Tell you what: Take 30 minutes away from trashing a site you've clearly not bothered to check out, and go check it out. They might even write well thought out reviews.doesn't change the impression that the model is slimy. Follow the money, and it smells like one too. It's exactly what my non-tech-saavy friends and family would search for.
New york times wirecutter productreview behind full#
The fact that their entire frontpage is full of ~30 articles that all use headlines that are equivalent to the most popular Google searches is another layer of distaste for me. That allows them to maximize their revenue even more, because the reader gets a choice of positively reviewed items to choose from without having to go to another website. So they still wouldn't be likely to be very tough on any of the items, unless they just throw a bad one in as chum. One of the dozen+ items they test would probably work out pretty well. best earbuds, best soho router, best rechargeable AAs, etc. They're not going after individual items in their reviews, they're comparing several items at once. The entire model rests on the fact that they need to write enough positive reviews to support the business. Neutral revenue streams are certainly difficult under an ad-based model as well, but in this case writing a negative review will 100% negatively affect revenue.
Wouldn't it provide an incentive to write strong positive reviews, in order to spur sales of the products on 3rd party sites to provide revenue? Certainly they wouldn't be a majority contrarian reviewer. It doesn't strike me as particularly biased unless they're rating the retailers. They get their cuts through Amazon and other retailers, not the manufacturers. Maybe I'm missing something, but this screams as a potential source of biased reviews of consumer electronics. Wirecutter’s business model primarily relies on making money through affiliates, getting a cut of any sales generation that comes as a result of their review.
0 kommentar(er)
