My take on this is no they don’t. As long as they are truthful they only report on the quality of the product and prevent many people of spending a lot of money from losing it by buying something that doesn’t work.
If your product is shit your company does not deserve to be shielded from the backlash, this is the core of (classic) capitalism after all.
You must log in or register to comment.
Reviewers aren’t (or really shouldn’t be) beholden to companies, the whole point of a review is to give an opinion on a product, and the less input into that the company has the happier I will be. At the same time, some reviewers do hold a lot of sway, and can strongly influence people’s opinions with their reviews, so there might be an argument that a negative review can impact sales. However, so what? If the reviewer is bringing up their concerns or issues with a product, that is the whole point of what they do, and their viewers will want to hear about those things (working on the assumption that people will tend to watch reviewers they think align with their own views), and would be pretty upset if they weren’t warned about the downsides prior to purchasing.
There are a lot of reasons in here about how bad reviews kill products, but I didn’t see mentioned how exceptional a product has to be to garner GOOD reviews. A business will get to the point of almost harassing you to leave a good review. In my experience people leave reviews when they are unhappy, and say nothing when they are satisfied.
An example of this was Teenage Engineering K.O. II EP-133 sampler. A bunch got released with broken fader knobs and the wave of bad reviews and complaints flooded in, drowning out the actual pros and cons of the device. T.E. isn’t exactly floundering from it, but in another circumstance that could have killed the product (which I find to be phenomenal).
A plurality of negative reviews kill those companies that make bad products. And that’s a good thing. Wheat from the proverbial chaff as it were.
Comcast is a great example.
Honest reviews prevent bad reviews from others and returns. They should be embraced for what they are and a blueprint for what you’ve done well and where there is room for improvement.
Good. Make better products and support them after you made them.
If your company sounds scammy and you say it can do things it can’t, I hope your company burns before you burn customers who believed your lies
prevent many people of
This actually stuck out more than the comma splices.
Reviewer opinions on both Humane and Fisker are pretty consistently negative so this isn’t some mean YouTuber with an axe to grind situation.
The products are bad and people shouldn’t waste their hard earned money and time on them. Venture Capital firms may lose money, but that comes with the territory. Not every venture is a win.
What are we supposed to do? Give bad products good reviews so the poor little million dollar startup doesn’t get its feelings hurt?
If we were talking about dishonest, malicious reviews, I’d understand.
That’s not the case here though, not only is Marques’ review honest, multiple reviewers reached the same conclusion as him.Maybe try making a good product next time.
Is this about the Humane thing?
In his video, he mentions the Humane review - but also the Fisker car review which was equally scathing.
Just watched the whole video (and the car one afterwards). I think if MKBHD is being disingenuous, as one of the most influential reviewers, he would’ve been the first to be called out (based on the facts he’d got wrong in the video instead of conspiracies.) that didn’t happen so I’d say it’s safe to assume the problem stems from the product itself, at least in these cases. Anyway, great watch.
Absolutely. LinusTechTips had to issue a formal apology for dumb stuff someone had said about another reviewer, but in the unveiling of all their shit, it was revealed that they had mis-reviewed a gaming mouse.
The mouse was in prototype stages, and the LTT member that reviewed it did not take the plastic off the gliders and said that the mouse was horrible and dragged a lot. The company then floundered and had to sell the prototype and rights at auction at the next CES.
The worst part is that they assumed that a competent reviewer had the fucking common-ass sense to remove the plastic that… you know… comes on almost every gaming mouse, so they didn’t even dispute the issue.
Ah LTT, the “go fast and break things” of the tech review world.
I hope they do I bought a nothing phone 1 after reading promises of how they wouldn’t move to another phone until they had everything right etc.
Not only did they not keep it but after launching the 2 almost right after this claim they actively sabotaged the 1 the camera got worse the battery got way worse and thing is now super unstable and I really believe it’s on purpose as custom roms make the phone great.
The company is dead to me but I am kinda enjoying seeing the phone 2 users now complain because they are starting to get the same treatment now.
I’m dead set in my belief that this happens to every phone, and I’m sad to see the nothing phone is going the same way.
I had a Motorola X that was suddenly dying in less than 5 hours and one day I couldn’t even connect to my service. I looked and found that an update had uninstalled the phone’s modem. Not even a factory reset helped.
After rooting and finding the correct package for my modem, the phone ran flawlessly using Resurrection Remix (I miss that ROM), proving that the battery and modem were indeed fine.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/watch?v=QztFpzKsdeA
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I’m legitimately shocked there are people defending the garbage Humane AI Pin, which leads me to think a lot of the criticism levied at MKBHD is made up by a PR firm working for the company. I already hated the god damn thing because it gave you hallucinations on demand. But watching his review and The Verge’s review, its an overpriced gimmick that has a camera on all the time, and does nothing a smartphone can’t already do. They didn’t ask for bad reviews, they made a godawful MV–sorry, shitty product. Now they’re gonna reap the whirlwind.
A smartphone is just better in every way imaginable. I also don’t have my phone hallucinating all the time either, so I have that going for me.
I’m also gonna say the obvious quiet part out loud: He’s black and they’re targeting him first. Not The Verge, not Engadget, him.
I’d think a bigger difference is he’s a single YouTuber, the Verge and Engadget are actual companies with $ and man power.
They seem to think he is single at least…
No, he’s mentioned he has a team. He may be the final say on a product, but there’s people under him shaping what he gets.
I respect MKB for the hustle and his success, but he’s not a one man band.
Very simple.
Shitty products and bad/greedy/sociopathic management kill companies. And guess what? They’re shitty companies. They should die.
So I am not a fan of the reviewer pictured for the same reason I don’t like Doug Demuro’s car reviews.
From what I see, they have very limited time with a product, and can tend to not understand it fully, and then add into their reviews tiny nitpicks that many people wouldn’t even notice on their own.
It seems like they look for something to complain about and that then goes viral as if it’s a huge issue with the product.
While I don’t think it necessarily “kills” a company or product, I think their reach is oversized for the low quality review they do.
There’s a YouTuber who does gun reviews that I watch occasionally, and I wish other reviewers were like him. He pays for them with his own money, and Patreon money. If the gun is very popular he’ll do a short video and label it initial thoughts, and then eventually he’ll do a review after he’s shot 1000s of rounds with it over weeks and months. If he notices something wrong, he’ll look online to see if anyone else has similar issues and mention things like “I have an original model, which has problem X, manufacturer Y has since addressed this, and fixed it, and the community agrees it is no longer an issue. So look out for the first year release of X if you want to buy.” Overall he does an excellent job of separating his opinions from selling points.
Yes I tend to like this but I wasn’t able to put it into words as well as you weee - someone who doesn’t just spout off their experience as if it’s the only one, but takes the time to understand if this is something that is only affecting them or if it’s the specific unit they have, etc.
Techmoan is the same way when he reviews a product and I’ve always respected his reviews a lot more because of it.
For phones, there is Smoorez, if he still does, what he was doing a couple of years ago.
This guy literally says he spends a week or two with each vehicle while demoing, same as car and driver does for their reviews. He’s not looking at it for 5 seconds then picking it apart.
Even if he does spend 2 weeks with them, he frequently talks about stuff he is out of his depth on.
Just because he had access to interesting cars doesn’t make him a good car reviewer. If I want to see what the inside of a Lamborghini Miura looks like, sure he’s probably got a video of it.
If I want to know anything about a modern car that I may purchase though, he’s one of the last people I’d look to.
And just because he’s a normal person and says he’s not a professional does not make him a bad reviewer. He’s a normal person who notices normal things we would all find annoying. I pick out things similar to how he views things so his views are definitely useful. You can latch on to anyone you want, but having a real person look at an object and find faults we all would hate is exactly the right person to review something.
What?
Doug Demuro goes over every single weird little feature in the cars he covers. What does he not fully understand? But I also don’t conder his videos true reviews, I’m not in the market for 90% of the cars he shows, and I doubt many people are. It’s entertainment, and for car enthusiasts it’s fun to see a breakdown of a cool car.
As for MKBHD, I would say his smartphone reviews are some of the only ones worth watching on YT. He uses them for weeks as his main device and I’ve never seen him shy away from speaking his mind. Again, he’s an enthusiast and his nitpicks are probably irrelevant to a lot of users. But that’s exactly why I like his reviews, it’s a different perspective that I wouldn’t get anywhere else. Low quality? My brother MKBHD puts more effort into his b-roll shots than most channel put into the entire review.
I feel like I shouldn’t have to say this but reviewing anything boils down to “how many things can I find wrong about this product”. If I want all the gushy features and crap I would just watch the press release.
Doug Demuro has some different style of videos. He has his old school vids where he shows off interesting aspects of mostly older videos and now he’s also doing reviews of new cars. The second type is the one I’m referring to.
Doug did a review of a VW ID.4 in which he complained about how the infotainment system is “slow” and that got blown so out of proportion I do believe that it affected their sales significantly.
With MKBHD I agree with what you’re saying, and low quality was the wrong way to describe them. It’s more that they are noticing little things that the general population would mostly not notice or care about but then that becomes the whole story of the device.
It’s not that I think it doesn’t have a place, it’s just that these enthusiasts opinions get blasted wide and far by other media and it’s frequently not taken in the context in which the video is created. They (other media) will latch onto a nitpick and proclaim the product to be doomed.
It’s one thing to go looking for an enthusiast deep dive, and it’s another to amplify these complaints to the level that is done currently.
My point is basically that I think there is some validity that enthusiast reviews are able to affect the market too much. Not that these people shouldn’t make their videos, just they should not be taken that seriously and amplified by other media.
It’s not the content creators fault, but I do think it affects sales more significantly than it should.
It’s a reviewers job to be honest; if the product is bad I appreciate them calling it out, no matter how small an issue is.
I’m not going to defend YouTubers that don’t know I exist, and honestly I don’t watch Doug that often anymore. But from what I can see even the new vehicles he reviews are niche and/or expensive as hell. The VW ID4 starts at $40k for only ~200 miles of range. Compared to iqoniq, mach-e, or the new Chevy EVs it’s just a bad value all around. Also, I genuinely think a snappy infotainment system is a necessity. I won’t even consider a Tesla since it doesn’t support carplay or android auto. Do the majority of people hold that same opinion? Hell no, but I still think it’s absolutely relevant to a review. Now, I could totally see your point of a review killing a company/product if the reviewer has a larger reach than the company. An example would be LTT’s “review” of a super niche waterblock from billet labs. But if you think one review tanked the sales of a car from one of largest conglomerate of car manufacturers then you’re woefully overestimating the reach of YouTube videos and online media.
Now humane is a bit of a different story, and the negative reviews are certainly not helping sales. But MKBHD’s video is a very honest explanation of his experience, and it shows how many things were promised but not delivered. If they didn’t want bad reviews, they should have delayed the product until it was ready.
You have a valid point that clickbait articles do more harm than the actual reviews, but again, I don’t think it’s the reviewer’s fault or problem. Most of these sites are full of other clickbait nonsense, and just like NYpost I’m not going to them for factual information. If the general public are being swayed by these articles, I don’t think they were seriously in the market for whatever product is being dragged through the mud. Most of what MKBHD and Doug reviews are premium products with premium prices, in my opinion they should scrutinized accordingly.
I think bad products fail on their own and the reviews and media accelerate that failure. I’m not saying it’s a good thing, but blaming the media for a company’s bad decisions solves nothing.
FYI, Id.4 gets much closer to 300 miles of range. VW has always underestimated their efficiency, even on gas/diesel cars imo.
The reason I don’t think I’m overestimating Doug’s reach is that I was constantly seeing people parroting and citing his review after it came out. All anyone seemed to talk about was how bad the infotainment system was. While the infotainment system was kinda a dog until you make some settings changes, it was in no sense bad enough to warrant the kind of hysterics that people were having over it. I’ve definitely seen worse systems in other cars I’ve driven - especially considering CarPlay and android auto function perfectly fine and speedy. The car is not above criticism, but it seemed a lot of people were taking his word as gospel and/or becoming obsessed with a fairly minor detail.
I’ve never heard of humane before this and I wasn’t talking about that review specifically, but I’ve seen reviews before (I believe they were phone reviews, but it’s been a while) from MKBHD where I felt some minor thing was being blown out of proportion or where he didn’t seem to understand that some people may appreciate something being done a different way than he expected and therefore I quit watching his videos because they didn’t appeal to me.
In my opinion, both reviewers I’ve mentioned here tend to have some hot takes that garner way too much traction, and I can understand that frustration if you’ve created a product that they then trash. I’m not saying that it’s their intention to do so, but I do think it can be irresponsible to present things the way they do - especially since these reviews remain live much longer than a software cycle might.
VW has always underestimated their efficiency, even on gas/diesel cars imo
Maybe they underestimate the MPG rating but did you forget the massive diesel scandal? They lied about the efficiency of their engine and exhaust system to the point where they had software counteracting testing procedures.
Do you own an id4 or something? Like why do you care about the public perception of a company? People who actually are in the market for a new car are bound to test drive it first, and they can decide if the infotainment system is good enough for themselves. My point is: lots of talk from people who are nowhere near buying any car let alone a $40k+ id4. If I purely listened to the internet’s opinion I wouldn’t own half the shit I enjoy on a daily basis.
MKBHD and his team are by no means perfect, watch their podcast and you’ll quickly see the gaps in their knowledge. If you haven’t watched him in awhile I can understand you position a lot better. He’s come a long way in the past few years, and while I never found his reviews to be bad, his current work is top quality. For instance: a lot of his smartphone reviews revolve around the camera performance. At the end of the year he does a big comparison between a bunch of phones. Between that and the yearly smartphone awards, I think he does a fine job at summarizing the software improvements over the first year of ownership.
Of course every big content creator has a legion of annoying fans, again LTT almost killed a 2 man company from a single botched video. I’m not here to defend any community, just that these two reviewers that you seem to have a gripe with do better work than 90% of others.
I’ve owned several VW’s including diesels and yes, currently an id.4. I am a fan of VW cars, but I don’t really care about the perception of the company - I like the cars but it’s really more that I like my local dealership and find their cars superior to others at the same price point.
The reason I brought this specific incident up was because it’s easier to remember, but I find Doug fairly frequently was misinformed about things. It was fine when he was just showing off stuff he thought was interesting, but once he started reviewing cars currently for sale, it really jumped out to me that he’d just be ranting about stuff he just didn’t understand and was not a reliable reviewer. The only reason I kept tolerating him for a while was that he has access to interesting old cars I wouldn’t be able to see otherwise, but as far as the new stuff, he was unqualified imo.
I do agree with your point that most people would do test drives, etc, but this came at a time when these cars were not available on lots and many people began canceling their orders based on the perception of the car which seemed to be widely based on Doug’s review. I just happened to luck into one being at my dealer, and was able to test drive it, but at the time they were very hard to find and most peoples orders had not yet been delivered. It definitely hindered sales and was totally blown out of proportion.
That said, VW should have handled the response to it better - they basically just ignored it, and that’s on them.
I also remember the diesel scandal quite well because I was just about to sell my diesel beetle when the story broke and the price plummeted.
Thankfully between my dealer and VWoA they made it right, so it didn’t turn me off from them completely. What became known the following year was that it was not just VW, but almost the entire automotive industry engaging in similar tactics, but that was not nearly as widely reported.
As far as MKBHD, that makes sense, and it could be just an outdated opinion I have of them based on much older reviews.
It’s not bad reviews that kill companies, it’s bad products.
Generally speaking true. However some companies manage to get the hype train going which leads to people buying bad products. As a result, a company can still survive by selling bad headphones or bad water bottles. Bad reviews can balance things a bit, but if their marketing budget is as big as the defense budget of a small country, there’s not much a bad review can do.
Obviously, this doesn’t really apply to small startups with only pennies to spend. Their marketing consists of sending samples to reviewers, and if that gamble backfires, for any reason, things aren’t going to look very good for the company. Maybe the product was bad, and they had it coming. Maybe the product was ok, but the review sample was broken. Who knows.
@Eyedust@lemmy.world has an example of a bad review killing a potentially good product.
“Bad review” as wrong review.
this is a perfect example of why @PhAzE@lemmy.ca should get posts downvoted and account banned of most major platforms (dont actually do this but see what i did there?)
Yes, my comment assumes the reviewers are being genuine. However, in a lot of cases, those people can be weeded out and themselves fail over time because they, too, are peddling bad products (reviews).
