Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [REVIEW] Monster Turbine Pro Copper In-Ear Monitors
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[REVIEW] Monster Turbine Pro Copper In-Ear Monitors - Page 3

post #31 of 43
4/26/10 at 9:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeonWho View Post

Before I begin this review, I'd just like to thank the folks at Monster for their dedication and generosity in putting together the review program that gave me this opportunity.
Honestly speaking, it is very straightforward that this quote mentions that Leon received his earphones through the review program. Well I'm pretty sure me and other readers did get that idea.

I don't know why are bashing Leon over this matter.
Reply
post #32 of 43
4/26/10 at 9:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeFFz View Post
Honestly speaking, it is very straightforward that this quote mentions that Leon received his earphones through the review program. Well I'm pretty sure me and other readers did get that idea.

I don't know why are bashing Leon over this matter.
I'm gonna play Devil's Advocate here and say that I can see where The Monkey is coming from. The statement you quoted is very ambiguous and could mean anything from Monster sent you a sample to review and send back to them to Monster sending the headphones at a discount to the actual case that Monster sent out these earphones to reviewers to review and keep (as far as I know). See what I mean? The statement says that there was some sort of review program in place, not the details of said program, which, I believe, is the main point of contention.

I'm not bashing Leon at all and I hope this post isn't seen that way (I think his review was excellent by the way) but I believe that The Monkey is right in saying that it is a bit unclear in terms of FTC full disclosure guidelines.
Reply
post #33 of 43
4/26/10 at 10:08pm
I received some advice from The Monkey via PM and agree with his views on this issue. I decided afterward to edit the first paragraph of my "quick impressions" post.
Reply
post #34 of 43
4/26/10 at 10:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGame21x View Post
I'm gonna play Devil's Advocate here and say that I can see where The Monkey is coming from. The statement you quoted is very ambiguous and could mean anything from Monster sent you a sample to review and send back to them to Monster sending the headphones at a discount to the actual case that Monster sent out these earphones to reviewers to review and keep (as far as I know). See what I mean? The statement says that there was some sort of review program in place, not the details of said program, which, I believe, is the main point of contention.

I'm not bashing Leon at all and I hope this post isn't seen that way (I think his review was excellent by the way) but I believe that The Monkey is right in saying that it is a bit unclear in terms of FCC full disclosure guidelines.
Precisely. Although it's the FTC we're worried about in this context. Especially when someone has received something for free and then assigns a "value" rating to it. Full disclosure just makes good sense IMO. And this isn't bashing (c'mon folks). In fact, disclosure protects the reviewer as well as the consumer.

We have too many shills here. I don't believe OP is one of them. But I do think this is a great opportunity to show folks how to properly write a review. When it's such an easy thing to do, I am frankly at a loss why people don't do it. But it's a community. Mine is only one opinion.
Reply
post #35 of 43
4/26/10 at 10:19pm
Whoops. Guess I was typing a bit too fast there, ha ha. Updated my post with the right organization.
Reply
post #36 of 43
4/26/10 at 10:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Monkey View Post
Precisely. Although it's the FTC we're worried about in this context. Especially when someone has received something for free and then assigns a "value" rating to it. Full disclosure just makes good sense IMO. And this isn't bashing (c'mon folks). In fact, disclosure protects the reviewer as well as the consumer.

We have too many shills here. I don't believe OP is one of them. But I do think this is a great opportunity to show folks how to properly write a review. When it's such an easy thing to do, I am frankly at a loss why people don't do it. But it's a community. Mine is only one opinion.
ok i get it now about the value rating and the FTC. Thought about the review program, there was only this http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f38/te...phones-475757/ program no? But well maybe the OP should explain it in more detail.

Sorry if i offended you in any way
Reply
post #37 of 43
4/26/10 at 11:07pm
It might but that I'm tired or just being stupid right now but what is FTC? I can see both sides but it is true that there have been shills acting like members and posting favorable impressions on products. However if I did not know about the Monster review program I might not know what the mention towards Monster would be since it is not very clear. I however do not believe the OP is one of those shills but it helps put into perspective when reading the review.

the solution to this? The OP should edit his first post and say that Monster gave the coppers for free in exchange for this review. That way we can get on with this and to the actual review.
Reply
post #38 of 43
4/26/10 at 11:15pm
The FTC is the Federal Trade Commission.
Reply
post #39 of 43
4/26/10 at 11:17pm
FTC is the Federal Trade Commission, which is the federal agency tasked with, among other things, consumer protection, truth in advertising, etc. (It also shares concurrent jurisdiction with DOJ regarding antitrust matters.) Some interesting reading here (well, to me at least):

http://ftc.gov/os/2009/10/091005revi...mentguides.pdf

In particular, this example, while not directly on point, hits pretty close to home concerning reviews on this site:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Example
Example 7: A college student who has earned a reputation as a video game expert
maintains a personal weblog or “blog” where he posts entries about his gaming
experiences. Readers of his blog frequently seek his opinions about video game hardware
and software. As it has done in the past, the manufacturer of a newly released video game
system sends the student a free copy of the system and asks him to write about it on his
blog. He tests the new gaming system and writes a favorable review. Because his review is
disseminated via a form of consumer-generated media in which his relationship to the
advertiser is not inherently obvious, readers are unlikely to know that he has received the
video game system free of charge in exchange for his review of the product, and given the
value of the video game system, this fact likely would materially affect the credibility they
attach to his endorsement. Accordingly, the blogger should clearly and conspicuously
disclose that he received the gaming system free of charge. The manufacturer should
advise him at the time it provides the gaming system that this connection should be
disclosed, and it should have procedures in place to try to monitor his postings for
compliance.
People like Great Dane (and I'm sure many others) are sick of me going on about this, so I'll stop at this point. Just something to think about.
Reply
post #40 of 43
4/27/10 at 1:34am
^
deleted
Reply
post #41 of 43
4/27/10 at 7:38pm
Thread Starter 
Edited my review. I wasn't trying to offend anyone. I guess my wording was a little vague though.
Reply
post #42 of 43
4/27/10 at 8:05pm
LeonWho I also meant no offense and sorry if I came across as heavy-handed. But this place would be boring without some spirited debate.

I applaud you for writing what is, IMO, an excellent and exemplary review.
Reply
post #43 of 43
4/27/10 at 10:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Monkey View Post
LeonWho I also meant no offense and sorry if I came across as heavy-handed. But this place would be boring without some spirited debate.

I applaud you for writing what is, IMO, an excellent and exemplary review.
Hah, you think that was spirited? Pansy! J/K
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › [REVIEW] Monster Turbine Pro Copper In-Ear Monitors