Photography Youtubers have a history of questionable behavior
Photography influencers have been a hot topic on my blog for years, and I have heavily criticized the largest channel, because there was so much questionable behavior in my opinion. While it may not be the only channel worthy of criticism, it's definitely a good example to highlight what's wrong with Youtube and how influencers collaborate with brands. This "A7 III Review" by Tony Northrup from March 2018 is exactly what Marques Brownlee was talking about in his video. Tony was invited by Sony to Las Vegas (seemingly all expenses paid) to "review" a camera he just got into his hands right there. This is what I deduce Marques doesn't believe it's ethical, but it seems normal practice among photography gear reviewers.
This is what Tony said about the camera in the video:
“This is a camera, that will really change things. We have a 2000 Dollars entry level camera that does 10 fps. It’s got dual memory cards, so it can be used like a professional wedding camera. The eye AF allows you to not have to move the focusing point all around manually, and the silent shutter is absolutely perfect to shoot silent ceremonies and stuff. This is gonna revolutionize wedding and portrait photography.”
Well, it turned out this camera did not revolutionize anything. It was an incremental update of a mid-range camera, basically a cost down version of the more expensive and feature rich A7R III.
Read my whole post: Tony Northrup and the problematic Sony A7 III "review">>
Read my whole post: Tony Northrup and the problematic Sony A7 III "review">>
Ken Wheeler, the most biased photography gear reviewer on Youtube in my opinion, a guy who made thousands of videos praising Fujifilm, has posted a video 3 years ago complaining that Fujifilm did not want to do him a favor allocating a lens that was in shortage at that time. The lens in question was the GF 32-64mm f/4 for the GFX system.
In the video at the 4:44 mark he says:
"And obviously Fujifilm doesn't need to give a crap about me, I mean, you know, they are not indebted to me for anything I'm giving them you know, an enormous amount of free tech support, making them millions [fake cough] and millions [fake cough] and millions [fake cough] and millions and millions of dollars."
At 6:12 he goes on:
"What Fujifilm should've done. This woman that called me today from Fujifilm, she should've said: I will send an email to corporate so and so, and we are gonna try and find you that lens."
He then goes on and explains that he expected Fuji to preferentially allocate the lens to him with the next shipment, and labels the woman from Fuji who talked to him on the phone as "obnoxiously rude". This is a clear case of an influencer who is by his own choice promoting Fuji in thousands of videos (and smearing other brands like Nikon, Sony and Canon in the processes), expecting favors for his shilling.
Two days later Ken made a follow-up video with a more positive tone after receiving some criticism by his followers, and after he heard that people inside Fuji watched his complaint video. I think the main issue here is that he didn't want to burn bridges with Fuji. In the video he still tries to rationalize his actions, and kind of half-admits that he was wrong, but still bemoans the woman he talked with. He still says he hoped they'd help him allocate the lens to him, and then all this would be of no issue.
A day after he made another video and said some guy from Fujifilm called him, and said he will send him a "GFX hat". He would not disclose the content of the call, but it seems that Fuji apologized and Ken was very happy about it. This shows how difficult it is for brands to deal with these demanding influencers who think they are entitled to favors and freebies just because they have an audience to which they shill their brand.
Read my whole post: The Downfall of The Angry Photographer>>
In conclusion
These are just two examples that came to mind. Of course most of these dealings between photography brands and influencers happen behind closed curtains, we the viewers seldom actually get to know or see what is really happening. For example, why did a former Sony Ambassador and Youtuber delete his video after he left the program and criticized the brand? We will never know. But I'm glad that someone like Marques Brownlee has a clear ethics standard which is easy for his followers to understand, and builds trust with his community. I hope other Youtubers follow. When it comes to photography Youtubers, though, one can hardly argue that there are any standards, but that's a story for a different post.
These are just two examples that came to mind. Of course most of these dealings between photography brands and influencers happen behind closed curtains, we the viewers seldom actually get to know or see what is really happening. For example, why did a former Sony Ambassador and Youtuber delete his video after he left the program and criticized the brand? We will never know. But I'm glad that someone like Marques Brownlee has a clear ethics standard which is easy for his followers to understand, and builds trust with his community. I hope other Youtubers follow. When it comes to photography Youtubers, though, one can hardly argue that there are any standards, but that's a story for a different post.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please comment on topic. Spam, off-topic stuff, and hate speech will be removed.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.