Techpowerup "Advertorial By AMD" Draws Controversy

[ARikozuM]

11 hours ago, goodtofufriday said:

 

Lol what.

Haven't you heard? Gray makes you look thinner!

[Jito463]

18 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

Sorry but this is shady: A moron in a hurry would confuse it for a legit article.

A moron gets what they deserve, then.  I have no sympathy for idiots.

18 hours ago, HKZeroFive said:

Are people seriously not concerned about this? If this was an advertorial by NVIDIA or Intel, I bet those same people would be screaming that it's misleading.

I am concerned about it.  I'm one of the more 'Pro-AMD' people on LTT (I've never owned a single Intel system, going all the way back to the 486 days), and I don't consider this good marketing.

17 hours ago, LAwLz said:

This type of behavior should not be accepted. It is for crying out loud borderline illegal because it harms consumers.

I agree that it shouldn't be accepted, but calling it illegal is ridiculous and completely over the top.  Is it shady?  Yes.  Is it misleading?  Somewhat.  Is it illegal?  Absolutely not.  It doesn't "harm consumers", and you'd be hard pressed to prove it does in a court of law (sidenote: I really hate the term "consumer").

[goodtofufriday]

50 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Haven't you heard? Gray makes you look thinner!

Dont forget doom 57 fps is somehow less than mass effect 50 fps! 

[mr moose]

4 hours ago, VSG said:

So the graph is a stupidly scaled one.

 

Graphs are by there very nature designed to graphically show relative values, as soon as you use a different scale for each condition (even with the figure printed) it becomes an out and out misrepresentation of the data.   

[Hiitchy]

21 hours ago, Nineshadow said:

* SNIP *

Not sure if shampoo, or TIM.... Send help.

[LAwLz]

6 hours ago, Jito463 said:

I agree that it shouldn't be accepted, but calling it illegal is ridiculous and completely over the top.  Is it shady?  Yes.  Is it misleading?  Somewhat.  Is it illegal?  Absolutely not.  It doesn't "harm consumers", and you'd be hard pressed to prove it does in a court of law (sidenote: I really hate the term "consumer").

Why is calling it illegal ridiculous? Making native advertisement without properly labeling it such is in fact against the law, and I think there is a strong case here that the article is not conveying that it is an ad clearly enough for people not to be mislead.

Quote

In evaluating whether an ad is deceptive, the FTC considers the net impression the ad conveys to consumers.  Because ads can communicate information through a variety of means – text, images, sounds, etc. – the FTC will look to the overall context of the interaction, not just to elements of the ad in isolation.  Put another way, both what the ad says and the format it uses to convey that information will be relevant.  Any clarifying information necessary to prevent deception must be disclosed clearly and prominently to overcome any misleading impression.

 

A basic truth-in-advertising principle is that it’s deceptive to mislead consumers about the commercial nature of content.  Advertisements or promotional messages are deceptive if they convey to consumers expressly or by implication that they’re independent, impartial, or from a source other than the sponsoring advertiser – in other words, that they’re something other than ads.  Why would it be material to consumers to know the source of the information?  Because knowing that something is an ad likely will affect whether consumers choose to interact with it and the weight or credibility consumers give the information it conveys. 

[...]

Disclosures that are necessary to avoid misleading consumers must be presented clearly and prominently.  Whether a disclosure of a native ad’s commercial nature meets this standard will be measured by its performance – that is, do consumers recognize the native ad as an ad?  Only disclosures that consumers notice, process, and understand can be effective.  Inadequate disclosures can’t change the net impression created and won’t stop consumers from being deceived that advertising or promotional messages are something other than ads.

 

The FTC staff business guidance document .com Disclosures:  How to Make Effective Disclosures in Digital Advertising explains what advertisers should do to ensure disclosures in digital advertising are clear and prominent.   In general, disclosures should be:

• in clear and unambiguous language;

• as close as possible to the native ads to which they relate;

• in a font and color that’s easy to read;

• in a shade that stands out against the background;

• for video ads, on the screen long enough to be noticed, read, and understood; and

• for audio disclosures, read at a cadence that’s easy for consumers to follow and in words consumers will understand

 

You're not allowed to do whatever you want just because it's an ad.

If you somehow do think that it was obvious to everyone that the article was an ad then just look at the graph... There is no way you can deny that it is misleading.

 

 

Why do you hate the term "consumers"?

[Misanthrope]

8 hours ago, Jito463 said:

A moron gets what they deserve, then.  I have no sympathy for idiots.

To clarify, this is a typical joke line to define what constitutes trademark infringement:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_moron_in_a_hurry

 

[VSG]

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

 

Graphs are by there very nature designed to graphically show relative values, as soon as you use a different scale for each condition (even with the figure printed) it becomes an out and out misrepresentation of the data.   

Indeed, and if you look at the article again now you will see a lot of changes have happened. Still some left to do on AMD's side, but it's a lot more transparent now.

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, VSG said:

Indeed, and if you look at the article again now you will see a lot of changes have happened. Still some left to do on AMD's side, but it's a lot more transparent now.

Of course it's being changed, being caught out doing this shit costs credibility and sales for TPU and  AMD.    Changing it to try and limit damages.

[Jito463]

3 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Why do you hate the term "consumers"?

Instead of being people, that term reduces us down to nothing more than a resource just waiting to "consume" something.  Customer is far more preferable (or potential customer).  Consumer makes us sound like a bunch of cattle to be herded.

[Dylanc1500]

41 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Instead of being people, that term reduces us down to nothing more than a resource just waiting to "consume" something.  Customer is far more preferable (or potential customer).  Consumer makes us sound like a bunch of cattle to be herded.

Moo? Lol

 

Technically we are consumers depending on what products you are speaking of. It's why we have products that are called "consumables".

[LAwLz]

52 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Instead of being people, that term reduces us down to nothing more than a resource just waiting to "consume" something.  Customer is far more preferable (or potential customer).  Consumer makes us sound like a bunch of cattle to be herded.

The problem is that consumer and customer are not synonyms. 

Consumer = a person that consumers something. For example reads an article or watches a video. It is anyone who uses a goods or service. 

Customer = a person who buys something. 

 

You're not a customer to TechPowerUp since you don't pay them money. 

 

Anyway, I don't think of the term "consumer" as cattle to be herded, but to each their own. 

[Mooshi]

Still more credible than anything from Kotaku.

[Bleedingyamato]

7 hours ago, Mooshi said:

Still more credible than anything from Kotaku.

They do game themed stuff right?

 

Do they lie or something?

[Tribalinius]

God forbid that it could be a mistake or a typo coming from the person who made the graph in the first place...

[dexT]

4 hours ago, Bleedingyamato said:

They do game themed stuff right?

 

Do they lie or something?

The CNN of gaming

[Bleedingyamato]

Just now, dexT said:

The CNN of gaming

I don't watch a lot of tv news.  Is CNN bad?  ?

[dexT]

Just now, Bleedingyamato said:

I don't watch a lot of tv news.  Is CNN bad?  ?

Yes, very fake news. Multiple people fired this week for fake news and undercover footage of a producer saying they have no ethics and push crackpot stories for ratings.

[mr moose]

On 6/30/2017 at 5:04 AM, Tribalinius said:

God forbid that it could be a mistake or a typo coming from the person who made the graph in the first place...

 

And accidentally mess up not one but two numbers and the lengths of two graphs to correspond to each typo at the same time?  Nope, it was intentional. 

 

Officer, he fell on his own knife twice.

[PCGuy_5960]

 Why are people defending them?

 

If it's AMD, it's fine. I guess

[YoloSwag]

Sadly a lot of tech sites are slowly losing their integrity. A lot of well-known sites for me have become so bad, I don't even consider anything they say anymore.

 

"You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain." - Merlin Dumbledore (the white).

[Juanitology]

Hilarious: https://clips.twitch.tv/BoldSingleEggnogDatBoi

[Brooksie359]

On 6/27/2017 at 3:11 AM, HKZeroFive said:

Are people seriously not concerned about this? If this was an advertorial by NVIDIA or Intel, I bet those same people would be screaming that it's misleading.

Honestly I'm not sure if AMD is to blame for this. I mean isn't it kinda the website that hosted the article responsibility to make sure it's clear that it is an ad and not AMD? I just think people should be mad at the website for allowing this rather than a company doing a sponsored content piece.

[LinusTech]

24 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

Honestly I'm not sure if AMD is to blame for this. I mean isn't it kinda the website that hosted the article responsibility to make sure it's clear that it is an ad and not AMD? I just think people should be mad at the website for allowing this rather than a company doing a sponsored content piece.

Legally speaking it's on AMD.

[mr moose]

7 minutes ago, LinusTech said:

Legally speaking it's on AMD.

Well, the fallout is certainly on both.   Websites though seem to be a legal grey area about who is responsible for content, is it the publisher or the creator.  Biggest example in my mind is piratebay, they merely publish user links but are being challenged legally and shut down flat out for user content.