“Hey, buddy, want a free laptop?” Assuming it was being offered by a legitimate store, and not from the back of a nondescript pickup truck parked behind the local mall, a lot of people would presumably say, “well, duh, sure!” Or would they?
A question that’s buzzing ’round the blogosphere is whether it’s right for companies like AMD and Microsoft to give, and/or for bloggers to accept, such free-as-in-beer laptops with Vista installed. Presumably AMD hopes that the bloggers will like the hardware and write about it so that other people will hear how great it is and want AMD-based laptops too. Presumably Microsoft hopes that the bloggers will like Vista and write about it so that other people will hear how great it is and want Vista too.
Robert Scoble thinks it’s “an awesome idea.” On the flip side, Joel Spolsky thinks it’s “ethically indistinguishable from bribery” and points out some interesting consequences. Me, I just love a chance to test the value of a potential principle derived from analyzing one situation by seeing how well it extends to similar situations. After all, if two questions X and Y are of the same kind, though perhaps different in degree, then an answer that’s true for X should also be true for Y. (If cannonballs fall downward when released, so should watermelons.)
So consider book publishers:
When a new book comes out, the publisher routinely mails out free copies to as many potential reviewers as they can possibly think of. Depending on the book, you could think of it as dead-tree spam. Anyone who writes for any moderately relevant media outlet that some potential book purchaser might read is a target liable to be deluged. Yes, publishers give those $50 books away for free, to the point where I’ve long ago had to ask publishers to PLEASE STOP SENDING ME BOOKS WITHOUT ASKING FIRST (er, sorry, that caps lock key gets jammed sometimes). You can find books in print by Scoble, by Spolsky, and by me — and I’m sure all of our publishers routinely give away free copies of our new books to potential reviewers, hoping that making them available will increase the chances of getting a good review (as opposed to, say, no review at all if the potential reviewer misses the book entirely in the avalanche of new titles clamoring for their attention).
Sending free books to potential reviewers is a common practice. Readers seem to like it, because reading the buzz helps them to find out about new books that might interest them. On the other hand, if Spolsky is right, should we view “free books!” as an attempt to unfairly manipulate the buzz, an attempt which furthermore could cast a shadow of doubt on all reviews and reviewers, bloggers or otherwise?
So consider some variants of the question: Is it ethical for a vendor of
- books
- software
- hardware
- any product
to give away free products to potential reviewers, hoping to generate coverage?
Of course, the product costs vary; (most) laptops are more expensive than (most) books. But those are differences in degree, not differences in kind. If you think the price point matters, then what is the price boundary between “fair gift” and “bribery,” and why?
I won’t try to say what The Answer is; everyone needs to decide what their own answer will be, and act accordingly. I’m just observing that a consistent answer should apply well to all of these situations, including the “any product” general case.
What do you think, Robert and Joel?
Disclosure and disclaimers
Whereas the current tempest is about AMD-based machines for bloggers, I’m writing this on a free machine I was given (a) by a different vendor and (b) for a different reason. The machine I’m using now is an Intel quad-core machine that Intel gave me under the same “try it out, let us know what you think” conditions, because I’m a member of a Microsoft team whose software they presumably want to work well on Intel hardware. Both AMD and Intel routinely supply free machines for this purpose to various Microsoft teams. For the record, a few months ago AMD offered me a laptop just like the ones being talked about in the current tempest, but I turned it down because I already had an adequate laptop and had no use for another one.
Unlike the current tempest about machines given in hopes of garnering positive reviews, the machines supplied to internal Microsoft teams are presumably not given in hopes that we’ll blog about it (the vast majority of the recipients aren’t bloggers or other writers), but rather to make sure we develop and test our future software products on their hardware so that the software will be likely to work well on that hardware.
Extra question for bonus points: Is it ethical for a {book|software|hardware|other} vendor to give away free products to potential value-add third parties, hoping to encourage add-ons that work well with their core product?
I’m a Microsoft employee, but I don’t speak for Microsoft or even particularly care that it’s one of the names involved in the original question that I’m now generalizing. I’m interested in the question for its own sake, and I’m glad that Scoble and Joel have posted thoughtful comments on this topic.
P.S.: Like I said, Intel didn’t give me this machine because I’m a blogger. But since we’re already having this discussion, and because I am in fact a blogger, and I am at this very moment blogging, and I feel like saying that I do like this Intel quad-core machine, I’ll say so: I like it. Thanks, Intel. It’s a great, snappy machine. Oh, and its runs Vista just fine, and I like Vista too (well, except that Vista won’t run Civilization 4 well, but that’s another story…).
Sutter’s Mill 
I think the more importent question is will the gift manipulate the bloggers opinion in a way that will benifet the gift giver, thus creating a bribe. I would have to say that if a company where to give me a laptop that did not work I would write about it, and if a company gave me a laptop that worked I would write about it. So really it depends on the person, and how honorable they are.
(no name) is right there, laptops and books do differ by kind.
1. With respect to reviewers and bloggers, laptops are a special kind of product. The laptop itself can help the reviewer or blogger do her job. This creates a possible dependancy of the reviewer on the product, unlike in the case of for example a stereo or a book.
2. Unlike media such as books or movies, laptops or stereos usually have some value even if the review result is negative.
3. Laptops, as long as they work at all, are useful and valuable beyond the time required to review them. The same goes for any other product that is not ‘consumed’. You may reread a book, but you won’t read it over and over again. Music is between those extremes (but a CD is usually by far not as valueable as a laptop). That’s why review copies typically bear a "review copy, not for sale" marker.
4. I would normally expect a manufacturer to ask for a product to be given back after the review results are published. For books or other media, this would not be economical, as the reviewed, used media is of little value to the manufacturer. For products such as laptops, the value of a reviewed item can be expected to be about the same for the manufacturer as for the reviewer.
(no name)’s point was about the perceived value of a gift and the sense of obligation that valuable gifts create. Herb, you seem to be missing this point entirely.