The Microsoft Laptop Scandal: PR Backpedaling Never Works
I told myself that I’d steer clear of this issue, because there’s a war raging on the web right now, and it’s more or less academic. So, with nothing to really discuss at a pragmatic level (as I see it), I had decided to avoid all the theory-based banter this time around.
I lied.
What I’m talking about is the news that Microsoft and its PR firm Edelman has been sending out loaded, high-end Acer Ferrari 1000 laptops pre-loaded with Windows Vista and Office 2007 to prominent bloggers (many of which are Apple/Mac blogs) in an attempt to buy favorable coverage and generate buzz. At first, the laptops were gifts — meaning they didn’t have to be returned — but now it appears MS has reversed its stance, calling the laptops loaners and asking for them to be returned (more on this later).
As I see it, what Edelman has done is technically unethical. They are sending out incredibly high-zoot machines to bloggers as gifts and “suggesting” the bloggers could, I dunno, maybe blog about their experience with Vista and Office 2007 if they’re so inclined. Or maybe they won’t — no worries, no obligation, but hey, enjoy the laptop nonetheless give us back our machine when you’re done.
Where is the line between this and overt bribery? Got me. Near as I can tell, they’re damn close to the same thing. But I really don’t understand why some are screaming bloody murder about this, because it happens all the time; we just don’t get to see it firsthand. But whatever. My beef comes from another angle.
Robert Scoble thinks what MS is doing is awesome, provided bloggers disclose, and Joel Spolsky says Robert’s logic is faulty. If you look at the comments at Scoble’s place, in particular, you’ll find a very interesting and diverse discussion, with opinions ranging from one side of the debate to the other.
I agree with Joel: no matter how much you “disclose,” human nature is such that you won’t be able to be 100% impartial if and when you choose to write about Vista. The influence is just too great. You’ll feel, on some level, that Microsoft did you quite a large favor, and even if you’re not an Microsoft fan, you’re already buttered: you’re more likely to say fuzzy things in reciprocity than not. And because this caveat of human nature is true, the credibility of all bloggers suffers, because once paid love buzz is evident, you can no longer trust any blogger that raves about a product. I’ve noticed this before, and so has Spolsky, who sums up his feelings thusly:
These gifts reduce the public trust in blogs. Recently I wrote a nice article, for example, about Sonos. I bought the system with my own money, liked it, thought it had some great UI that programmers should pay attention to. Most people understood the article to be what it was: a positive review about a good product, influenced only by the fact that the product was good. But some people thought it was just a paid advertisement.
Microsoft and Edelman are trying to influence the influencers, and that’s nothing new. I don’t understand the anger over this aspect of the story, because there is no altrusim in the marking/buzz game: get the consumer’s attention at all costs and force engagement. This sort of shit happens all the time, it just rarely gets bubbled up to the surface like this issue has. If people think this isn’t reality, they need to wake up.
But boy, it’s ugly when the plumbing shows, isn’t it?
However, the bigger gaffe here is Microsoft’s sudden PR reversal stunt on whether the laptops are keepers or not. First they were, then, once this story broke across the tech web and everyone and his brother knew that Microsoft was nuzzling bloggers with free “gifts,” everyone at Edelman freaked and gently asked for the laptops back (or for them to be “given away,” but regardless, the option of the blogger keeping it is now blindingly absent).
Sorry Edelman. You can’t feign desire for pseudo-objectivity retroactively by indian-giving a laptop to an A-list blogger. You just compound your problems, not fix them. As you’re learning right now.
Technorati Tags: windows, vista, office+2007, microsoft, bloggers, ferarri, laptops
How does this run?
If I’d bought a product and then reviewed it, I’d be more inclined to give a mediocre product a little boost, and be less harsh, because I have used my critical faculties in buying the product in the first place and wouldn’t want to be thought lacking in the research department. A bad product reflects on my buying choice prowess – or lack of.
A gift – well I can be as harsh as I like, I have no stake in any purchasing decision. There’s also the psychology of “So they think they’ve got a product that’ll satisfy ME then… we’ll see about that! Mwwwaaaahaaahaaa…”
That’s just me – everyone’s different. It does become reasonably obvious over time which blogs are reliable, so I don’t have a problem with the freebies – disclosure is mandatory though.
Good call to not steer clear of this by the way.
I read the story this morning and couldn’t believe what I was reading … You make the point very clear … I wonder how much it cost them to pull this stunt !!!
And oh well … good press … bad press … it’s all good press … well unless everyone wrote all bad press … but isn’t that “good press” … I guess we will soon find out !!!
Cheers
IAWMD
http://www.iawmd.org
Hi Jeff,
Actually it looks like the recall of the laptops was a knee jerk reaction. It looks like the official line is now that we can keep the laptops.
Seriously though, you know my blog I’m generally pretty pro Microsoft but I can say when something is wrong. Take a look at my first review and let me know what you think.
http://notgartner.wordpress.com/2006/12/29/ferrari-1000-the-windows-experience-index/
Its looking like as the Internet is waking up after Christmas that some more sensible view points are coming out that this is just par for the course when it comes to launching a new product and that you need to take the good reviews with the bad – even if you seed the kit.
Some of the reviews from the Mac Bloggers that got laptops have been pretty scathing.
Mitch –
I don’t know if my post articulated my point well enough, but I *know* this sort of thing happens. I get that. I guess my issue is that when the palm-greasing bubbles up and is obvious to pretty much anyone who looks at it, it’s pretty ugly. And once bloggers start going crazy, well, perception becomes reality and no amount of reason — correct or not — will quell the voices.
I tried not to become another “me too” blog voice. I do think that what happens when something is a “gift” borders on unethical, but that’s just me: I don’t think there’s a right answer here. Joel Spolsky and I are on the same page: once you’re influenced by a $2K favor, you feel, either consciously or unconsciously, some obligation, some goodwill, to reciprocate. And to that end, the machinery isn’t much different from bribery.
What I hope I conveyed in my post is that the PR backpedaling is the bigger mistake, as I see things. First the laptops are keepers, then loaners, now, according to you, keepers again?
Regardless, here we go again with “perception is reality,” right? The first public wave said, “Hey, keep these laptops.” The second said, “Not so fast,” and that REALLY got the blogs chriping.
Now it’s back to, “Just kidding — keep them”? Seems to be too late to do a triple-take.
Thanks for your post, Mitch. Your comments are insightful, as always.
Everyone should be honest, they are only pissed because they didn’t get one. Microsoft and the PR firm did the right thing, good for them. The ethical issue is with the bloggers, if they do not disclose the gift or whatever it is then shame on them and stop reading their biased bullshet. If I was an active blogger (I tried it once and it lasted a couple weeks, just not dedicated that way) and I received on I would either disclose it and keep it or let everyone know I was ebaying it and donating the $$ to Jolie’s kids or something.
There is no ethical dilema giving someone something so they can evaluate it. After all you are asking them to spend their time reviewing it they should get something out of it. Every stock analyst discloses their holdings when they rate stocks do the same here and move on to something that matters.
Never mind the bad press from the original giveaway; the reversal is a Stupid PR Move for the Ages. They will never live this down.
What’s the difference if you are sent a laptop by MS expecting a review as opposed to when you ask for one? If MS had not sent this, at some point you would have mailed Edelmann asking for copies of Vista for review. Is there any guarantee that the review then would not have been skewed? I have been a tech journo and received many such ‘gifts’. At all times, we did the reviews and locked up the hardware never using it again except when referencing it. It’s possible, you know. Don’t get all righteous… it sounds hypocritical.
I’m confused about this discussion about ethics. If no one knows people are bribed to review a product, it’s fine. If it’s done in the open, then it’s not? Isn’t that a double standard? Shouldn’t it be the opposite?
What I find sillier is to send an MS product to Apple users. It’s a known fact that Apple nuts are just that (I mean about the product), and passionately despise MS. IMO, it was just spending good money after bad by sending an MS product to an Apple user. Even the mindset is different. It just shows how self-centered and out of touch MS is.
dom12 — They sent the units to Apple/Mac bloggers because the good ones *don’t* despise MS at all. I’m a Mac guy, and several times on my site I’ve raved about Office 2007 and said that Vista will dominate the market.
Fact is, a lot of of the tech “sneezers” (influencers) are Mac people right now. MS knows that if they want to get the viral word spreading, they need to crack some of these Mac blogs, plain and simple. That’s why they’re sending out high-end, pre-configured, pre-everything laptops: so that the user experience with Vista and Office 2007 is as good as it can be.
I enjoted the artilce, but watch the term “Indian Giver” It really is an off term
SJ — if 100% political correctness is your thing, this might not be the blog for you.
MS sent a gift that was worth 10 times the cost of their product. Why didn’t they just send out copies of Vista? Why include hardware at all?
Well, it’s common to send out review copies to magazines, so why not to bloggers? The reason they sent hardware is probably because they can’t expect a blogger to have access to the same amount of (good) hardware as a magazine, and besides Vista requires new hardware so if the blogger used it on older hardware and wrote a bad review they wouldn’t get what they were after.
The fuzz seems to be about whether these actually are review copies, or if the bloggers can keep them or whatnot. So now they can’t keep them, but they are allowed to give them away. What the bloggers would earn the most on would probably be giving it away to one of the readers in some sort of competition – it would lead to more attention, bigger audience and because of the bigger audience more influence. This would be best for Microsoft too – they’d get a “buddy” with more influence. Ironically, those who’d lose on that is the audience (excepting the lucky winner) because they can’t trust the blogger’s objectivity any more.
TDS — that’s *exactly* what I wonder as well. MS is seeking buzz about Vista and Office 2007 at the end of the day, right? MS also knows that Vista doesn’t run as well on older hardware, so they partnered with AMD to give the whole thing a packaged-deal look and sent a *guaranteed experience* to bloggers, not just software.
Too bad they didn’t send you one.
raincoaster et al, they will live this down in about 10 seconds. The blogosphereites will remember this for a while, but it is going to make them switchers? Likely not. Is the average Joe Visa down at Best Buy, or even a corporate IT manager getting ready to overhaul their systems, going to reference this story to his sales agent and demand answers? Microsoft has employed much worse tactics, like the Vista EULA, OEM bundling, software patenting, and all sorts of other things that should have people up in arms, yet, nothing, or nearly so. So, no. Nobody but academics will care and this will likely have a negligible affect in the market, IMHO.
(Clarification : “them” above in “making them switchers” refers to Windows-faithful consumers switching to Linux/Apple out of disgust and moral outrage over marketing tactics they read about, not the bloggers themselves.)