Sent from my C6506 using Tapatalk
They could have gone the route of directly approaching bloggers of interest or maybe even going to Youtube directly for advertisement. Hey, that's generally how it's done. Instead, this is a direct ploy to have VLoggers with big fanbases to essentially cash in on their integrity. To be perfectly blunt.. I can see this even backfiring if people wanted to organize against it and go on the offensive against VLoggers who take the "blank check."
..but as long as there are enough people to sit by and not see a problem, who knows? It's an underhanded move, though. The web is more and more content driven by the day and this is a thinly veiled play at sidestepping the more expensive route of getting professional endorsement. Let's just call a spade a spade.
So if I understand you correctly, approaching bloggers of interest directly is somehow morally accepted in your own Larry David everyone should know my rules mindset. So what Sony has done with youtuber Chris Smoove is somehow better morally in your mind. They go up to Chris Smoove get him to all of a sudden flex for the PS4 when previously he just played games not giving a fuck on what. This sudden change in behavior is not noted; his viewers one million viewers don't know he has some type of deal. They don't know he has some outside incentive. But they know he flexing for the PS4.
This backroom type of shit that Sony does is sanctified to you while MS approach is hellish since you're obviously trying to equate one (Sony) as the right way. MS says that if we are paying you, your viewers will know as a disclaimer is required in tag form. That's your hellish approach lefein, letting the public know who's paying you.
To be clear, I just don't give a fuck how they advertise. Both companies.
Are you going to acknowledged that?
I understand why you don't want to though. Soon as you do this thread becomes ridiculous. Fight that good fight.
By the way. I feel Chris Smoove's integrity is the same as its always been. That's a cool dude.
You're trying to come outta left field with an entirely different conversation. Not seeing the use for your unrelated block of text. You're welcome to enlighten me though.
They can't just spend billions of dollars on "everything" and make it work. They have to do it just like any other business, invest, get revenues, profits, on to the next project.
So going back to my post, my point was that, so far it doesn't show that the Xbox Division has any more cash reserves than SCE does. In fact, I would say that the SCE branch have spent more money and invested more into the gamers than the Xbox Division has.
..and no. I do not equate individuals being approached by marketing to push a product and a company waving a blank check at any and all Youtube based social media. One is targeted advertising and it happens in movies and VLogs a lot. Typically, there is plenty of visibility for it all the same (hence the rise of internet media at a time when traditional media is on the decline). The latter is a sad attempt to saturate any and all social media with a distorted presence of a product.
Sorry, True_Gamer, they're not the same. Not even close. An esoteric hashtag does not change a thing.
Okay - if talk is not about advertising, YouTube, monetising, promoting, don't post it.
I'll leave the recent posts above mine of what NOT to post.
Consider this 'an 'etiquette' guide for this thread.
Also, editing your post to add your "arguments" isn't allowed either.
3/10 for effort though.
Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk
Yep slimey as fuck. Itīs almost to easy to bash MS now lol.
Not long ago there was a story about employments in an MS office which only job were to wrote positive stuff about MS on reddit all day long. Then we had a massive ban wave on NeoGAF when all the astroturfs got called out. All that happened last year IIRC. Now this. Seems like MS still in panic mode and trying to fix their bad reputation with money. This can backfire hard.
What I was trying get at with that comment was that microsofts way to solve everything is with money. People don't realize what Microsofts main purpose in business is and how they make the most money. If you look at history, Microsoft has always been into markets that it can dominate and/or to create a monopoly, software wise and company wise. They aren't doing neither of these in the console markets and they are certainly not making a profit they want which is why you see shareholders with their thumbs down and CEO candidates with other shareholders wanting to pull out of this. Even though the money they are throwing at youtube is only 3$ per 1,000 views, there are quite a few review youtube names out there and this just adds more to the cost that they shouldn't be spending on. In my opinion of course, they shouldn't be wasting their money on this as they are trying to make a profit on a $499 console that is under it's competition in terms of specs, hardware etc etc.
But yeah, you can't have a go at a company for wanting to make money. They're *ALL* doing that. ;)
However, I don't like the concept of monopolies and this quest, to "control" everything. It's one thing to have fingers in a lot of pies, but I don't like it when they seem to try and kill competition.
These kinds of payments aren't inherently suspect in and of themselves. If the video makers disclosed that Microsoft was paying extra for these videos, and if they were allowed to say whatever they wanted in those videos, then the whole thing could be seen as merely an unorthodox way to increase exposure for the Xbox One on YouTube.
That's not the case, however. According to a leaked copy of the full legal agreement behind the promotion, video creators "may not say anything negative or disparaging about Machinima, Xbox One, or any of its Games" and must keep the details of the promotional agreement confidential in order to qualify for payment. In other words, to get the money, video makers have to speak positively (or at least neutrally) about the Xbox One, and they can't say they're being paid to do so.
The arrangement as described might go against the FTC's guidelines for the use of endorsements in advertising, which demand full disclosure when there is "a connection between the endorser and the seller of the advertised product that might materially affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement." The document offers a specific example of a video game blogger who gets a free game system that he later talks about on his blog. That blogger would need to disclose that gift, the FTC says, because his opinion is "disseminated via a form of consumer-generated media in which his relationship to the advertiser is not inherently obvious." That same reasoning would seem to apply to the opinions expressed by the video makers participating in this promotion. Neither Microsoft nor Machinima responded immediately to a request for comment on the matter, but we'll let you know if and when we hear from them.