moebeast
Member
Last edited:
What Happened?
- Thread starter SkyEye
- Start date
- Status
razor02097
Rogue Drone Pilot
A lot of people are asking for more AP. DJI is one of the best off the shelf platforms that are actually affordable. I don't blame them for jumping on the opportunity to play with the latest and greatest from DJI.
Personally DJI isn't my cup of tea. I don't really see purchasing a DJI product anytime soon. But my with all of the free content flite test offers, I don't mind if they occasionally show off a new product from a manufacturer.
Are you saying reviews and commercials are the same thing?
All Im asking for is a clear disclaimer. If they review any product, I dont want to have to guess if they where paid for that episode by the manufacturer, or if they where free to speak their minds.
Busted... I meant to put the word commercials in quotes. I fixed that. Thank you.
Please show me where they have ever referred to them sharing a product with the audience as a "review".
Likewise I challenge you to show me where they've ever tried to deceive the audience about accepting compensation for showcasing products?
I'd say integrity is intact.
Wow, you put the bar low. Where exactly do they say the got compensated for producing and publishing that video? AFAICT, nowhere. But you think its reasonable for us to assume that anyway. So should we assume all other episodes are also paid for by some manufacturer?
BTW, FCC and FTC regulation actually requires infomercials to clearly state those things. And IMO, integrity doesnt mean you skirt (or possibly even, break) the law. Integrity would be clearly stating this and that content was paid for by DJI regardless if it was legally required.
I'm confused. When did FliteTest or any other youtube or internet resource ever fall under FCC or FTC regulations? I'm not sure which episode you're referring to, but the DJI Inspire episode I saw had the FT crew talk about how DJI wanted to provide an Inspire for an episode, but only with their own pilots. FT didn't agree to that, so they went out and bought their own and Eric is their main DJI Inspire pilot. I believe this was the article that was listed as a review:
http://flitetest.com/articles/dji-inspire-1-review
http://flitetest.com/articles/dji-inspire-1-review
Well it wasn't stated, so it wasn't paid for. Because - as you've mentioned - it's the law.
Are people that influenced by TV / movie crap so that every product they see is automatically paid for product placement? I don't understand why people even think that everything Flite Test shows is somehow sponsored.
Every time Flite Test got something for free or have been paid for it was clearly mentioned in the show. Examples: "We got this free prototype Connex system from GetFPV for testing.", "We got invited by ImmersionRC to Europe... (plus IRC logo on screen", Sponsoring by HobbyKing - logo included in the video...
They bought their own DJI Inspire 1 to show us and had planned to sell it after the testing, but kept it because they liked it. They've crashed numerous planes that they got from friends and family, yet people still accused them of "it's easy to crash it if you get it for free from the manufacturer.". They are showing Graupner transmitters they are selling on their own store: Paid for product placement...
Everybody is so fast with accusing Flite Test of making paid advertisement without knowing anything about the background.
What happened this time (I think) is that they got invited or even asked for a product demo and filmed that, because there are viewers that are very interested in those machines. Then they explicitely mention that someone from DJI is showing the product features to make sure everybody knows that it is not an unbiased review, still accusing...
Do they have to add a reverse disclaimer in every video? "We didn't get paid for this episode and bought this new gadget everybody wants to see ourself, here is the bill."
Since always. BUt thats not the point here, I dont intend to sue FT. I just want them to open and honest about this.
the 'Dual Camera Operation - DJI Inspire 1' episode. And several similar one's before that. And no, it wasnt called a review, but what difference does that make? Many of the reviews where also sponsored, think hobbyking/durafly reviews etc. I have no problem with that, as long as its disclosed and as long as the sponsor doesnt interfere with the content.
He is right with that:
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/bus...ndorsement-guides-what-people-are-asking#when
He is talking about the latest video where they showcased the features of the DJI Inspire 1 gimbal / camera system by having someone from DJI and Alex fly in two operators mode.
Interesting. Flying Monkey seems to think otherwise, and Im pretty sure you're wrong and he's right.
But thanks for proving my point to him.
BTW, for those saying "reviews" are different; not so long ago I followed a kickstarter project for some VTOL.
edit bis: found it:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1617348376/the-vertex-hybrid-uav/comments
so, true or not? Balu will say not true because they dont say so, Flying Monkey may say true but they dont deny it so their "integrity is intact", even though even the moderator here might have been misled.
Seriously, some transparency is in order. I think we deserve to know what episodes are being paid for and to what extend the sponsor has editorial privileges.
Last edited:
razor02097
Rogue Drone Pilot
Interesting... The only thing I'm wondering is if the check goes to flite test or stonekap productions? A professional video is expensive to produce and edit. I'm pretty confident that selling foam planes and youtube hits isn't going to be enough to cover such expensive equipment and staff.
Unless its my adblock, I dont think their vids are even monetized, are they? As to where the check goes, it hardly matters, the money will end up paying FT bills.
Regardless, like I said, I understand bills need to be paid. If they need to take money from sponsors, I have no problem with that. Early reviews where also clearly sponsored by hobbyking/horizon hobby etc. Fine, but just say it, and clarify what, if any, impact the sponsor has on the content of the episode. Dont leave us guessing if they are saying product X is awesome because they actually think its awesome or because they were paid to say its awesome.
And if companies want to pay for FT services to create infomercials, thats great too. They are good at it, its a source of revenue, I have no objections whatsoever. But again, be open and honest about it.
You're basing the argument on the idea that Flite Test is nothing but an informercial for various products.
Interesting, I can almost actually see that. Let's pretend you're correct, on to the next part....
You're also basing it on the idea that you "deserve" something. I'm guessing you deserve something from the show, because of your contributions to the show. What cost are you outlaying as a direct result of free episodes?
I apologize if I'm coming across as confrontatonal, I don't mean to. Legality wise... you bring up interesting points. But when people start demanding that they deserve something. Especially when they're already getting something for free... I tend to want to know why they think they're owed anything.
razor02097
Rogue Drone Pilot
Don't take this the wrong way but your replies are awfully aggressive. I love the Flite Test show as much as anyone but I wouldn't try to discredit someone for their opinion.
Obviously he isn't going to contribute a substantial monetary resource to the Flite Test show... But we as a community all contribute in some way how ever small. Whether it is a show suggestion, purchase from the FT store, word of mouth advertising to others, youtube subscription, FF volunteering, FT extra donation, or even just helping people out in these forums... Personally I don't expect anything. But it is nice when a really entertaining and informative episode comes out.
What monkey is trying to say and it has come up in the past is people complain about episodes like they have a financial stake in the company. For those who have been around for a while it kind of "chaps our britches" when we see these complaints. People are interested in various aspects of this hobby and sometimes that requires bringing in some higher end products. Do I miss some of the "older" stuff, sure. Some times the old profile f-22 and others like it could and maybe should make a come back. Some of these builds can be a bit much for a new person so a simple profile type plane is a great start.
As for the bit about being sponsored and all that..... First StoneKap is out of the picture now. Second I am pretty sure the store generates most of the revenue for flitetest. They have done a few "sponsored" episodes as of late but they are not always R/C related products. How much do they get for a sponsored episode, I don't know and really it's none of my business.
What we need to remember is we are fans of FliteTest. We can only offer suggestions on what we, the fans, would like to see and hope they will be taken into consideration. I have always lived by this motto, if I do not like something I wont have anything to do with it. So for me that means is I do not like an episode, I won't watch. If something bothers me that bad I will find time to make contact and voice my concerns. Don't forget you can leave them a voicemail and you can voice your concerns that way.
As for the bit about being sponsored and all that..... First StoneKap is out of the picture now. Second I am pretty sure the store generates most of the revenue for flitetest. They have done a few "sponsored" episodes as of late but they are not always R/C related products. How much do they get for a sponsored episode, I don't know and really it's none of my business.
What we need to remember is we are fans of FliteTest. We can only offer suggestions on what we, the fans, would like to see and hope they will be taken into consideration. I have always lived by this motto, if I do not like something I wont have anything to do with it. So for me that means is I do not like an episode, I won't watch. If something bothers me that bad I will find time to make contact and voice my concerns. Don't forget you can leave them a voicemail and you can voice your concerns that way.
What we, viewers and community members, shop customers and others bring to the table is essentially everything. If we werent here, no company would want to sponsor an episode, no money would be earned making FT. But you're basically saying FT viewers aren't owed a thing. No respect, no honesty, no disclosure, nada. IF they wanted to insult us, you think thats ok because "free". If they want to mislead or lie to us, thats ok. Because "free".
I dont think such approach is a recipe for success and Im glad FT crew for the most part dont seem to share your opinion. Josh doesnt strike me as a disrespectful or dishonest person. Its just when it comes to disclosure that they are currently sorely lacking (potentially even legally). Its not hard for them to address, it doesnt even cost them anything, we just need to get the point across that we care. At least I do. Maybe you guys dont care if a "review" endorses a shitty or overpriced product just because some company happened to pay for it, and as a result, FT's credibility sinks below zero. I like to think Josh is smarter than that.
Last edited:
Please, no strawmen. I didnt say that. I did say we dont know which episodes are paid for infomercials, and which arent. We can guess, but even the staff on this forum doesnt seem to know or agree which, if any, is a paid-for informercial and which, if any, are genuine objective reviews.
Can you honestly not see this is a problem?
- Status
Similar threads
