Who is and Who isn't

[colotimber]

I did not realize that there were FOG members that post editorials about tools and that those same individuals were "underwritten" by Festool in any size shape or manner.  Coming from the pharmaceutical industry in a previous life, this practice is looked upon with a great amount of suspicion. 
After reading from Brice that "I've had Festool give me products to help promote here and on my site , that is no secret" I was really taken back.  Being a relatively new member I had not see that information disclosed.  I am not saying that Brice or any other FOG member's review or comment was skewed because of their "affiliation" with Festool, I for one would like those relationships disclosed about the affiliation, dealers are required to disclose their association, I think that those of the FOG members that receive anything for free from Festool should be so identified.  At that point, it is my decision as to the level of credibility given to the author.

Dan Judish

 

[Frank Pellow]

I didn't realize it either and agree that, if one is reviewing or commenting upon a tool that was supplied to them for "free", then they should fully disclose that fact.

 

[Brice Burrell]

Colo, I understand your view. I don't think it is fair to separate us from other members. There has been talk about Festool sponsored reviews on this site having a dis closer in the review. I've added this to all of my Festool sponsored reviews on this site: "In the interests of full disclosure, this tool was provided by Festool for review purposes."  You'll notice that not all of my reviews and how to's have this disclosure, that's because most of the work I've done here and on my site are not Festool sponsored. I do this work because I believe in the tools and want to help others. I would rather not be labeled as having an affiliation with Festool, this may cause some people to question my motives on every Festool related issue. That's not fair to me. Please keep in mind there is another side to this issue. I would prefer to be judged by the quality of the content I post here just like everyone else.

 

[greg mann]

Dan,

While it may seem these things are a little circumspect that is really not the case. Certain folks, like Brice,  have become fans of the product and may engage in a little evangilizing based on their own experiences. Is it any surprise that Festool might identify a person like that as a possible reviewer of a new product? There have been some accusation and innuendo recently about this, with references to the 'Henderson 7' and all, but for the most part, everyone who pays attention usually knows whether there was any solicitation involved on Festool's part. Having said that, I do believe those folks that are engaging in tool reviews are just now beginning to realize that not all visitors to this forum understand the exact circumstances. I believe that you will see better documentation regarding full disclosure exactly because it is an issue that has now been raised. I am only expressing this as an opinion here but I am also, in this response to you, encouraging everyone involved in a review process to please detail how it is that they have come to the review process.

One should also keep in mind that these reviews are, for the most part, personal perspectives on how a particular tool works for that reviewer and, in some cases, how it does not work. Anyone using these reviews should only use them as a starting point in their own decision process. I do believe that anyone coming to an Owner's Group should already understand there just might be a predisposition for favorable opinions based on historical experience with the line. That can also extend to personal websites and/or blogs, where an individual indicates that he has general preferences for a specific product line.

Where your own analogy breaks down, just a bit, is that there are certain quality and engineering tendencies that may be more consistent throughout a relatively narrowly offered power tool line that may not translate to drug company products. One would not ncessarily conclude, for example that because company A's heart medicine is so wonderful they must also make the one of the best diabetes meds.

Please bear in mind, I think your observation is with some merit. We do need to be fully transparent. This is virgin territory for many of us and we are learning the ropes. And Brice, if I have misstated anything please feel free to correct me.

 

[colotimber]

Thanks Greg for your perspective and I may have overstated my case, I wasn?t really comparing this to pharmaceuticals after all this is certainly not life and death ;D.  In all fairness Brice, I think that there is a difference between when a tool was just provided for the evaluation but went back to Festool when the review was completed and if at the end of the evaluation the tool now belonged to you personally.  For me there is a distinction and one that I feel should be disclosed.  As to the broad picture if I knew that someone had been given say five or ten thousand dollars worth of Festools (which is not many Festools) in my book...........that is a lot of money.  I know that you ?prefer to be judged strictly by the content of your post like everyone else? but I also feel that you sacrifice some of that when you are paid to do something.  I think in some ways it is like what we are all doing here, there is a difference between doing this stuff with wood as a hobby and for a living, once we started being paid to do it, the perspective changed. I personally want to thank you for all of the great contributions that you make here at FOG for it is a much better forum.

Dan Judish

 

[greg mann]

Dan,

And thank you for engaging in a frank but thoughtful discussion that will accomplish two things. 1. Help us get better. 2. Remind us how pleasant and friendly this place can be. We need to get back to where we were in that regard. It is the very best way to right the ship.

 

[Qwas]

In all fairness Brice, I think that there is a difference between when a tool was just provided for the evaluation but went back to Festool when the review was completed and if at the end of the evaluation the tool now belonged to you personally.  For me there is a distinction and one that I feel should be disclosed.  As to the broad picture if I knew that someone had been given say five or ten thousand dollars worth of Festools (which is not many Festools) in my book...........that is a lot of money.  I know that you ?prefer to be judged strictly by the content of your post like everyone else? but I also feel that you sacrifice some of that when you are paid to do something. 

Dan Judish

I have to agree with Dan here. I was not aware of anyone receiving free tools for doing a review. I think accepting free tools from Festool does not conform with the policies on the FOG.

The Festool Owners Group is an independent entity.  It has no official connection with any branches of the Festool company, and it receives absolutely no funding from the company or any dealers who work for the company, nor does it receive funding from any other advertisers.  The costs of running this forum are provided on a voluntary basis by the Forum Administrator.

This means that the Festool Owners group is customer-driven. We are free to have unbiased discussions about the tools without concerning ourselves with advertising or other corporate restrictions.

Thank you,
Matthew Schenker
(Forum Administrator)

However, this forum is meant as a place for people to receive unbiased information about Festool products.  User discussion areas must not become a venue for sales promotions and other marketing activities.  Further, it is very important that Festool Dealers are clearly identified and that all Dealers are treated fairly and equitably.

General Reminders
It is important to maintain a proper balance between Dealer presence and pure, unbiased information in the Festool Owners Group.  Open, fun, and honest discussions benefit everyone in the long run, as more people will want to come here, and will feel confident about the depth and accuracy of the information they receive.

I would think accepting free gifts from Festool would affect one's bias on ALL Festool items.

 

[Dan Clermont]

I was one of the lucky Hendersen 7 to attend Festool school with Brice, Per, Dan Clark, Dave Ronyak, Mathew, and Ned. None of us were paid off with tools or promised anything in exchange for positive marketing on the FOG or ANY forum. Most of us left Nevada with a willingness to pass on as much info as possible to our fellow FOG members.

Brice was doing reviews for Festool well before he went to Hendersen.

Having spent time with Brice I can tell you he is one of the most critical people I have met when it comes to tools. He spent allot of time looking over the tools and analyzing them. That is something you would want in a good reviewer. He doesn't sugar coat anything!!!

I personally think all reviews where a tool is supplied by the manufacturer should have a disclaimer in the write up stating so and Brice has done that.

All I want is honesty

Dan Clermont

 

[Daviddubya]

First, I have never received anything free from Festool, unless you count a couple of t-shirts that Bob Marino sent me for placing orders.  Thanks Bob.

I think the practice of providing free tools to reviewers is widespread in the tool industry.  Do you think all those reviews in woodworking magazines are done with tools that the reviewer or the magazine company purchased?  Nah, not a chance.  And do you think all those reviews you read in magazines are written with no monetary compensation?  Again, not a chance.

I had the opportunity to do one tool reveiw (not a Festool product).  I got the tool free and was told to keep it.  I did keep it for a while, but eventually sent it back because I simply was not using it.  That was my choice.  Getting that tool free did absolutely nothing to influence my review of the tool, other than to prompt me to write the review.  As a result of my review, a couple of features were improved.  So the process worked.

Frankly, I doubt that the handful of people here in the FOG that have received something free from Festool are the least bit influenced by those "gifts".  In fact, they are not gifts, but an incentive to write an independent user review.

ps - I think disclosure, similar to what Brice has done, is fine.

 

[Qwas]

I think everyone out there knows magazine reviews are very biased and why most of us don't trust those reviews. Me, personally, read Matthew's policies and expected unbiased reviews. I have read many reviews on here that I thought were good. None of the reviews mentioned receiving free tools. I never thought someone was receiving free tools.

I don't know much about any of our reviewers. For all newcomers sake, I think the reviews should be marked and I think the reviewer should be marked.

 

[vanderpooch]

I've written a number of reviews (7) over the years for Fine Homebuilding, so I have interest in the opinions on both side sides of this issue.

In my opinion, getting a tool for free, especially up front, is bound to influence your review somewhat. Liking a tool and liking a tool you paid $500, or however much, for are two different things. For example, I reviewed both the Trion and the Bosch 1590 when they were first released. I really like my Trion, but I would have a hard time saying it is twice the jigsaw the Bosch is, which is approximately the price difference. I don't know if Festool's policy changed (and it certainly seems it has) but they asked that the tools be given to a local HFH chapter after the review was completed. I ended up making a cash donation to HFH and keeping the saw, but that was a choice I had to make after the review was published.

I've never done a published review with the expectation that the tool was mine for the taking. I've been lucky enough to have a couple given to me over the years, but I have also purchased some of the tools I reviewed BEFORE writing them up. In all cases, I was finding the tool and contacting the magazine about doing a review, not being solicited by a tool company.

Aahh, this is getting rambly and I've lost my train of thought. I guess I do feel there is a difference between an unsolicited review and a review "sponsored" by a tool company. As long as the reviewer is up front about it, I don't think it is a problem, but it absolutely needs to be out there.

My two cents,

- Kit

 

[vanderpooch]

Qwas,

Why do you think they are biased?

- Kit

 

[woodshopdemos]

as to woodshopdemos, I started this website 6 years ago and at that time, the shop had tools that I had purchased some years ago. I started to get mfrs products to review by telephoning, letter writing, emailing over and over again and I would  get some marginal products to review. I was being tested. The site has grown to be very successful and getting products to review is not a problem now...turning some down is. Finding time to review them all, is. And if your familiar with the site, each page is original thought. I have always told things as I see them. This last posting I started the PC Omnijig review and I had some difficult time getting thru the instructions. I said so. In all these years, I have been fortunate to be close to a lot of real find mfrs. It takes time, but fun time. I also have sent product back because it didn't do what it was supposed to do. Just twice but I got a lot of grief from the mfr for not reviewing it after all their hard work. If the new product isn't available for sale, I wont review it...yes there are some people who want the review so that they can then set up a website and start to sell it. Not my job. And I spend a lot of time doing this thing. I am retired and only spend about 50 to 60 hours a week on it. Some of my tasks are really hard and only I can do...like looking for new faces to be "workshop assistants."
   To this exact thread, I just added a "full disclosure" statement that I hope will meet this groups expectation. It is: Full Disclosure: Products reviewed on this site are often
supplied free of charge by the manufacturer. The opinions
expressed are purely mine.  John R. Lucas

   I love my job and at 71 I find it is hard and harder to keep things going. I have so many great products on the to do list (Festool included) that it will get me thru this year. Then we will see.
   By the way, with 1600 pages of how-to and 35,000 photos, I am very comfortable with my charter...not embarassed at all saying that I get free tools...and I know it does not pressure me to praise the tool or the company in the least. If it is a good tool, I will find that out and report it...and if possible, use the tool in a project. Example, I just received a Woodpecker Pinnacle Coping Sled (better than the others I have.) As part of its review I will do rail and stile frame using the one-piece rail and stile bit. It is not a "poor" substitute for a matched set of which I have 5 or 6, but it is a very useful bit...particularly when used with a good lift. So I will make a few doors...may try to intergrate Domino as well...and who knows, the new CMT Enlock System. Do I not have a really neat job? If only I started it when I was 45.

 

[Qwas]

My reasoning is they receive a free tool and do the review. Festool sends another free tool and expects a good review. Pretty soon the reviewer knows the game and understands to keep receiving free tools he has to do a great review. And we all want new tools, especially free.

My other reason and concern is the price of the tools means a lot. Using your example with the Trion jigsaw, the price is an important part of the tool. The Trion can be a great jigsaw but is it's price within reason? ( I own one and I think it is.) But I think a reviewer who gets it for free will tend to skim over the price versus value issue.

 

[mhch]

Mmm, I think the reviewers we have on the FOG do more than write quick praising reviews.
Brice, Jerry, John Lucas, and Forrest Henderson, who else do I forgot ?
reviewing,  Is there any one who missed to understand they were commissionned in some form to do it ?

They provide plenty of practical information, usage ideas, suggestions, hints and tips, etc ...
This is very useful to newbies like me, and I'm sure to other more experienced peope.

Even if commissionned, so what ?
They provide added value to the tool, which both explains and justifies the commissionning.

 

[Frank Pellow]

My reasoning is they receive a free tool and do the review. Festool sends another free tool and expects a good review. Pretty soon the reviewer knows the game and understands to keep receiving free tools he has to do a great review. And we all want new tools, especially free.
...

I believe that this is not true for most (if not all) of the recipients of free tools who have written reviews here.  Nevertheless, I firmly believe that each such review should disclose the fact the the reviewer did not purchase the tool.  And, please keep posting your excellent and unbiased reviews folks.

 

[Dan Clermont]

I concur with Frank on this and all I ask is for a disclaimer explaining the situation.

It takes time to construct, photograph and writeup a review. I've often looked at Jerry's manuals and thought about the time it takes him to write them with such detail and think that he has earned that tool several times over.

Dan Clermont

 

[vicc]

Gentlemen,  I work in a field where independence is a paramount requirement for certain participants. What they often don't understand is that "independence" is a state of being; in any particular situation you either are independent or you are not independent. It has nothing to do with the "goodness", strength of character or honesty of a person or any such thing.

Stating that someone lacks independence in a particular situation does not mean that you are impugning their character or their morals or saying they will conduct themselves in a biased manner.  But it is saying that a reasonable person unconnected with the situation would perceive that the person in question may potentially be in a conflict of interest position (even if they do not actually get swayed by that "potential" conflict of interest).

In the example of a travel writer receiving a free trip to a Vegas Hotel; whilst reading his review we'd want to know about the freebie wouldn't we? In woodworking reviews it is my humble opinion that it is appropriate that reviews which may sway people to buy one brand of tool over another are identified as "sponsored" irrespective of the bona fides/ experience/ excellence of the reviewer. As these are not life or death circumstances I suggest that disclosure is sufficient mitigation for any potential lack of independence.

For the avoidance of any doubt, I am not suggesting that any of the reviewers in this group are anything other than upstanding citizens, and I personally have received a great deal of benefit from their excellent reviews and am very grateful that they take the time and effort to compile their reviews.  Thanks for reading my 2 cents :.

 

[colinw]

Being a new member to this forum I did not know that anyone was commissioned in anyway, I was under the impression they were totally independent, maybe I'm naive, but I agree with the general consensus here if you review something and have been payed or given anything please add a disclaimer stating this !

Colin

 

[Jesse Cloud]

I like the disclosure idea.  The examples Brice and John used are fine.  I always enjoy the reviews and have never found one to be biased.  Still, its good to know the info in the disclosure.  Actually, I'm kinda glad that they get some reward for all that work!