Key point is that when reviewers are sent on trips and or receive gear that creates at a minimum of a perceived conflict of interest. Professional organizations will have a code of ethnics which either prevents or addresses this directly, but some sales organizations may not have this level of integrity. All the reviewer has to do is declare the conflict…note that they are compensated via travel and or gear and then the viewers can decide how much faith they put in the review. It’s not about whether you stay good things or bad…people need to realize that itself doesn’t make any perceived or real bias disappear. As you noted some reviewers do this…even on the S9 review, but some didn’t and that is the issue..too much hype and too little disclosure.. On a practical basis for me the reviews I trust the most are ones where then reviewers purchase the goods (or it’s of small value or simply a short term loan), but that doesn’t mean other reviews are untrustworthy (just a potential for bias), but how many camera reviewers have you seen where someone clearly says..’I don’t recommend this camera”. If they did I expect many won’t get more to review. Might be a few, but rare.

Мне очень нравятся ваши обзоры на KZfaq. Я вам полность доверяю и пользуюсь сведеньями из ваших обзоров при выборе техники.

What I find very annoying about youtube reviewers, is that there is a LOT talk about video, I NEVER do videos and most Photographers never do videos or only do video rarely, so products are pushed too much towards video use and less to Still Photography.

Well done, I agree with you totally on every point. What you say makes total sense.

Gerald is salty he didn't get a trip. I've watched MANY reviews on the S9. Every one I see is very, very critical. They are actually very improved than the past.

I've never seen so many people butt hurt about not going to Japan. These creators or experts are worried about cheap full frame cameras invading their space and take more of their market share because the camera is 'pure junk' as explained by many commentors and "why do they need open gate on such a cheap camera?!". Channel Micro Four Nerds gave a good positive review of the camera and even mentioned the overheating and short record times. Looks like she fell in love with the camera. Too many camera snobs this time around.

I think Gerald’s point wasn’t exactly your point.. The problem with the s9 is that a part of Panasonic’s KZfaq community has been integrated into to Panasonic’s marketing strategy. As a client of Panasonic products, I know I am going to be “bombarded” by their advertising & marketing. But reviewers in KZfaq are a buffer. Their value is that with their experience and knowledge they are going to help us (the amateurs) to make better choices and spend more wisely our money. That’s why we subscribe to them, but through their links etc… But Panasonic, in a terrible marketing decision, has integrated an important group of them into their strategy to create hype. I understand those creators, mostly young kids, when they accepted the honey trap… but no way we (consumers) can consider them genuine anymore. I know I wont and I am going to be sceptical to most of their reviews in future. Specially after seeing the disconnect in between the hype and the reality of the s9. And I think this is different from being a “fan boy” of a brand. A fan boy is in a hype but Panasonic has used them to create a hype. And I am sad because some of these channels ( micro 4/3 nerds for example) are some of my favourites. I have to say also that some comments have been disgusting. Criticism has to be civil and never personal, and I still believe that they give a lot to the community. By they way, I really like this channel, and I do believe your reviews are genuine

How do you feel about reviews made by “Ambassadors?”

Thank you. The drama showed most of all how Gerald disregards his viewer's ability to parse information into their own conclusions.

I think the challenge is optics of these sort of trips, the inundation of videos all at once, the clamber for attention, the sometimes exaggerated titles to get clicks and the majority of reviews felt a lot of the flaws of the S9 was over looked and information was left out. Flaws tuned to quirks. I was shocked how much LUTS was mentioned as if that was the entire purpose of the camera. I wonder if this LUTS thing is going to be turned into a money grab or since you can upload LUTS to the app, what is going to stop people from uploading bought LUTS for free for everyone avoiding the cost of buying them? Lots of questions regarding integrity has been brought to the forefront. I think it is a wake up call and I don't think content creator should take it as an attack, but more of opportunity to look at how things are presented and how the optics may look to the general public and viewers.

😂all reviews are biased, based on several reasons, but mostly photographers are individuals and therefore subjective to feelings. Some like the mother....

15 min recording on the Panasonic s9 is crap!

I disagree with this view of the reviews in question and the free product distributed by manufacturers etc .

Bored - unsubscribed prefer to see your cat