It is the same thing. My guess is that the difference comes in with the extra step of a signed contract and NDA. Both are kinda crappy, this is shadier.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Xbox One and Machinima: Be nice or neutral, and don't tell anyone we're paying you
- Thread starter atomsk
- Start date
Hmmm...getting virtual crap versus advertising something and not declaring it...nope don't see any difference.
see edit. And this is shady as all hell, much more so than a discount on something.
Agreed
Sorc3r3r
Member
I see what you did there XD.
War is war.
And when your army is weaker and more costly you have to do something out of the field.
Btw, it is pretty shady.
Im convinced your trolling now. How in the hell is it to like a pepsi facebook post the same thing as indirectly paying content creators for endorsing the Xbox while prohibiting them to mention that they have been payed.
I said damn ..
We're closer... shady? perhaps. Illegal? doubtful.
Or they have enough money not to give two fucks about paying any fines and OK with breaking that law.
StarBlazers1
Member
I understand the outrage about all this. I posted awhile back and I just want to clarify something... Are we more upset about the fact this is happening or is it more the NDA?
I mean, the part where they are "encouraged" to post positive media doesn't seem to hit me really hard. I worked in Retail for many years and in many cases we were paid Spiffs or "extra money" to sell some items over other ones. And yes, we would definitely push those items.
If I were working in a Gamestop and Microsoft offered me $20 bucks a unit to sell an XB1 while Sony offered me nothing, guess which one I would be positive over and push?
If it's the NDA we are supposed to be more upset about or rather the transparency of it all, I can go along with that more so than the other. Though I guess the retailers aren't that transparent about the spiffs either. I don't know, it's an interesting situation that I really believe needs to be researched some more. I can't imagine Microsoft is the only company to try this. They just got caught.
I mean, the part where they are "encouraged" to post positive media doesn't seem to hit me really hard. I worked in Retail for many years and in many cases we were paid Spiffs or "extra money" to sell some items over other ones. And yes, we would definitely push those items.
If I were working in a Gamestop and Microsoft offered me $20 bucks a unit to sell an XB1 while Sony offered me nothing, guess which one I would be positive over and push?
If it's the NDA we are supposed to be more upset about or rather the transparency of it all, I can go along with that more so than the other. Though I guess the retailers aren't that transparent about the spiffs either. I don't know, it's an interesting situation that I really believe needs to be researched some more. I can't imagine Microsoft is the only company to try this. They just got caught.
Unlikely. Most legal departments don't operate like this.
Brad Grenz
Member
Or thought would stay hidden and never bight them on the ass, or thought they'd be able to transfer responsibility to a third party, or didn't bother to look closely at the terms Machinima drew up.
The fact that the promotion violates FTC rules is not up for debate. YouTubers are required to disclose these considerations, and the companies paying them are required to inform them that those disclosures are needed. Apart from failing to inform them of that responsibility, the contract actually precludes any such disclosure. Ignorance isn't a defense. "Fancy Lawyers" aren't a defense. For whatever the reason this promotion was allowed to proceed, it is clearly illegal and undermines the credibility of editorial content EVERYWHERE which is why these issues need to be taken seriously. This thread has already spiraled from the pocket change MS was promising YouTubers to be nice to the Xbox One, to the assumption that major professional sites may also be on the take. After all, MS flaunts the law, why not aim a little higher, right?
Of course it's the NDA.
legal departments don't make corporate decisions.
I'm trying to find an analogue in kind, not degree. It's advertising that the consumer doesn't see as traditional advertising, in return for some value. You missed the part where I said it becomes different and darker w the NDA.
Microsoft defense force in here..mother of god.
haha, yeah. I'm done.
Microsoft defense force in here..mother of god.
AKA the "They're just being a business!!" crowd. Never gets old, they are a lot like the EA love crowd.
Have you actually read any of the legal literature provided to you in this thread, online or otherwise? Or are you just going to continually regurgitate that it is legal without doing any research of your own, simply because it suits your pro Microsoft agenda? I must say, I was doubtful at first too, but after reading everything provided….
Imperfected
Member
You're thinking too linearly.
The next-level shit is paying someone inarticulate that people are unable to relate to, but to endorse the competitor's product rather than your own. Most people aren't actually that deeply affected by positive peer pressure - "Oh, PewDiePie loves X-Box, I'd better buy one!" - but plenty of people are influenced by negative peer pressure - "Oh, PewDiePie loves X-Box. That must be the console for complete morons."
That's right: I'm saying MisterXMedia is the most successful Sony plant there is.
shady? yes. Corporations do it? yes Illegal? depends. And yes I've liked pages for discounts. Except its out in the public. They put out full page ads saying like this and you get this. No NDAs.
Its one thing if ethically you dont take offense thats fine and your opinion but not realizing the difference between social marketing and what is potentially illegal and the concerns being voiced here ... I dont even know what to say.
I can't agree with any of your first paragraph. That's just not how a legal dept like this operates. I'm 99.99% certain that they anticipated this issue- which means they know something we dont, or you're a more competent legal analyst than they are. I also disagree with your contention that the illegality of it isn't up for debate- legal interpretation can always be debated.
Further- it can still be shady, undermining, etc without being illegal btw.
So, you are just dropping the 'like' angle now? Sorry, I am just asking that you try and back up what you are saying.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
If you think they're committing a crime, then report it lol.
plasmawave
Banned
The difference is knowing. When you see commercials or product placement you know what they are. With a deal like this you don't know if someone is saying something because he believes it or because he is paid to say it. If you trust someone's opinion this can influence you very much this is dishonest and unethical.
Marc
Member
Why does that make it correct? Bribery is the act of giving or receiving anything of 'value' to influence decisions. That is one consideration of the law. All expenses paid trips, free consoles and games are all of great value and are well beyond the limit most would set as reasonable. If I got found out for such a thing in my job I would be open to a several grand fine and possible prison time. I can only speak for my laws but I have been told the US laws in this regard are actually more strict.
Disclosure is of use when things like dinners occur, it is why politicians 'have' to declare them. Speaking for here I believe the monetary value set on that before being considered risky is around £100. It doesn't account for things which are considered 'lavish gifts'.
What you guys seem to be saying is in the realm of "Oh but when Boogie received that million dollar cheque he like totally told everyone so its cool now right". The fact he is open about it is nice and all but at the end of the day the bribe has occurred and he may be influenced by it. It is hard to know since every influenced person would deny it too, hence the whole point of the laws to prevent such compromised states. Of course it is a bit of a blurry line in the sense he is not professing to be a journalist although he earns money from gaming opinions. It disgusts me that people who pretend to be journalists also take such bribes. Ultimately the law has left gaming alone as despite the huge sums of money involved, no one really gets hurt from it compared to a politician or policeman taking a bribe. Still, if someone decided to report it to authorities I imagine they would be duty bound to investigate and such openness could bite people on the arse.
I don't like the moral high ground viewpoint when simultaneously taking bribes.. which include directly given payments as per his youtube vid for access to certain games. Which he was going to give positive feedback anyway apparently... hmm...
Chobel
Member
Even if MS get away with it because of some loop-hole or technicality, the actual content creators are doing something illegal by not disclosing they're getting paid.
That's a good point. Has anyone even contacted the FTC about this yet? I suppose you'd know more if you did.
la flama blanca
Banned
He's busy working on a counter thread of positive xbone news/rumors. "HYPE" "HYPE"
Speedy Blue Dude
Banned
So this is illegal? Holy fuck Microsoft is being arrogant as fuck. :|
Is there maybe a difference between being given a product and being given money? Or are they both considered the same?
Edit: Microsoft Defense Force?... This is a thing now? I thought generalizing members was a bad thing?
No calling users "SonyGAF, NintendoGAF, XboxGAF" etc?I'm not on that side either. I'm not saying what they (Microsoft) are doing is illegal, but I love the typical fanboy response of "they are just being a business". It gets really old and it's no wonder why Microsoft tried to pull the shit with the XB1 at first given that a lot of their fanbase excuse the shit they pull.
StarBlazers1
Member
So, if Microsoft came out and said, We'll pay everyone $3.00 per 1000 views for positive impressions before it all started, this wouldn't even be an issue?
I find it hard to believe that we wouldn't still be riding them this hard.
I agree it is a completely stupid thing they did. Their product actually is pretty good and they really didn't need to do this, but I've got to say that advertising trends have been going this way for a while.
Ever since "Viral" campaigns started becoming more popular, it's been difficult to tell what's real and what's not. They aren't clearly labeled as advertisements. In many ways, this is an extension to those campaigns. They were just foolish in thinking they wouldn't get caught. And for that reason, they absolutely deserve the bad press.
With that being said, I'm not going to not buy one of their games or systems because of this. I own an XB1 and a PS4 and I want to play each of their exclusive games.
I think we are owed an apology and the transparency issue needs to be changed throughout the social media space now that it has become so central to these companies marketing plans.
The problem is not disclosing that you are getting paid for it and that the video is a commercial.
For those interested in the legal issues, this is a good blog to read
http://bloglawonline.blogspot.com/?m=1
http://bloglawonline.blogspot.com/?m=1
BrokenIcarus
Member
Exactly, there shouldn't ever be any blind following for anything ever.
Sub_Level
wants to fuck an Asian grill.
But they really don't! They pretty much just have to support good games and offer a good product while gradually lowering price on said product as manufacturing costs become cheaper. The internet is just as effective at spreading good news about something as it is spreading bad. No need for these unorthodox 420tacticalstratssubterfuges.
Derekloffin
Member
While I sorta agree with you, my confidence level is a lot lower than that as MS has a track record of knowingly breaking various laws. They usually tried to disguise such, but anti-competitive practices, not implementing demanded european legal sanctions, blatantly using some IP protected products in their fully knowing such... Basically, they have done it before, and with MUCH bigger issues than what this is with the FTC, so no, I can't be that confident at all and thus must seriously consider that legal missed this, or was ignored.
From Mavs link, read example 2. No disclosure is required because payments are ordinarily expected by viewers. It is expected that YouTube channels get paid for page views.
There's more than enough wiggle room for interpretation and certainly MS examined what is legal and what is not.
We wouldn't. There was already a thread about this last week, which was not as big or intense as this. The NDA part was not known back then. Almost everyone finds the NDA part disturbing.
This thread has been a fun read. People's heads are literally exploding in here over.. what exactly? If I have this right, they paid/are paying a youtube company of sorts to advertise or at least be neutral in their commentary of the product. Is that pretty much the gist of it?
Are they somehow also paying them to unfairly attack the PS4 or something? How is this any different from when companies cut deals with television stations and programs to have their product take center stage, or when in a sports broadcast the announcers or popular TV personalities mention, and help advertise, a company's product on the air? Wasn't it obvious that maybe some type of agreement was in place with some of the Xbox or Microsoft related promotions we've seen from Machinima? Wasn't it Machinima that had exclusive access to the Halo Forward Unto Dawn TV show, and wasn't it also the same for that Ryse mini-series?
Eh, I'm not spending too much time on the subject. We do love our Xbox drama.
I know you like Microsoft and like your Xbox one a lot. That is perfectly acceptable, but sometimes companies, no matter how much you like them, cross a line on things. This is one of them. Don't try to defend something that's already been proven to be very shady.
oconnomiyaki
Member
More like bad mouthing and selling you a product at the same time!
MS is genius!!!
The weird thing about the Scroogled ads is that, from what I can tell, it's not an uncommon practice in the States. I was watching the NFC Championship and there was this ad from Ford taking a dump on Honda. Hell, Sega ran an entire ad campaign for half a decade that took jabs at Nintendo. So why the outrage when Microsoft does it? I can understand if you're not from America, but otherwise...
...I don't think that you get what's happening.
That's no reason for you to post something so ridiculous.
What? It's all open for everybody to see that you liked (and most of the time share) a certain promotion and what you get out of it. This is the exact opposite: liking a certain product but without letting people know that you like a certain product.
Similar threads
- x2