning about getting a keeper.

the brand deal is 

Linus is given a 4,000 US ultimaker 2 in exchange for the review. Thats the BRAND DEAL 

and in regards to total B. he discloses this very fact EVERY TIME! with ZERO ambiguity 

 

[MG2R]

the reason I did this again. Is pure and simple. Linus said he was going to look and change process if necessary. yet here he is 4 video's later. still doing the same thing

Keep in mind, the videos on youtube have been shot and edited at least two weeks before they air

 

 

 

BTW, in case you missed it: difference between an ad and a review, plus a nice bottom line of this whole situation

[trag1c]

the brand deal is 

Linus is given a 4,000 US ultimaker 2 in exchange for the review. Thats the BRAND DEAL 

and in regards to total B. he discloses this very fact EVERY TIME! with ZERO ambiguity 

 

Just because a company gave away a product doesn't mean that its a brand deal. Its just mean that a marketing major at Ultimaker was smart enough to get low cost exposure. This happens with a ton of products or even sponsorship. For example in a robotics team that I mentored we where given a lot of pneumatic parts at no to the team cost. These parts had the company logo on them as well as a company sticker for the robot giving that company a lot of cheap exposure and a positive image for supporting local students at a fairly large event. 

 

Or take a look at Nvidia, AMD, and Intel sending free units to any major media source that does reviews. Since its free does that mean its a brand deal...Absolutely not many of those reviews are critical of products those products. Even if a products absolute trash and the reviewer denounces it there sales will still increase from the exposure marketing people recognize this.

 

Nvidia sent LMG 6 Titan X's for exposure. The cost of manufacturing and shipping shipping 6 units to get exposed to over 1.8 million people is a very small price to pay compared to an advertisement since those can easily run over 200,000 dollars for a good ad. They're also targeting the right audience when they made the decision to send those units.

 

TL;DR ITS ALL ABOUT THE EXPOSURE.

Your rant about LMG doing illegal/unethical practices is invalidated.

[Pomfinator]

Linus is given a 4,000 US ultimaker 2 in exchange for the review. Thats the BRAND DEAL 

and in regards to total B. he discloses this very fact EVERY TIME! with ZERO ambiguity 

 

Thats not a fucking brand deal, thats a review unit.  You send a review unit to a critic for them to critique it.  How hard is that to wrap your head around? Do you not see the absolute hypocrisy you spout in these two sentences alone? TB gets a game sent to him to review, he keeps it. Linus gets a piece of hardware sent to him to review, he keeps it.  Both of them clearly say that the company provided that review unit.  So why do you harp on one and praise the other? Cause you don't understand, you don't understand your internal biases, you don't understand that the only thing different in those two statements is that TB gets a product worth 60 bucks and Linus gets a product worth 4000 bucks.

 

What the hell do you want? You want him to stop taking review units? Buy everything with his own money, Apparently you don't want that either, cause like any consumer you're greedy, you want the content and you want to satisfy your "ethics requirement." 

 

Oh and by the way, why the heck are you using Twitter to confirm answers.  Of all the things you could've done, you talked to Ultimaker on Twitter? It wasn't an e-mail correspondence or anything more formal...but Twitter? And no documentation to show what you're accusing is correct? What a joke.

[TheProfosist]

Ill reply to this tomorrow when I have some time but this is probably being pushed harder than need be.

[cesrai]

Ehh.. Running in circles is common this says isn't it ?

[LogicalDrm]

Finally you are giving something to work with. But still, you are making assumptions and not having any real proof.

the reason I did this again. Is pure and simple. Linus said he was going to look and change process if necessary. yet here he is 4 video's later. still doing the same thing

Youtube has 7 days delays as is. Vessel has 3-5 videos buffer. They don't reshoot/re-edit videos just because you have issue with them.

advertising standards Canada

http://www.adstandards.com/en/

states

(f) The advertiser must be clearly identified in an advocacy advertisement. (aka the ppl giving the unit to Linus FOR FREE)

2. Disguised Advertising Techniques

No advertisement shall be presented in a format or style that conceals its commercial intent. (so it must be disclosed its a paid placement, or what was done in exchange for it

this is funny but kinda true lol

12. Advertising to Children

Advertising that is directed to children must not exploit their credulity, lack of experience or their sense of loyalty, and must not present information or illustrations that might result in their physical, emotional or moral harm.

Child-directed advertising in the broadcast media is separately regulated by the Broadcast Code for Advertising to Children, also administered by ASC. Advertising to children in Quebec is prohibited by the Quebec Consumer Protection Act.

Canadian advertising LAW

http://www.canadianadvertisinglaw.com/

You are making asumption that every video they make is an advertisement. Read post made by @MG2R (sorry for missing my tag in last post). There is difference between review (have something good and bad to say) and ad (promote something). Generally really few LMG videos are even real reviews. They are more toward overviews as they don't give any awards, grades or stars. They only point out pros and cons plus say their own opinion wheter you should or should not get unit in question.

The part about children isn't valid in this at all. By US laws, Youtube viewer should be 13 or older. Younger ones should only watch while parent is present (or other adult). Besides that, what country sees as child is very different. Here over 16 isn't child anymore while still not counted as adult. I assume its more same in Canada/US. Any LMG content isn't targeted to children. Hence they don't need to think about children while making stuff.

The competition Bureau of Canada states 

http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/03946.html#s1_4

1.4 Disclosure Issues in the Digital Economy

Many of the kinds of representations that mislead consumers online create a false or misleading general impression because the advertiser has not adequately disclosed information necessary for consumers to make informed choices. The true state of affairs, if revealed at all, is often buried in fine print disclaimers or is obscured because of its formatting or placement in the context of the overall advertisement. The following outlines some of the more common examples.

1.4.1 When information is actually advertising

One of the most powerful ways for consumers to protect themselves when shopping is to become informed. The online world has opened infinite gateways into new sources of information where consumers can educate themselves about products and services by referring to studies, articles and expert reviews, and also by tapping into the experiences of fellow consumers. This is an intensely pro‑consumer development.

However, in many instances this can be completely undermined by advertisers who design online advertisements for a product or service to look like something other than promotional material. Some are made to look like unbiased news articles or headlines, others like independent sources of information such as expert reviews or blogs, while still other commercial representations masquerade as consumer reviews and testimonials.

As consumers seek out and rely on information found online in order to help them make choices in the marketplace, advertisements that falsely pose as arms‑length information can be seriously misleading, and erode confidence in the digital economy.

Those are in place so that consumers wouldn't be tricked by "small print". Thats why any electronical device which needs batteries must have "no batteries included" with big letters. In this thread you have used Ultimaker video as example. I don't remember exact words, but Luke had several issues while using printer and Ultimaker didn't have good support to help him out. Isn't that quite opposite of advertising Ultimaker as good product/brand? So if you would go and get Ultimaker and have same kind of issues (or some others), would you blame LTT video for not telling about those issues? No, you don't. You have been aware of possible issues and made decision regardless. That isn't false advertising as the quote above refers to.

 

Ill reply to this tomorrow when I have some time but this is probably being pushed harder than need be.

Better be fast. I have a feeling this will be locked soon too.

[MG2R]

Better be fast. I have a feeling this will be locked soon too.

Unless discussion gets out of hand, or a thread violates the CoC in some way, there's no real need to expect a lock. The previous thread was locked because the last two pages were filled with ad-hominems instead of actual discussion.