6 ms·

While that's true for the possibility of conflict of interests, do you have any proof/data showing they've actually flexed that conflict for their own gain? Und

While that's true for the possibility of conflict of interests, do you have any proof/data showing they've actually flexed that conflict for their own gain? Undermining the trust in the authority of the aggregate values is a huge issue I'm sure they'd much rather avoid as much as possible in order to extract as much value out of the platform as possible. I know a bunch of folks recently complained that they were trying to manipulate the scores for Captain Marvel, but that was also under a huge organized attack to torpedo the audience scores even before it was released for viewing. So they had a legitimate reason to go in and try to "fix" the scores. Whether the new values is "accurate" is of course up to debate (for philosophical values of "accurate") but most of the criticisms I've seen have had reasonable explanations behind them.

skinnymuch 8y ago
The conflict of ownership also doesn’t work since Captain Marvel’s studio, Disney-Fox, are the biggest competitors to Rotten Tomatoes’s AT&T/Warner and Comcast/NBC Universal owners.
SkyBelow 8y ago
When avoiding a conflict of interest matters, normally there isn't a standard of requiring evidence of any impropriety for behavior to be deemed inappropriate. Merely not avoiding the conflict of interest is enough. Granted, for something like civil lawsuit or criminal charges this alone isn't enough and evidence is required, but for matters such as violating professional ethics not disclosing a conflict of interest is enough. Like I said, with movies reviews it does not matter (at least in my opinion). The issue I have is that I don't think such a carefree attitude can be taken when it comes to rating the truthfulness or applicability of news. As for any examples of actions, I do not have access to the sort of data to determine if any such actions were taken, nor do I have the resources nor desire necessary to even begin investigating. Also, especially in relation to recent events that touch on a more political scale, I rather not deal with the issue of evidence being trusted based on the extent it confirms existing views (a cognitive bias common to humanity that isn't particularly worse in this case, but which I have seen result in flame wars on other forums).
- Spellman 8y ago
  Perfectly reasonable. Thanks

skinnymuch 8y ago

The conflict of ownership also doesn’t work since Captain Marvel’s studio, Disney-Fox, are the biggest competitors to Rotten Tomatoes’s AT&T/Warner and Comcast/NBC Universal owners.

SkyBelow 8y ago

When avoiding a conflict of interest matters, normally there isn't a standard of requiring evidence of any impropriety for behavior to be deemed inappropriate. Merely not avoiding the conflict of interest is enough. Granted, for something like civil lawsuit or criminal charges this alone isn't enough and evidence is required, but for matters such as violating professional ethics not disclosing a conflict of interest is enough. Like I said, with movies reviews it does not matter (at least in my opinion). The issue I have is that I don't think such a carefree attitude can be taken when it comes to rating the truthfulness or applicability of news. As for any examples of actions, I do not have access to the sort of data to determine if any such actions were taken, nor do I have the resources nor desire necessary to even begin investigating. Also, especially in relation to recent events that touch on a more political scale, I rather not deal with the issue of evidence being trusted based on the extent it confirms existing views (a cognitive bias common to humanity that isn't particularly worse in this case, but which I have seen result in flame wars on other forums).

Spellman 8y ago
Perfectly reasonable. Thanks