Ironic: Free Vista PC Arrives Broken; Plus, The Last Word
Long Zheng, who seems very disheartened over this Windows Vista free PC blogger fiasco, posts about the new Velocity Micro Media Center that he was sent by the PR folks. The ironic thing: His arrived broken, with various internal components smashed around during the shipping process. Cables were disconnected, the hard drive had broken loose, and the circuit board was generally fried. After all the crap Long has to go through, he didn’t even get a computer out of it. Crazy.
I was talking with one of the bloggers who got a free laptop, and I feel like I shouldn’t save the way I feel for just IM conversations. Here’s the fact: There is nothing wrong with bloggers accepting free stuff. Major news organizations have policies about not accepting swag because reporters fight over this stuff, and because there are lots of dishonest people who literally trade products for positive reviews. That is their fault. The readers of this blog know who I am, and if they don’t trust me, they shouldn’t be reading here.
Any blogger who feels he could not accept a free laptop and remain impartial is a blogger I’m not interested in reading. If you don’t have enough confidence in your abilities as a journalist to not be blinded by a laptop, then why should I, or anyone else, have any confidence in you? You don’t have to accept the laptop, but if you don’t believe in yourself, then neither do I.
The worst part about this is that it is bringing out the worst elements of the online community. The haters, the flamers, the assholes who only comment when they are mad. These aren’t the regular readers of Scott Beale’s blog. These people don’t hang onto Long Zheng’s every witty remark. They don’t rely on Brandon LeBlanc, they’ve never heard of Mitch Denny, and they don’t care how hard Ed Bott works. They hang out at community sites, working on their post counts, fighting with the moderators, and only venture into the blogosphere when something pisses them off.
I hope none of my favorite bloggers wind up hanging it up because of this. To all of them, I say: Your readers, your colleagues, we are all with you. We are happy for you, or we are jealous of you, but we do not respect you any less, nor do we hate you. We have faith in you, and that will not be shook by this fiasco.
For the record: I would have taken the laptop, and I would have kept it. Not only that, but I am looking for the right people, because I am going to request one. I am a huge enthusiast in Windows Media Center, yet I can’t do any half-decent coverage of Vista Media Center because the damn thing doesn’t run right on my laptop. My HDTV tuners require a more powerful processor than the one I’ve got, and I don’t have half the money to afford a new PC right now. If I can get it working with a little help from a PR firm, damn right I’m going to go for it.
Plus, my wife could use her own machine 
If a blogger’s moral standards require him or her to refuse freebies in order to be certain that they remain impartial to the reviewed product, then that’s fine by me. If a blogger does accept freebies, fine be me as well - but I want the full disclosure. A nice quote from Joel Spolsky about this matter:
“Even if no quid-pro-quo is formally required, the gift creates a social obligation of reciprocity.”
Even if a blogger knows of him/herself that (s)he will remain unprejudiced, regardless of free products, a new reader of the person’s blog might not know it. This is why I also understand Joel’s “pissing in the well” remark.
Good luck requesting yours
Comment by Tim | January 1, 2007
[…] In a January 1, 2007, post at at Inside Microsoft headlined Ironic: Free Vista PC Arrives Broken; Plus, The Last Word, New York-based blogger Nathan Weinberg offers the most vehement defense I’ve seen to date of the 90 bloggers who received from Microsoft either a Velocity Micro Media Center PC or a $2,200 Acer Ferrari laptop with AMD chips and loaded with Windows Vista. […]
Pingback by The Technology Free Press » Blog Archive » Nathan Weinberg For The Defense | January 2, 2007
[…] …or so I thought. From InsideMicrosoft: […]
Pingback by Robert McLaws: Windows Vista Edition : Nathan Weinburg Ends the Blogger Laptop Debate... | January 2, 2007
Seriously, it’s worth every cent for you to buy a new rig to run Vista Media Center. A faster computer makes all the difference. Just buy a new laptop. You won’t be sorry. I know, I got a free Acer and I would say buy one if you don’t have one already.
Comment by Nathan Steyn | January 2, 2007
Tim: Fair enough, moral standards can be a good reason for an overall policy against accepting freebies, but I don’t accept the “impartiality” arguement. I don’t want to read anyone so easilly influenced. Disclosure is vital, too.
I don’t think a gift creates an obligation. A gift from my wife creates a social obligation, as does a gift from a buddy. But a gift from a PR firm? They know the score, just as I do. You may send me a hundred products, and I may bash all 100 of them.
Nathan: I want a proper Media Center rig. I love Media Center so much, I’m tempted to downgrade to Windows XP just to get it running again, and that would be a real shame. I just can’t afford one right now. I got married recently, and my budget is stretched to the limit. If some PR firm doesn’t loan me one, I’m not sure I’ll be able to properly test Vista Media Center for at least another year.
Comment by Nathan Weinberg | January 2, 2007
Well said, Nathan. I agree with you.
Comment by Patrick | January 2, 2007
Exellent post Nathan. I like your comments across the board.
Thanks.
Comment by Windows Observer | January 2, 2007
Even though I don’t think this issue is that important (as long as a blogger discloses receiving the item as a gift when reviewing it), I still feel my third paragraph counters your point.
Even if you know you’ll remain impartial, AND I know you’ll remain impartial, a new reader might not know, and I think nearly all new readers will be more inclined to say that you *might* not be imprtial, than there are who will say that you are.
I’m afraid things aren’t really black and white in this case. You can’t prove it, Joel can’t prove it, I can’t prove it. Receiving a free gift might not even alter your entire review, just slightly alter a single view on a single downside of a product - without even you being aware of it.
Still, as I said, I don’t really care all that much, as long as it being a gift is not kept a secret.
What’s funny, however, is JoelOnSoftware’s latest entry. It feels like he completely counters his original argument with it - and he even mentions his “no gift” policy at the bottom. I definitely feel he should refuse/return the book he mentions, merely because of his previous blog. It’s so completely obvious that I’m even wondering whether his latest entry might be linkbait.
Comment by Tim | January 2, 2007
“Even if no quid-pro-quo is formally required, the gift creates a social obligation of reciprocity.”
Yeeaaaahhh, I’m gonna have to disagree with this point. First, a gift, at any social level, *SHOULD NOT* create a social obligation. That is the point and enjoyment of giving a gift, in that I don’t expect anything in return. That also creates a horrible sort of logic; “Well, I did give her a diamond necklace, she should put out…”
I also happen to think that people that are worried about others falling prey to a “bribe” are themselves more than likely easily bought.
Comment by Shawn Oster | January 2, 2007
Tim: New readers tend to misunderstand the blogger. New readers are the ones causing grief for guys like Long, one of the best new bloggers of last year. It takes time for new readers to understand what is going on, and if a new reader has a problem, there’s no faster way for them to get to know me than if they complain. I’ve turned complainers into full-time readers, because once they listen, if I make my point well, they stay.
Shawn: I think a gift does create a social obligation, however the relationship as previously established defines the type of obligation. If my wife gives me a gift, I am obligated to appreciate it. If I know my wife is giving a gift beforehand, and know she expects one as well, I am obligated to give her one. If you, as a reader, give me a gift, I am obligated to acknowledge it and link to your blog, unless I have a million readers and don’t care about you. However, if a PR agency sends me a gift, I have no obligation to them at all. I may write about it, I may not, I may cover their stuff better in the future. PR flacks know that gestures like this are part of a larger picture of working together with the journalists, and while they may not guarantee coverage, they do guarantee the journalist will listen to what they have to say in the future.
Comment by Nathan Weinberg | January 3, 2007
“If my wife gives me a gift, I am obligated to appreciate it.”
LOL.
Comment by Patrick | January 3, 2007
You know, unless I like sleeping on the couch
Comment by Nathan Weinberg | January 3, 2007
Shawn, that quote was from Joel Spolsky. I’d have put it a little more careful - a gift might not actually create any social obligation (unless it’s from Nathan’s wife to Nathan), but it might create a very subtle feeling that this is actually the case.
If only psychology were an abstract science, explaining this would be much easier.
Nathan: The gift from a blogger to you, resulting in a link is, in my humble opinion, already in the grey area. Effectively, it results in a thing called advertising. If alliwantforxmasisapsp sent you a PSP, would you have linked to them? That is, after word got out that it was an attempt at viral marketing?
Even a gift resulting in better coverage is a bit strange to me. Why would you blog about anything else than you normally would, especially if a gift from a PR department would change it?
I guess I’m going to make this my last comment on this particular post - we just disagree, but I guess we all at least understand the points the others are making here.
Comment by Tim | January 3, 2007
I said a gift from a reader to me. Many of my readers have their own blogs, small blogs that exist for various reasons, usually not for profit, and I wouldn’t consider it a grey area to link to their blog after they did something nice for me. Now, if Engadget send me a cupcake with a big Engadget “E” on it, then I’d feel funny, absolutely.
As for the PR guys getting better coverage, they wouldn’t be guaranteed that, but the fact is, the more attention they pay to me, gifts or otherwise, means I am more likely to pay attention when they send me a press release. Palm invites me to their press conferences and under-NDA webcasts sometimes, and as a result, even though I wouldn’t normally cover Palm, I wind up doing it anyway.
When I was talking to the blogger who got the free Vista computer, I made this point that sums it up perfectly:
To me, a scoop is worth as much money as an envelope full of cash. The right scoop puts money in my pocket immediately with new visitors and lots of ad clicks, and long-term increases my regular revenue. There’s no difference between giving me a free laptop and letting me get a peek at a new technology, because sometimes that peek is worth more than the cost of the laptop!
Any journalist that tells you otherwise is a liar.
Comment by Nathan Weinberg | January 3, 2007
Just wanted to let you guys know that we are replacing any damaged system that was sent out by MS free of charge. We identified key screws that held the HDD cage together that were subpar. We have since replaced these screws in our chassis and apologize for any inconvenience.
Comment by Chris Morley | January 4, 2007