Imo so did any notion of impartiality towards anything but that's just me. Once it becomes your career, you do what you have to. I don't blame them for it.
-
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
Imo so did any notion of impartiality towards anything but that's just me. Once it becomes your career, you do what you have to. I don't blame them for it.
Garrett 2U
Member
did you not read the first two sentences of my post pointing out that it is unverified, or are you just trying to be a jackass?
Chobel
Member
You're seriously trying too hard to miss the point. It's the law. You get paid to make the video, you disclose that.
Wickerbasket
Member
Then why are you posting it here?
I'm not trying to be a dick, but did you even check his post history? He's only had posts on the xbox one subreddit. He doesn't exactly scream credible source.
You do understand that with regulations it becomes something different. Not the free soapbox that it is now.
Why not just watch the ones you trust and not the others?
NoMoreTrolls
Banned
How many times can you miss the point?
Well If I got paid to post positive or neutral information on the XB1 that's where I'd post too. Can't blame him for that.
Chobel
Member
Every fucking time.
SwiftDeath
Member
That was the first PR response by Machinima in regards to this. It is spin. Why are the documents changed in comparison to older deals? Why is it missing the stipulation that you have to specify you are being paid to do this where the others one did?
I know the point you guys are trying to make.. I just don't agree with it in this context. You can't complain about something that just affects untrustworthy people' s blogs. It's silly. Even if it ends up being illegal.
Osiris
I permanently banned my 6 year old daughter from using the PS4 for mistakenly sending grief reports as it's too hard to watch or talk to her
I know you are obviously trying to catch up, so allow me to do a re-cap, the NDA hasn't been an issue for a long time as far as this story goes, we've seen it, it's been posted, in full.
At first it was thought that the NDA required the partners to not disclose anything, clarification was made this this didn't apply to the disclosure requirement, but lacking any other text about disclosure in the guidelines this was still muddied and unclear as to what it pertained to.
Later it was found that Machinima, in it's guidelines for past campaigns for other companies specifically required disclosure of the relationship in the descriptions of participating Videos. This requirement was removed from the guidelines for the Xbox campaign(s).
This disclosure, and lack thereof, in the Xbox videos is the germane point, not the NDA, not the promotions of products, the lack of disclosure of a material connection (compensation, paid promotion).
This disclosure of a connection to the promoter was a legal requirement, not just a polite expectation.
There, caught you up.
Garrett 2U
Member
to ask if the NDA was leaked so it could be verified.
NoMoreTrolls
Banned
You can't complain about illegal acts... what the fuck am I reading? Hold me, GAF.
djblackice
Member
Seriously, what the fuck.
SkullHydra
Member
Okay, I am done with trying to explain how this is different than standard YouTube sponsorships to people who don't want to understand. After linking them to the image of the differences in contracts that alr1ght posted, this is what they responded with:
They keep mentioning that the participants were allowed to tell people they were paid, which means that no one is doing anything wrong. *Sigh*
They keep mentioning that the participants were allowed to tell people they were paid, which means that no one is doing anything wrong. *Sigh*
AngryJoe got sent the same documents and said they were real.
enanogrande
Member
So.. it doesn't matter because you don't trust the people that are doing it?
Never mind these guys have ~11 million subscribers, I guess. Fuck those guys, no one cares about them.
You can't complain about untrustworthy peoples blogs. :/
Chobel
Member
What the hell are talking about?
I'll try to make it simple for you: You get paid to promote something, you have (by the law) to disclose that. This contract says don't disclose you're getting paid, in other words they're making people do something illegal.
SOMEONE LIGHT THE CBOAT SIGNAL
Wickerbasket
Member
How do you know which ones are untrustworthy when they aren't allowed to tell you they're getting paid?
I always take advertisements which a huge grain of salt, any endorsements should be made clear.
They are not making people do anything. You don't have to take the deal.
So the fact that it wasn't forced at gunpoint makes these illegal acts suddenly okay? I'm confused.
Wickerbasket
Member
Both parties in that case are most likely breaking the law.
...And if you do take the deal, you have to be transparent about that with the content.
This isn't hard to understand. Stop being intentionally obtuse to vainly defend your favorite hardware manufacturer.
Raoul Duke
Banned
This was a really good video... It actually speaks to how I feel regarding the cloud it leaves hanging over youtube... I had high hopes that the people on youtube who were there trying to represent an honest view could bring about a breath of fresh air into a stagnant and hypocritical games enthusiast press. Now also, I can't cast judgement on everyone on youtube, that would be extremely unfair, but this nonetheless will destroy my hopes for a sea change in the games media. I now feel that there's just too much money in this industry and it's being used for corrupted practices in all reaches to protect these large investments... at least I still have you neogaf.
But if they don't disclose how would be know which one took the deal? And ultimately, how would we know whose opinions are genuine?
serversurfer
Member
Actually, he said it wasn't part of the promo they ran in November, and we already knew it wasn't in the January promo.
If we hear of a promo in between that specifies disclosure, it's probably safe to assume this is a MS-specific clause rather than a blanket policy change at Machinima.
No at all.. But there is difference between it being sleazy and omg most horrible thing ever .. Bring in government regulation!
enanogrande
Member
Fuck, I can't believe after 72 pages we still have to read shit like this.
NoMoreTrolls
Banned
Why does it seem like this is damage control? If it's something you find so inconsequential, then why bother talking about it?
For fuck's sake, wrong is wrong, and no amount of mincing words is going to change that.
Chobel
Member
Are you saying because it's not the worst thing ever, then it's totally OK and legal?
Wickerbasket
Member
What are you talking about? It's both sleazy and illegal.
Which part is it you take issue with?
GardenSirens
Banned
I wonder if anyone is going to start paying people to bash the xbox one...despite them doing it for free already
Osiris
I permanently banned my 6 year old daughter from using the PS4 for mistakenly sending grief reports as it's too hard to watch or talk to her
It was only 1 page ago in the thread
The "As a perk..." text, seen above from the E3 and Comic-Con promotions was removed from the Xbox promotions guidelines, but you are right, it could have been a blanket change, in which case there will be more fireworks to come
NoMoreTrolls
Banned
Is that a hint of salt I detect, or is my taster off after this thread?
Uno Venova
Banned
there is clearly some sort of irc where this tag in tag out shit is coordinated
But who are the untrustworthy people? That's the issue. It could be everyone, it's not necessarily limited to just this promotion and Machinima. Hell, we just found out about a similar thing with EA and Battlefield 4 so it's definitely not limited to just this promotion and the people attached to it. Therefore you can't actually identify who is untrustworthy to "avoid" their content.
It ruins the very nature of what Youtube was -- it's tainting the content creators' opinions in order to influence their viewer base where before (whenever the "before" was) that wasn't the case. Youtubers were the closest thing to other customers the viewer could relate to -- now, after this revelation? Now you have to put every Youtuber under the magnifying glass and at that point, you may as well just stop watching any Youtube content all together (unless the content creator has come out and has been upfront about this particular issue like boogie).
If they can't disclose they're doing the promotion, how do you know you can trust their opinion? How do you know they're untrustworthy? This could have gone completely unnoticed if this wasn't leaked and it would have continued to grow as a standard (since they'd be getting away with it), but now that it's caught they can't brush it under the rug -- it's a big issue.
Maybe it's Canadian in me, but I think that is exactly the time to bring in Government regulations...
If you go back to the original post.. I am just saying the call for government regulation for YouTube bloggers is silly.
Unless you are connected to a registered company.
Government already regulates regular bloggers, video bloggers should be different?
Imperfected
Member
Pfft, you would think that, with your affordable medicine and functioning banks...
3rdamention
Member
What the Hell I can't, who are you to tell me or
anyone else what we can or can't complain about?
I honestly don't know who you think you are, it's embarrassing....
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
FTC regulations? More like government impeding freedom of speech!
Brad Grenz
Member
The government regulations already exist that apply to individuals, including YouTubers. The FTC regulations that have been repeatedly cited in this thread were crafted for exactly this situation. And to answer your previous question, how are we supposed to know who is trustworthy and who is scummy if these people can accept unlimited secret payments from corporations?
That right there shows it's a...
Getting on the wrong side of the FTC is not something MS needs right now. Like Boogie I take them for their word that they didn't know. These things do slip past large corporate entities when they have to deal with small marketers and 3 degrees of separation.
Still, it's just more negligence by MS in the face of a already hostile climate. They' still ok'd a "buy us some good will" campaign instead of a "lets foster some good will with our consumers". Still out of touch, with the view they can buy their way to success.
cheeseburgla
Banned
Bottom line for me..... Don't trust anything you read/see/hear on the Internet. Everybody does what they have to do to get an edge, whether it's taking a few bucks from a company, or making outright false statements or stories in an attempt to discredit somebody or something. It's a damn shame when the majority of us just want an honest opinion about a product we may spend our money on.
DoubleTake
Member
Ughh where is CBOAT when you need him. I want some unadulterated truthfacts dropped about whether or not Microsoft knew about the nondisclosure clause or not. Damnit Cboat we know youre watching...
Similar threads
- x2