Review Disclaimers

[whiskeylogged]

I ran a little long with this, and I admit that my original idea might have gotten lost along the way.  Instead of deleting it all, I'm just adding this little TL;DR on top and if you'd like you can sift through the rest of my post below.

 

TL;DR: Review disclaimers are nice to see, but they miss the mark if they say their review is unbiased anyway.  I don't think a reviewer gets to decide to not be influenced by something like a sample being provided for free.  Also, some of us do notice when a disclaimer isn't present.  Even if we know samples get sent to reviewers, it's nice to see them acknowledge it and allow us to choose whether it influenced them or not.

 

Long draft:

I'll start with an anecdote.

 

A buddy of mine asks me "Hey will you review my new app? It's 19.99 on the app store but here's a download code for it."It's fine, definitely rough around the edges, but it's useful and fun. What it's not is a $20 app. I'm like most app store shoppers and cringe when I see anything on the left side of the decimal point. My friend's app is not the first to do what it does, and those other apps are usually 99¢. If our friendship is solid and he chose me in hopes of an objective review, then I do my best to stay fair, noting the shortcomings and the inflated price, but I also pad the review with some sugar because it isn't that bad and I never actually spent $20 to get it. Money never left my wallet. I never agonized over the different options and decided it was best to reload my stupid iTunes account just to take a chance on the expensive app. Ignoring the friendship for a second, is it possible for me to be 100% objective in my review? No.

 

Enter the disclaimer.

 

*Disclaimer: this app was provided to me by the designer free of charge.*

 

Whew, weight off my chest...but now the review has a different light cast on it. The comments reflect that with "wow must be nice to get it for free-ninety-nine" and "wonder if the $20 coupon had anything to do with the score lmfao such bulls#!t."  Ugh, trolls... Seems like that little asterisk became the backdrop for the entire review.

 

Not that it's any use negotiating with internet terrorists, but I try my best to amend the review for the better.

 

*Disclaimer: this app was provided to me by the designer free of charge. This in no way, per my editorial policy, influenced the final outcome of this review.*

 

And.....I just added fuel to the flames.  Ok I'm done anecdote-ing.

 

Hopefully you can see the problem I have with some disclaimers. For my "amendment" I just copied part of the disclaimer from The Whiskey Wash. Kudos for disclaiming everything, but they don't get to decide that a free sample doesn't influence their review. Unfortunately it's subconscious. They can't tell themselves to ignore how much they paid or didn't pay for the whiskey; the best they can do is correct for the bias, but that's still "influence".

What am I saying, that it would be better they didn't disclaim anything? Some of my favorite blogs (The Whiskey Reviewer, Drinkhacker) don't have any conspicuous disclaimers above or below the review. Not to mention, some big names like Whiskey Advocate and Forbes don't overtly post any disclaimers either. So who cares?

 

The informed consumer.

 

Shoppers are (arguably) smarter than ever, and they pay attention to little things like perceived bias in a review. Even though a smart shopper is always a little skeptical, it's better that the reviewers come clean, admit where the sample's coming from, and let the reader decide for themselves how much that matters in the final outcome.

 

Here are just a few examples from sites that, in my opinion, get it right:

 

Adventures in Whiskey: Thanks to (insert name) for the sample. As always, all thoughts and opinions are my own.

 

Breaking Bourbon: The sample used for this review was provided at no cost courtesy of (insert distillery). We thank them for the sample and for allowing us to review it with no strings attached.

 

The Whiskey Jug: *DISCLOSURE: THE (INSERT NAME) SAMPLE WAS GRACIOUSLY SENT TO ME BY THE COMPANY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS REVIEW. THE VIEWS, OPINIONS, AND TASTING NOTES ARE 100% MY OWN.

 

I love sites that take the time to at least say something, including The Whiskey Wash. Informed consumers should know better anyway, but let's just call it a nice little bonus feature like when sites post the scoring legend along the side of the page. It's appreciated by those who are looking for it and harmlessly ignored by those who aren't.

 

This isn't my consumer economics dissertation (though it's almost long enough). These are a trail of thoughts on a forum post as I slowly get snowed in. Go ahead and throw spears at my grammar and long-windedness, but I'm happy to have a forum to speak my mind and perhaps gain some insight into how other people feel on the topic.

[GaryT]

I agree that folks who receive free samples should be disclosing that on their reviews (and I believe per the FTC Guidelines they SHOULD be citing when a product review is based on a free sample, or if their paid to do the review).  It is up to the reader to determine if they think the review was 'bought/sold' by that.  On (enter shameless plug) https://whiskeyapostle.com/ we put a disclaimer at the end of every review if the sample is provided (hell, sometimes I put that on when I get a sample from someone else just to acknowledge that).  

 

Does it influence my review?  

 

I'll admit that it does, but here's my disclaimer:  It doesn't influence my description of the nose/palate/finish.  Here's an example - I was sent a sample of Chicken Cock 10 yr Double Barrel Bourbon.  I sat down to taste it and make my notes before putting together the profile.  I didn't realize initially that it was a $250 bottle.  The whiskey I thought was highly ordinary - and I rated it as 'Average' (https://whiskeyapostle.com/2018/11/chicken-cock-10-year-old-double-barrel-bourbon/)

 

But if someone had given me a sample of that, my comments likely would have been a bit more cutting about "This isn't worth anything close to $250".  But hell - I think people who spend $400 on a bottle of BTAC are nuts, and have to remind myself that value is in the eye of the beholder.  So I tried to find something positive, and pointed out that if you're looking to buy this for the packaging, as a collectible - more power to you.  But it wouldn't make sense to buy as a sipper.

 

I felt bad and actually emailed the company who sent me the sample (but didn't offer to 'pull' the review - just to give him a heads up).  He was cool with it and said he respected an honest review.  In fact, their company has sent me other samples since.

 

So I'll admit that a free sample does have some influence on the commentary, although my goal is not to let that color the tasting notes.  When I read reviews, I usually look at several from different folks - looking for what they have in common.  And I check in here.  

 

[whiskeylogged]

12 minutes ago, GaryT said:

I agree that folks who receive free samples should be disclosing that on their reviews (and I believe per the FTC Guidelines they SHOULD be citing when a product review is based on a free sample, or if their paid to do the review).  It is up to the reader to determine if they think the review was 'bought/sold' by that.  On (enter shameless plug) https://whiskeyapostle.com/ we put a disclaimer at the end of every review if the sample is provided (hell, sometimes I put that on when I get a sample from someone else just to acknowledge that).  

 

Does it influence my review?  

 

I'll admit that it does, but here's my disclaimer:  It doesn't influence my description of the nose/palate/finish.  Here's an example - I was sent a sample of Chicken Cock 10 yr Double Barrel Bourbon.  I sat down to taste it and make my notes before putting together the profile.  I didn't realize initially that it was a $250 bottle.  The whiskey I thought was highly ordinary - and I rated it as 'Average' (https://whiskeyapostle.com/2018/11/chicken-cock-10-year-old-double-barrel-bourbon/)

 

But if someone had given me a sample of that, my comments likely would have been a bit more cutting about "This isn't worth anything close to $250".  But hell - I think people who spend $400 on a bottle of BTAC are nuts, and have to remind myself that value is in the eye of the beholder.  So I tried to find something positive, and pointed out that if you're looking to buy this for the packaging, as a collectible - more power to you.  But it wouldn't make sense to buy as a sipper.

 

I felt bad and actually emailed the company who sent me the sample (but didn't offer to 'pull' the review - just to give him a heads up).  He was cool with it and said he respected an honest review.  In fact, their company has sent me other samples since.

 

So I'll admit that a free sample does have some influence on the commentary, although my goal is not to let that color the tasting notes.  When I read reviews, I usually look at several from different folks - looking for what they have in common.  And I check in here.  

 

Coming from someone who actually receives and reviews samples, your thoughts on the matter are more than I could've asked for.  Thanks for the insightful reply Gary!

[Harry in WashDC]

Hhhhmm.  I get no samples to review and no compensation to encourage me to review, and I don't review anyway.  BUT, I do put up tasting notes from time to time.  I get no free samples or money for those, either.  I do it because I LIKE to do it.  I have on occasion included a disclaimer when, for example, I favorably. guiltlessly, and shamelessly mention AND ENDORSE a restaurant/bourbon/cooking utensil/BBQ grill brand I really like in order to reassure blog readers (presuming they believe me AND assuming people read my notes) that I have no ties to the object of my affection.  It also may be a function of the audience-type.  ALL my whiskey tasting notes have been posted here on SB, and I know that different palates taste different things but that over time I've learned whose tastes are like mine and whose aren't so I adjust when I read tasting notes of others and expect they do the same when reading mine.  In other words, the notes are not designed to encourage others to buy a particular whiskey but are intended to help them decide WHETHER they want to buy it.

 

There is that social media thingee which uses "influencers", some of whom are compensated based on followers, who ostensibly offer up seemingly benign posts that appear to be personal observations but are, in truth, scripted endorsements intended to get followers to buy the products/services being lauded.  It bothers me that the underlying relationships are not disclosed.  It's sort of like being invited to someone's house for dinner and, upon arriving, finding out that the real intention is to try to get me to buy cleaning products OR donate to the host's (but not necessarily my) favorite charity.