Every review has a bias but when does it cross the line?

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
MV Atlanta
Junior MemberPosts: 41
Like?
Every review has a bias but when does it cross the line?
7 months ago

There is tons of information written about the auto review industry. How the messaging is controlled and only those who comply get early access to new products. Even though DP review had disagreed with my earlier post that this type of arrangements exist, I have hard time believing that a manufacturer would provide an early access to new cameras to those with a track record of explicitly pointing out negatives and wanted to share some specifics. These are rules of life and business whether it is explicit or not - these rules govern relationships between the manufacturers, sites and their parent companies. I am not saying that these are always explicit arrangements but there must be some understanding of this that plays into when the reviews come out or how they are worded.

Here are few examples that:

Robin Wong states that he works for olympus but he is not influenced by this. please see his images and I challenge you to replicate these: http://robinwong.blogspot.com.es/2014/02/olympus-om-d-e-m10-review-part-2-high.html

Although the kit includes an uglier and much bigger version of 14-42mm lens, number of sites use the much better looking and smaller pancake lens in reviews and refer to it as a kit lens. The camera looks so much better and sophisticated with the pancake lens but the actual kit lens makes the whole set up look very cheap. The pancake lens is often used by reviewers when making a case for the size advantages, etc. but hard to believe that they would not know this was not the kit lens considering that the reviews came out after the release of the camera. Plus, how did they all got this set up for the reviews unless the manufacturer provided them with it and are they not smart enough to know the difference? It is expected for the manufacturer to provide misleading marketing images (with a fine print that says that the kit lens is actually different) but it is just seems dishonest for review sites to do the same. Here are few examples (DPreview used the right kit lens for its review):

Would not a reasonable person start taking all the statements and findings from these reviews with a grain of salt? Why would they be biased in one aspect of the review but not others?

I am also amazed how many of these reviews simply sound like a recital of the marketing language and specs from the same script without very little actual testing; and how few (if any) tech savvy commenters notice or point these out?

I realize it is futile to argue about the review findings among so many passionate tech savvy folks; just like one cannot argue about the religion or politics. We like to think of ourselves as objective but we are not (including myself who was proved factually wrong in many of my other comments). It is a common problem even among scientific community (my day job) because of so many facts come in contrast what we believe and then we filter and adjust the facts to suit our preconceived notions. We only see what we want to see.

ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow