Support NeoGAF

[Skeff]

True, but it looks like MS already has their martyrs all lined up. So while they would get the PR, they could just keep coming out and saying, " nope, it was all on them .. they were supposed to inform you they were being paid to stay positive! Seriously! " lol. You know how it will go I'm sure.

All depends on if the regular joe cares enough to actually say, " nah I'll go purchase a PS4 instead of a X1 because of this ". Most likely not ...

Look how many people even on here are already saying, " well shit this happens everywhere, all the time, exactly like this! Sony does the same thing! Nintendo does the same thing! Just accept it and move on "

i agree totally, it's already started. But I do not think MS's Board/Investors will be happy with this shitstorm because of what they see as such a small and meaningless division, I'm sure ValueAct amongst others will be taking notes. If there is even a 0.5% drop in MS revenue because of this then serious questions will be asked.

I completely agree that MS is ultimately responsible. However, I could see the argument that there's no way they could properly vet out every video that's pushed out due to this promotion. Then you get into that weird world that Google/Youtube is in where people have turned on ads for videos that they're clearly reposting.

I'm more talking about how a large people not following the rules shouldn't affect the company enabling it if they can prove that they made an effort to curtail the practice.

I see your point and it's a valid one, but the obvious reply is that MS cannot offer these terms if they cannot afford to vet all of the videos. The responsibility falls onto MS as soon as they start paying anyone (be it 3rd party advertisers or youtubers directly) to make sure that their marketing money is used to create legal content. If MS was to make it clear in the T+C that payment must be disclosed then I'm sure it would likely not be an issue the FTC would follow through on.

 

[stonesak]

True, but it looks like MS already has their martyrs all lined up. So while they would get the PR, they could just keep coming out and saying, " nope, it was all on them .. they were supposed to inform you they were being paid to stay positive! Seriously! " lol. You know how it will go I'm sure.

Maybe, but if there is a FTC investigation, and MS and/or Machinima lie to the federal government, watch out. The government doesn't like to be lied to.

 

[Raoul Duke]

cboat's response isn't really a surprise. No business would hire a PR agency to promote their product without knowing how the promotion would work.

There is so much money involved it would be the most foolish thing to do, besides getting caught in this ass storm.

 

[GribbleGrunger]

I completely agree that MS is ultimately responsible. However, I could see the argument that there's no way they could properly vet out every video that's pushed out due to this promotion. Then you get into that weird world that Google/Youtube is in where people have turned on ads for videos that they're clearly reposting.

I'm more talking about how a large people not following the rules shouldn't affect the company enabling it if they can prove that they made an effort to curtail the practice.

Why would they need to vet every single video if it specifically stated that you HAD to disclose the nature of the deal? They signed a contract to NOT disclose that information which is why MS are in this mess. If you think that MS didn't know about that clause, I'd have to think you're naive. They thought they could get away with it. It's as simple as that.

 

[Cynn]

You're all just haters on a witch hunt. If you had just bought into Microsoft's utopian vision of the future we could be concentrating on what's really important - games. Microtransaction filled, black crushed, 720p games. That's what's important.

lol Random. I'm actually on the other side of the doors in this picture. That's the 360 slim viewing party if I'm not mistaken.

 

[DoubleTake]

imbusy

al contaracts are veted by legal tho. Usualy multipel timse.

hmmm....busy with what???

Spoiler

Come onnn 2 for 2!

 

[TetraGenesis]

It amazes me that some people are so entrenched in their bias that they are actually taking Microsoft's feigned ignorance at face value.

 

[A-V-B]

hmmm....busy with what???

Spoiler

Come onnn 2 for 2!

If he's actually posting after all this time in regards to this, he must be pretty darn interested in it. I'm sure he'll be back. Maybe not right now, but he'll be back.

 

[RiccochetJ]

Why would they need to vet every single video if it specifically stated that you HAD to disclose the nature of the deal?

Because shit rolls uphill when lawsuits start to happen and if it's been proven you were clearly in the wrong.

 

[IAmRandom31]

But if this does happen all the time - heh - then how many folks online can you trust to represent the opinion of the average man? See what I mean?

Oh I'm with you man. Really. Trust is at an all time low in this industry toward the journalism. You can go read the comment section of any big review and will either hear " you are paid off by MS / Sony! " atleast a dozen or more times.

With this type of stuff coming to light, it just gives validation to those claims. Even Boogie states pretty simply that " yeah this happens all the time on youtube " but he only took the contract / money when he already liked the product and wouldn't say anything negative about it anyway.

But even then, a realistic review will always have a negative. Always. No game is 100% perfect. Even Zelda : OOT or Mario 64 had some issues that could be expressed negatively. But with this type of contract, you are giving a 100% positive or neutral review of a product, nothing at all negative allowed. Which in turn, takes away any feel of genuine opinion from it. Still a tainted opinion, because it is not the entire opinion that one could give. Even if you did not like the look of the UI on the X1 for example, but liked the responsiveness of the hand gesture controls .. you could only speak of the latter and speak nothing of the issue you had with the style. Its just not genuine, not complete.

 

[gogosox8]

Yeah but that's goes with anyone really. Even big sites have been caught doing shady deals.

Also I guess a better way to put it is.. Should we burden everyone with heavy regulations because of a few sleazy bloggers?

Saying "This is part of a promotion for x game" at the beginning of a video now constitutes "heavy regulation"?

 

[Chobel]

Sorry for reposting this but Northernlion (youtuber) said this in reddit

According to him, the previous Machinima assignments allow or even require full disclosure.

This is the best thing we have now confirming that previous Machinima contracts didn't include the "no disclosure" clause.

How I know this is him: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/qeuiw/i_make_a_living_playing_video_games_for_the/

 

[Neuromancer]

Yeah but that's goes with anyone really. Even big sites have been caught doing shady deals.

Also I guess a better way to put it is.. Should we burden everyone with heavy regulations because of a few sleazy bloggers?

I like to know when people are getting paid to advertise products to me. Why is that unreasonable?

 

[DoubleTake]

Sorry for reposting this but Northernlion (youtuber) said this in reddit

According to him, the previous Machinima assignments allow or even require full disclosure.

This is the best thing we have now that confirm that previous Machinima contracts didn't include the "no disclosure" clause.

How I know this is him: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/qeuiw/i_make_a_living_playing_video_games_for_the/

Oh I subscribe to Northern...Damn people. I mean theres proof right there sitting in front your eyes. Good work Chobel.

Im so interested to see what will come of all this, something has to...and I have a itching feeling it may be big...

 

[Shingro]

For promotion and fun, as of this post this thread would have earned $1,127

If only the OP had put the tag XB1M13 he'd have rent payed by now!

 

[RiccochetJ]

Oh I subscribe to Northern...Damn people. I mean theres proof right there sitting in front your eyes. Good work Chobel.

Im so interested to see what will come of all this, something has to...and I have a itching feeling it may be big...

No clue why the reddit post says 'allow' in past tense. To me that says this sort of thing has happened before.

 

[TetraGenesis]

I like to know when people are getting paid to advertise products to me. Why is that unreasonable?

Because of certain people's preference for the company in trouble.

 

[Garcia]

Not trying to start a witch hunt.

A "witch hunt" would be quite benefical actually. This isn't even a fraction of the iceberg's tip.

 

[Brad Grenz]

I completely agree that MS is ultimately responsible. However, I could see the argument that there's no way they could properly vet out every video that's pushed out due to this promotion. Then you get into that weird world that Google/Youtube is in where people have turned on ads for videos that they're clearly reposting.

I'm more talking about how a large number of people not following the rules shouldn't affect the company enabling it if they can prove that they made an effort to curtail the practice.

They wouldn't have to vet every video, but they would have to fulfill their responsibility to inform those who opt in that a disclosure of the promotional nature of the video is required by law. Had they done their part it would not fall on them very hard should the people creating the videos fail to live up to their legal obligations. The situation they have created here is so serious because it very much appears to be a calculated effort to secretly manipulate the public perception of a product in direct violation of both the spirit and the letter of the law. It really doesn't matter what industry is involved, that kind of behavior is absolutely poisonous to a free market and should not be tolerated by anyone.

 

[gogosox8]

Sorry for reposting this but Northernlion (youtuber) said this in reddit

According to him, the previous Machinima assignments allow or even require full disclosure.

This is the best thing we have now confirming that previous Machinima contracts didn't include the "no disclosure" clause.

How I know this is him: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/qeuiw/i_make_a_living_playing_video_games_for_the/

So this basically confirms that the no disclosure clause was only used in this particular deal with MS. So MS either made that part in the deal or told Machinima that they wanted that in the deal and Machinima agreed.

 

[John Harker]

Because of certain people's preference for the company in trouble.

Question because I hate giant threads, summarize that for me, whose blaming who for what? On the surface to me, it seems like its likely lead by the channel's policies, not the buyer

 

[KoopaTheCasual]

It amazes me that some people are so entrenched in their bias that they are actually taking Microsoft's feigned ignorance at face value.

My favorite responses are ones from Klocker and Phire Phox, since they can't even find a single defend-able act in this scandal.

"Whatever. Big woop."

The fanboy is strong with those two.

So this basically confirms that the no disclosure clause was only used in this particular deal with MS. So MS either made that part in the deal or told Machinima that they wanted that in the deal and Machinima agreed.

The weird thing, is that this NDA is not just MS, but also EA. But outside of those two, it seems like everything else requires disclosure.

 

[SwiftDeath]

For promotion and fun, as of this post this thread would have earned $1,127

If only the OP had put the tag XB1M13 he'd have rent payed by now!

He did. You just have to use the proper script to see the tags that pay out...

 

[Shingro]

Question because I hate giant threads, summarize that for me, whose blaming who for what? On the surface to me, it seems like its likely lead by the channel's policies, not the buyer

There's a very helpful timeline in the op, it might be worth reading it.

So, is it facinating to anyone else how fast this stuff moves? In the age of the internet these things expand and explode in a day or two, it seems like in the past there'd be at least a couple newspapers delivered before anything crazy happened.

It feels like to me that the short turn around time makes it far harder for messaging and damage control to be employed. I wonder if the companies that have to do that ever bemoan how fast humans transmit information these days.

 

[Tripon]

http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/7j4yfw/the-final-bosman-xbox-friends-with-benefits

Kyle Bosman of the Final Bosman discusses why MS and Machinima just screwed up.

 

[IAmRandom31]

Gotta love IGN lol

A burning PS4 and they can't even get the actual story correct. They ask is Machinima paying youtubers and not is Microsoft. Journalism.

And yes, they even said Machinima in the video too, so not a typo.

 

[TetraGenesis]

http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/7j4yfw/the-final-bosman-xbox-friends-with-benefits

Kyle Bosman of the Final Bosman discusses why MS and Machinima just screwed up.

Beautiful! I could use a Bosman right now

 

[DoubleTake]

Gotta love IGN lol

A burning PS4 and they can't even get the actual story correct. They ask is Machinima paying youtubers and not is Microsoft. Journalism.

Do not call any of them on that site Journalists.

 

[nib95]

imbusy

al contaracts are veted by legal tho. Usualy multipel timse.

Holy buttocks on a bullet train....

So this basically confirms that the no disclosure clause was only used in this particular deal with MS. So MS either made that part in the deal or told Machinima that they wanted that in the deal and Machinima agreed.

That was always the logical assumption. CBOAT essentially confirming it.

 

[Skeff]

Gotta love IGN lol

A burning PS4 and they can't even get the actual story correct. They ask is Machinima paying youtubers and not is Microsoft. Journalism.

And yes, they even said Machinima in the video too, so not a typo.

From the IGN article:

Editor's Note: This article originally stated that Microsoft was responsible for the promotion, but no explicit evidence has emerged to support that claim, and the text has since been edited.

They're actually running with this not being a Microsoft promotion. Maybe the Advertising guys reminded the editorial guys who gave the website a facelift and have since changed their tune.

 

[IAmRandom31]

From the IGN article:



They're actually running with this not being a Microsoft promotion.

Good lord.

I don't even know where to begin with that one. But as we said above, MS has its Martyr all lined up and here comes the support.

 

[Shin-Ra]

That's not an apostrophe IGN. Full stop after question mark too. Hmmmm.

 

[GribbleGrunger]

Because shit rolls uphill when lawsuits start to happen and if it's been proven you were clearly in the wrong.

You said MS would have to go through every video but they wouldn't if the contract was legitimate. The only reason they're in this mess is because it specifically stated participants COULDN'T disclose the nature of the deal. You can't then take what followed because of that and extrapolate it would be a nightmare to search every video. It's twisted logic.

 

[pixlexic]

I like to know when people are getting paid to advertise products to me. Why is that unreasonable?

The problem is there no real way to enforce it unless you register with the party who is enforcing it.

The only real way to enforce it currently is when it comes to light like in this situation. Even then though I'm not sure how responsible the bloggers can be held legally. And we will never know who took the deal.

 

[Kaako]

Of course MS & Machinima knew exactly what the fuck they were doing.

 

[Orayn]

The problem is there no real way to enforce it unless you register with the party who is enforcing it.

The only real way to enforce it currently is when it comes to light like in this situation. Even then though I'm not sure how responsible the bloggers can be held legally. And we will never know who took the deal.

Machinima has the authority and ability to enforce this and they've done it in the past.

 

[RiccochetJ]

They wouldn't have to vet every video, but they would have to fulfill their responsibility to inform those who opt in that a disclosure of the promotional nature of the video is required by law. Had they done their part it would not fall on them very hard should the people creating the videos fail to live up to their legal obligations. The situation they have created here is so serious because it very much appears to be a calculated effort to secretly manipulate the public perception of a product in direct violation of both the spirit and the letter of the law. It really doesn't matter what industry is involved, that kind of behavior is absolutely poisonous to a free market and should not be tolerated by anyone.

I completely agree with you. If MS had any sort of involvement (either willfully or by ignorance), then they should be held responsible both legally and in the court of public opinion.

I guess that I'm just having a hard time believing that after all the lawsuits they've gone through globally and the shellacking they took for the past 8 months for the Xbox, that they would somehow let or direct this sort of thing to happen.

Wait...

 

[Chobel]

Machinima has the authority and ability to enforce this and they've done it in the past.

Heck, they're doing it now.

 

[Skeff]

Good lord.

I don't even know where to begin with that one. But as we said above, MS has its Martyr all lined up and here comes the support.

Yes, I don't know what to say about that one either

 

[gogosox8]

Holy buttocks on a bullet train....

That was always the logical assumption. CBOAT essentially confirming it.

That was always my assumption as well but this and CBOAT basically seal the deal. MS had to have known about it.

 

[stonesak]

The problem is there no real way to enforce it unless you register with the party who is enforcing it.

The only real way to enforce it currently is when it comes to light like in this situation. Even then though I'm not sure how responsible the bloggers can be held legally. And we will never know who took the deal.

Bloggers can be held just as responsible as anyone else in this situation, that's not in question. And a FTC investigation could most certainly identify who received money from Machinima.

 

[travisbickle]

The weird thing, is that this NDA is not just MS, but also EA. But outside of those two, it seems like everything else requires disclosure.

Starter for 10:

Name two companies who had been caught up in so much shit in 2013 they were willing to pay Youtube video bloggers to lie about their opinion of the aforementioned company's products?

 

[Tripon]

Starter for 10:

Name two companies who had been caught up in so much shit in 2013 they were willing to pay Youtube video bloggers to lie about their opinion of the aforementioned company's products?

Sega and Gearbox for Aliens: Colonial Marines?

 

[RiccochetJ]

Starter for 10:

Name two companies who had been caught up in so much shit in 2013 they were willing to pay Youtube video bloggers to lie about their opinion of the aforementioned company's products?

Lie? That's a pretty strong word. If someone was paid to say Dead Rising 3 was a good game? Other than the fact that they were paid to say it, I wouldn't disagree with them that DR3 is a good game. Unless of course the person in question thinks that DR3 is terrible, then you have a point.

 

[Rozart]

Sorry for reposting this but Northernlion (youtuber) said this in reddit

According to him, the previous Machinima assignments allow or even require full disclosure.

This is the best thing we have now confirming that previous Machinima contracts didn't include the "no disclosure" clause.

How I know this is him: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/qeuiw/i_make_a_living_playing_video_games_for_the/

Wow. Thanks for this!

And I don't know if people are just being obtuse or they're really that naive to believe that MS is completely oblivous and blame-free with regards to not having a hand in crafting this daming non-disclosure part of the clause.

Honestly, it's really not hard to put two and two together, guys. Why do other previous Machinima deals allow full disclosure? Why does this particular deal with Microsoft prohibits something which has been continually allowed in the past?

Microsoft knew exactly what they were doing.

 

[call_kotaku]

The problem is there no real way to enforce it unless you register with the party who is enforcing it.

The only real way to enforce it currently is when it comes to light like in this situation. Even then though I'm not sure how responsible the bloggers can be held legally. And we will never know who took the deal.

Considering that Machinima/MS have written contracts that stipulate you must break the law to participate in their program, it's pretty clear-cut. I don't see why you think this must be a case of going after the actual influencers who signed the contracts, because other Machinima contracts (and similiar agreements from other networks) stipulate that influencers must show that whatever content they produce as part of the agreement was a part of a promotion, so the companies aren't liable if someone fucks up and negligently (or purposefully) breaks the law by not announcing that they are paid spokesmen.

It's extremely straightfoward.

 

[_hekk05]

The problem is there no real way to enforce it unless you register with the party who is enforcing it.

The only real way to enforce it currently is when it comes to light like in this situation. Even then though I'm not sure how responsible the bloggers can be held legally. And we will never know who took the deal.

Here are some people we know took the deal.

Read the bloody OP.

 

[IAmRandom31]

Wow. Thanks for this!

And I don't know if people are just being obtuse or they're really that naive to believe that MS is completely oblivous and blame-free with regards to not having a hand in crafting this daming non-disclosure part of the clause.

Honestly, it's really not hard to put two and two together, guys. Why do other previous Machinima deals allow full disclosure? Why does this particular deal with Microsoft prohibits something which has been continually allowed in the past?

Microsoft knew exactly what they were doing.

And a contract cannot be created to break a law. It is law that if you are promoting a product, getting paid to do so, you have to disclose that you are being paid. Just because it is contracted means diddly, it is a law breaking contract.

The law trumps any contract. Any judge / lawyer will tell you that.

 

[Raoul Duke]

Gotta love IGN lol

A burning PS4 and they can't even get the actual story correct. They ask is Machinima paying youtubers and not is Microsoft. Journalism.

And yes, they even said Machinima in the video too, so not a typo.

I really can't stand this shit... it's so blatant. It makes sense tho, considering machinima is basically a competitor to them and MS is one of the hands that feeds, if you go by the whole pins on ign during the xbone launch. Two birds one stone. Knock down your competitor while getting in the good graces of your sponsor.

 

[travisbickle]

Lie? That's a pretty strong word. If someone was paid to say Dead Rising 3 was a good game? Other than the fact that they were paid to say it, I wouldn't disagree with them that DR3 is a good game. Unless of course the person in question thinks that DR3 is terrible, then you have a point.

If someone is paying you to give an opinion, and they have set the rules for what that opinion will be, you are lying.