3 ms·

How so?

wmf 4y ago
In general when a company is controlling what you can say, they're doing it to make their product look better. Publications that aspire to actual journalism shouldn't participate in that.
- sirtoffski 4y ago
  Overall I do agree with you, it does make reporting seem very “sponsored“ and disingenuous. However, an argument could me made that “We have the first look at the new technology. We’re obviously very limited at what we can legally say or show, but nevertheless here’s a very limited sneak peak” is still genuine journalism. They’ve reported as much as they could and did not hide obvious Intel participation, etc. The video was very underwhelming and cringey imho. But to informed audience it probably wasn’t misleading or false - that’s how I felt after watching it.
- jamesgeck0 4y ago
  LTT is generally pretty transparent about any restrictions companies want to put on previews/reviews. Intel’s conditions are spelled out multiple times in the video, and LTT aired a longer discussion with these folks on their podcast that contained a fair amount of Intel criticism. This is 100% Intel trying to set the correct level of expectations for what will be a extremely competitively priced GPU with major compatibility issues at launch.
  - jeroenhd 4y ago
    They're transparent enough to be trustworthy for reviews, but not they're not really transparent about the influence a company might have. They will do videos for a manufacturer reviewing a product with a given set of rules, but don't always disclose their rules. They argue that their viewers know that if "showcase" is in the title they're being paid for the product (though they often omit "showcase" from their clickbait titles before adding them back later) but their custom definitions for content types are hardly an industry standard, let alone well known to the viewers. They do disclose what companies send them what, at least. They're better than most YouTube reviews in that sense. Their current content is always entertainment first, sales second, reliable reviews third. They're a media company, it's the way they do business. I have no idea what they were trying to do in this video other than show off some cherry picked samples. I'd much rather have seen a quick table of stats next to the unscripted interview during their podcast to be honest, but that doesn't bring in any cash.
- mardifoufs 4y ago
  Id agree but LTT has been very critical of intel and at some point intel was literally the butt of the joke on the channel for how abysmal their performance and thermals were. Even the previous video right before this one on the Arc GPUs was basically a huge call out, which was obviously taken seriously by intel as they have explicitly addressed/fixed the issues that were raised in that video. This is basically the best case scenario you can get as a customer, as far as commercial relationships go. It's so much more constructive for everyone involved to allow intel to also "respond" to the criticism by showing how they improved things. ( It also goes to show the type of influence LTT can have when they bother to send actual engineers to showcase and prove those improvements. That's something they probably wouldnt have bothered with if they knew LTT was just going to parrot the corporate line if they showered him with enough money.)

How so?

wmf 4y ago

In general when a company is controlling what you can say, they're doing it to make their product look better. Publications that aspire to actual journalism shouldn't participate in that.

sirtoffski 4y ago
Overall I do agree with you, it does make reporting seem very “sponsored“ and disingenuous. However, an argument could me made that “We have the first look at the new technology. We’re obviously very limited at what we can legally say or show, but nevertheless here’s a very limited sneak peak” is still genuine journalism. They’ve reported as much as they could and did not hide obvious Intel participation, etc. The video was very underwhelming and cringey imho. But to informed audience it probably wasn’t misleading or false - that’s how I felt after watching it.
jamesgeck0 4y ago
LTT is generally pretty transparent about any restrictions companies want to put on previews/reviews. Intel’s conditions are spelled out multiple times in the video, and LTT aired a longer discussion with these folks on their podcast that contained a fair amount of Intel criticism. This is 100% Intel trying to set the correct level of expectations for what will be a extremely competitively priced GPU with major compatibility issues at launch.
- jeroenhd 4y ago
  They're transparent enough to be trustworthy for reviews, but not they're not really transparent about the influence a company might have. They will do videos for a manufacturer reviewing a product with a given set of rules, but don't always disclose their rules. They argue that their viewers know that if "showcase" is in the title they're being paid for the product (though they often omit "showcase" from their clickbait titles before adding them back later) but their custom definitions for content types are hardly an industry standard, let alone well known to the viewers. They do disclose what companies send them what, at least. They're better than most YouTube reviews in that sense. Their current content is always entertainment first, sales second, reliable reviews third. They're a media company, it's the way they do business. I have no idea what they were trying to do in this video other than show off some cherry picked samples. I'd much rather have seen a quick table of stats next to the unscripted interview during their podcast to be honest, but that doesn't bring in any cash.
mardifoufs 4y ago
Id agree but LTT has been very critical of intel and at some point intel was literally the butt of the joke on the channel for how abysmal their performance and thermals were. Even the previous video right before this one on the Arc GPUs was basically a huge call out, which was obviously taken seriously by intel as they have explicitly addressed/fixed the issues that were raised in that video. This is basically the best case scenario you can get as a customer, as far as commercial relationships go. It's so much more constructive for everyone involved to allow intel to also "respond" to the criticism by showing how they improved things. ( It also goes to show the type of influence LTT can have when they bother to send actual engineers to showcase and prove those improvements. That's something they probably wouldnt have bothered with if they knew LTT was just going to parrot the corporate line if they showered him with enough money.)