Social Media Influencers on IIS - Should they declare

[glend (Glen)]

Look I am sure this can be a contentious topic but I think we need to discuss IIS policy, in specific the Terms of Service relating to vendors advertising. In my reading of the TOS, admittedly written long ago, there is no recognition of the 'role' of "social media influencers" in product promotion, nor is there a requirement that they mention their relationship with a supplier.

I admit that I hear alarm bells whenever I run across a posting by someone who runs a Utube channel, and has a history of reviewing a particular company's products (in an obviously favourable light).
In many internet forums, especially in the automotive sector, there are very active brand influencers at work. It becomes increasingly difficult to separate actual user reviews from those that are placed by influencers.

Do you have an opinion? Should "influencers be banned? Can we count on them to "self-declare" a business relationship? How do we call it out?
Appreciate your thoughts.
Glen

[Imme (Jon)]

I believe in such a small community in which newbies rely on sites such as this for advice that anyone with a company affiliation should by identifying themselves.....if they don’t then they should be ’outted’ by someone who’s knows about it.

Personally I’d be pretty pissed if I purchased a mount/camera/scope worth thousands based on someone’s recommendation just to find out that the person recommending it was little more than a ‘salesman’

[multiweb (Marc)]

I think if you've been part of this astro community long enough you know exactly who's who and make up your mind when reading a product review or equipment post. If you don't then you ask and other people who know more will chime in. Buyer beware, that's no different than any other kind of purchase anywhere really. You do your research and decide. There's no need to ban anybody IMHO. Nanny state comes to mind.

[Imme (Jon)]

Originally Posted by multiweb

I think if you've been part of this astro community long enough you know exactly who's who and make up your mind when reading a product review or equipment post. If you don't then you ask and other people who know more will chime in. Buyer beware, that's no different than any other kind of purchase anywhere really. You do your research and decide. There's no need to ban anybody IMHO. Nanny state comes to mind.

The thing is Mark that someone who is new to the hobby has no idea who is who....and they're the ones who soak up information like it's gospel.

To everyone else reading this post can you please advise me whether you are aware if Mark is affiliated with any business. He may be trying to stop this to aid his current and/or future business

......I just think it is easier if people declare themselves so it is transparent rather than people having to guess or ask the question

[glend (Glen)]

Originally Posted by multiweb

I think if you've been part of this astro community long enough you know exactly who's who and make up your mind when reading a product review or equipment post. If you don't then you ask and other people who know more will chime in. Buyer beware, that's no different than any other kind of purchase anywhere really. You do your research and decide. There's no need to ban anybody IMHO. Nanny state comes to mind.

Marc, when I said banned, i was referring more to specifically mentioning it in the TOS, rather than trying to police it directly. Vendor behaviour is covered in the TOS, the behaviour of their 'agent' is not. Proving a business relationship is problematic, but shadow promotion can result in more hits for the vendor, which can translate into increased sales traffic.

[multiweb (Marc)]

Originally Posted by Imme

The thing is Mark that someone who is new to the hobby has no idea who is who....and they're the ones who soak up information like it's gospel.

To everyone else reading this post can you please advise me whether you are aware if Mark is affiliated with any business. He may be trying to stop this to aid his current and/or future business

......I just think it is easier if people declare themselves so it is transparent rather than people having to guess or ask the question

I'm an undercover French operative advocating for reinstating green hues in astronomical pictures.

[JimsShed (Jim)]

In this astronomy forum I don't think we need "influence" protection from our naive selves.

I do like it when a vendor declares themselves. Actually helps their cause.

The YouTube channels are an important source of information and I fully support their existence and cross referencing in forum posts. I can tell if they're crap.

[JA]

Good question Glen. Personally I don't mind whether individuals do or don't declare their vested interests or affiliations when making a recommendation or offering an opinion.

It's always a case of buyer beware so I will always gather as much information as possible. In an important purchase I would always tend to be guided initially by the product's specifications, objective tests and then my own hands on test if possible. Ultimately we are the judges of what we'll accept and in the absence of real information and experience we can always take a punt and resell if unhappy

Best
JA

[Imme (Jon)]

Originally Posted by multiweb

I'm an undercover French operative advocating for reinstating green hues in astronomical pictures.

Codename 'Bayer matrix' I guess?

[Shark6]

I am curious as to who these alleged influencers are....

[RB (Andrew)]

Originally Posted by glend

In my reading of the TOS, admittedly written long ago, there is no recognition of the 'role' of "social media influencers" in product promotion.

Has Casey Neistat bought a telescope?

[Atmos (Colin)]

Originally Posted by Shark6

I am curious as to who these alleged influencers are....

I can think of one who, from memory, is a Celestron Ambassador but isn't paid or officially affiliated with Celestron so it is a bit of a grey area.

[glend (Glen)]

Originally Posted by Shark6

I am curious as to who these alleged influencers are....

I have not made any personal allegations, nor mentioned brands. There are several way that influencers are paid, and from my research none seem to be direct employees of the organisation they serve. Typically they are paid based on traffic they generate. Take the example of an Instagram influencer, they can make significant amounts of money from a single post, provided that they are promoting a client's product and have enough followers to generate the traffic.
They would likely be paid out of the advertising or marketing budgets of the suppliers, and they would not be directly employed. They may be paid through internet/digital media third parties who are working for a large supplier, so always appearing to be non-aligned.
Digitial media companies may provide the structure for these services across multiple product categories and vendors, making a fee for the service and paying the downstream influencer.

[RB (Andrew)]

Originally Posted by glend

I have not made any personal allegations, nor mentioned brands. There are several way that influencers are paid, and from my research none seem to be direct employees of the organisation they serve. Typically they are paid based on traffic they generate. Take the example of an Instagram influencer, they can make significant amounts of money from a single post, provided that they are promoting a client's product and have enough followers to generate the traffic.
They would likely be paid out of the advertising or marketing budgets of the suppliers, and they would not be directly employed. They may be paid through internet/digital media third parties who are working for a large supplier, so always appearing to be non-aligned.
Digitial media companies may provide the structure for these services across multiple product categories and vendors, making a fee for the service and paying the downstream influencer.

Well Glen, unless you have specific details that IIS Admin and Mods should be made aware of, you're basically just speculating that IIS is influenced in such a way.
Just in case members aren't aware of it, Mike does make certain exceptions to the TOS rules at his own personal discretion and he lets the mods know in advance.

Glen, you can send us or Mike a PM with specific details of your investigations pertaining directly to such activity on IIS.

Generalising or making vague insinuations about such matters does not serve to improve the community here on IIS.

RB