EA Paying for YouTube Love ?

Published by

Click here to post a comment for EA Paying for YouTube Love ? on our message forum
#4749764
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/173/173479.jpg
But even in the TV advertisements, you don't know whether or not the product being advertised even works.
On proper ads we all learn quickly to put our mental guards up against the hype because we know that it's meant to hype up the product in question... or I hope most of us do so anyway. That and not mentioning that a paid sponsored ad is an ad is illegal in some places, like USA I think and probably EU too.
Can anyone tell me what is so bad with this? It is business, marketing, media presence... the more your product is talked about or showed - the better for you. I fail to see anything extraordinary bad in it.
What lucidus said.
They hide the fact that the vids are sponsored or place gag orders on them.
Paying for advertisement is fine. Paying for advertisement and saying (in this case it's by omission but using a medium that's meant to be very... 'homey' is getting really close to straight up denial if not mentioned, IMO) that the opinion spoken by actors is not paid ad but their real opinion is not because that's just outright lies.
#4749775
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/196/196284.jpg
Reviews have never been completely trust worthy. This isn't something that just recently started. This has been going on as long as the internet has.... Every major corporation has done it at one time or another, including Intel and NVidia. Look at reviews on Amazon and Newegg..... Hell, look at PCMag reviews....
On proper ads we all learn quickly to put our mental guards up against the hype because we know that it's meant to hype up the product in question... or I hope most of us do so anyway. That and not mentioning that a paid sponsored ad is an ad is illegal in some places, like USA I think and probably EU too.
PCMag should finally come out and admit that Symantec pays them for favorable reviews of Norton products.....but there's nothing in their articles admitting such.
#4749799
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/195/195639.jpg
That's no different from the commercials we see on TV in the US. Companies are permitted to market products that they know for a fact don't work or don't work as described and make them sound like they're the greatest products ever released. This is actually standard practice in the US and is openly promoted....
Its different for advertisement on the tv and paid review because 1. you know money are involved. 2. they did not hide the fact that they are contracted to do it on the tv ad. 3. For review site on youtube, that is getting shady and illegal when they decided it is okay to hide that they are under contract to promote said stuff.
#4749802
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/173/173479.jpg
PCMag should finally come out and admit that Symantec pays them for favorable reviews of Norton products.....but there's nothing in their articles admitting such.
If that's the case then they are scumbags.
#4749808
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/228/228574.jpg
Its different for advertisement on the tv and paid review because 1. you know money are involved.
Money is ALWAYS involved.
#4749810
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/173/173479.jpg
Money is ALWAYS involved.
So are you being paid to post on this site? :P
#4749826
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/196/196284.jpg
If that's the case then they are scumbags.
They do admit that a Norton employee was involved in the creation of one aspect of their "testing method".....which invalidates their testing methodology as employees from a company who's products you supposedly test and provide an "unbiased" review of should never be involved in developing testing methods.
My boot time test, devised years ago with some help from a Norton engineer, measures the time elapsed between the start of the boot process (as reported by Windows) and the time when the system is ready to use.
Source: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2424575,00.asp 2 of the most commonly recommended antivirus/security solutions from PCMag, are Norton and Webroot, both of which were found to have exceptionally high false positive rates by AV-Comparatives. Norton was found to have an exceptionally low detection rate by AV-Comparatives, being beaten by even Windows Defender. Of course, Norton claims that file detection tests aren't a viable measure of an antivirus/security solution's ability to protect a system......which should make all of their customers wonder about the product.
#4749828
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/119/119677.jpg
And then they complain about piracy...
#4749832
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/199/199386.jpg
I think YouTube should shut down. I'm a hardliner. Plenty of websites and companies should embed their own videos directly, showing videos related to them. The tech for creating your own website and embedding videos has been around for decades, so YouTube is kinda irrelevant. Think about it.
#4749834
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/196/196284.jpg
Then where would everyone else post stupid videos?
#4749836
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/239/239932.jpg
Then where would everyone else post stupid videos?
Cat videos are NOT stupid 😛uke2:
#4749846
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/196/196284.jpg
Cat videos are NOT stupid 😛uke2:
Depends on what the cat is doing.....
#4749910
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/173/173479.jpg
Depends on what the cat is doing.....
Kobra cat will sweep your legs! :wanker:
#4749940
data/avatar/default/avatar31.webp
Bad: watching a YouTube channel review that you thought was objective, when in reality it's a paid advertisement from EA. There are people who started out legitimately reviewing products, now you don't know if they're being paid to say exactly what a company wants you to hear. THAT IS NOT GOOD. Let's review: watching an advertisement that you know is an advertisement = cool. watching a review of a game, reviewer has been bribed and paid not to admit it = not cool. We should be seeing: "The following is a paid advertisement by EA"
Are you kidding? Youtube? Objective Review?! Don't make me laugh! Youtube is worth only for cute kitten videos. Other videos (non-science) - 99.9% are just total crap. If anyone relies on YouTube for good reviews or source of info... well, I can only say that it is very sad. Should I start relying on "Gadget X vs Caliber .50" reviews?... they're so good and objective... they show how badly gadgets are made...
#4750156
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/115/115462.jpg
The only thing that slightly bothers me is that they wanted to "hide" this... other than that, I'm not surprised, most videos/reviews are either positive or negative advertisements, it has been like this since forever.
#4750172
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/115/115616.jpg
The only thing that slightly bothers me is that they wanted to "hide" this... other than that, I'm not surprised, most videos/reviews are either positive or negative advertisements, it has been like this since forever.
I'd rather understand it as that Youtubers didn't care, and EA-Youtubers agreement details were secret. It's NDA as any other. If you sign NDA, it doesn't lift all the laws and responsibilities.
#4750217
data/avatar/default/avatar17.webp
So that's why cracks exists, they force us to try the game before buying, by which i mean trying cracked version, i always say, Developers by which i mean Developing companies aren't worth fair game of consumers.
#4750235
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/199/199386.jpg
Then where would everyone else post stupid videos?
Why do videos need to be streamed at all? Why not offer a description and a download? The quality of YouTube is beyond funny, it really is the poorest example of RGB and bitrate out there. TV has channels...why not post a video at a site which is specific to the audience? I mean - YouTube is kindalike a dumping ground for pathetic and sad videos

Previous Page