Nobody is saying that reviewers shouldn’t accept lights for free. That’s not the point. The point is that the reader should know whether or not the light is provided for free, or if there is any other form of compensation. The reason for that is obvious.
> the reader should know
It’s to protect the advertiser/seller, for any product offered in the US.
The FTC can impose whopping fines for secretly sponsoring or paying for reviews — and does.
It’s not about the reviewer.
It’s about the people paying for reviews.
They’re the ones who get fined, if it comes to the attention of the FTC.
I’ve been asked to change a review.
I instead educated the company about the reason for honest reviews.
Thanks for the inclusion Old-Lumens!
Surely if such a recommendation is accepted, there will be exceptions for a group called the “Institutions”. 
It would be wonderful if your understanding of things is valid for all of us. But you know that the world is pied.
However it comes only be specified: purchased or acquired free.
“Acquired free’’ is not a dirty word but only bright yellow flag, especially for me.
Hmm…so if we are supposed to indicate if we got the light for free, are we also obligated to say what we do with said light afterwards?
I actually pondered this question. Should I keep it, sell it, or give it away on BLF? For the light I just reviewed, I was thinking about doing a giveaway on BLF, but decided to hang on to it, just so I can use it as comparison for future reviews of similar class of lights.
ADD: I guess another option would be mailing it back to the sender.
Personally, I don’t think it matters, unless the reviewer has a stated policy that he applies to each and every light, 100% of the time. Otherwise, he might simply send back the lights he doesn’t like, and keep the ones he does like. So, he’s still getting compensation whenever he chooses.
Again, I don’t see anything wrong with keeping the lights, as compensation for doing an extensive review. I’d just like to know. I don’t really care about FTC rules or whatever. I just care about knowing any bias when it comes to the subjective opinions about the light. I still value the review, I just need to know in what context to place it.
Agreed. I don’t think it matters.
Also it’s pretty easy to tell the well-done honest reviews from marketing hype reviews.
A carefully done review by one of our enthusiasts often has things like:
- many pictures of the light, both inside and outside.
- analysis of internal components
- full description of UI
- beamshots
- lumen measurements in an integrating sphere, or lux measurements with a luxmeter.
In contrast “marketing hype” fake reviews are more like those posted in a thread earlier today by Sophie11. Seems he took the thread down when we called him on it. In his review he gave “100” rating to what was clearly an overpriced budget light. Similar to the G700/X800 and for $70 price. He rated it higher than a Fenix. His review didn’t contain any beamshots or analysis of internal components either. Very obviously fake.
Frankly, I don’t mind if a manufacturer sends a free light to a reviewer to do the review. So long as the review is honest I don’t care. Being told in the review that the manufacturer supplied the light for review is fairly standard, but I don’t think it would sway my assessment of the review. More important is how thorough and thought out the review is, and whether it is by someone on this forum with a good reputation.
I completely agree with you about the spirit of BLF 
My experience (I’m not young) shows that only written rules are valid.
Signups after a month members will not know about this topic.
I am pleased that the topic has become relatively popular and discussion appear.
PS. Enelooper Nobody looking deep/complex scenarios here for need of sending back, etc.
“Again, I don’t see anything wrong with keeping the lights, as compensation for doing an extensive review.” as WalkIntoTheLight wrote.
It takes a lot of time and effort to do a proper review/ teardown with pictures, videos, beamshots explanations etc often with very little thanks so the guys that do it get my nod.
If they get a free light out of it or some other reimbursement, then that’s fine with me.
So long as there is enough information supplied, i can make up my own mind about the product using common sense.
free OR at discount OR other “consideration” given — in return for agreeing to do a review.
It’s not rigid. The rule for the US is rather like the “11th Commandment” in regulatory form
(“You Do Too Know What I Mean”)
Since most of the budget lights reviewed in this forum are from Chinese companies, I really doubt they care what the FTC does. The FTC can fine them all it wants; the companies can tell them to go pound salt.
IMO, the FTC rules are a red herring in this discussion.
WITL, I point those rules out specifically because
– most of these are advertised on Amazon’s site
– Amazon used to tolerate all-5-star rave reviews
– Amazon got busted on this and now has a rule that matches the FTC rule
– Amazon now says they may close a seller’s Amazon store for violations if reported, and
– competitive finking is part of the way the world works, and
– I’ve swapped messages with Chinese companies new to all this who were getting exactly the wrong advice, somehow.
Yes, the FTC doesn’t reach them directly.
Any company relying on Amazon reviews really has to be aware of the recent change in policy.
That’s all.
Not saying how it should be, not saying how I want it to be, not saying what the rules should be.
Just – last time – saying what the rules used to be and that they’ve changed recently.
Okay, all that may be true. But what does Amazon reviews have to do with reviews posted on this site?
Hey, I agree with what you are saying about making sure to state any compensation the reviewer gets. I just don’t think a reviewer here should do it because the FTC says to do it. The FTC, or Amazon, has no jurisdiction here or over Chinese companies.
The reviewer should post any compensation, or conflict of interest, or free stuff, because it’s the right and open thing to do. It helps the reader understand any potential bias, and helps the reader trust that they’re being open.
Hmm I thought about gifting Mt review lights
But I feel not comfortable gifting something that requires li ions
So I keep on gifting lights with a 3” AAA holder and simple rechargeable batteries.
The Convoy BD01 I do dare gifting and the BD06 seems a good candidate as well though I have not done as much discharge/charge cycles with it as with the BD01 (currently at 188 for the BD01)
Not that full disclosure is a bad thing, quite the opposite. But reviews are voluntarily done to help the community. This kind of attitude of suspicion towards reviewers will only get you fewer quality reviews. Nobody wants to spend hours writing a long review for people who will only question your motives. Even getting a cheap light for free isn’t worth the hassle of the review anymore. Most people do reviews for fun or goodwill, a subsidized light just makes it possible. Once it stops being fun, all you have left are the commercial “reviews”
Other thing about my morals are if you guys are having problems with a company i wont stick up for them even if they give me free stuff. This is why i kinda cut ties with a few companies that have shipping issues. I dint have issues with there shipping personally but i see it as a bigger picture as all of us. We should be number one as customers! But other people on this Website will still promote companies that are doing wrong i do not agree with that! just to get free gear?
You can never make every one happy but morals still mean a lot!
So you have a working theory?
I didn’t see where he insulted any one?
PD68, valid points yet the good outweighs the bad by such a margin here on BLF, sure people like you and everydaysurvivalgear and Budda and and etc etc will continue
.
.
.
Mate, everydaysurvivalgear your morals are clear and good!
.
.
.
EDITED OUT a piece of text addressing the negative things can said. It is very hardnot to address the B$ but BLFis afriendl place so I wish not to engage in pointless arguments.
So back on topic
I am thinking of doing another auction for OL with review lights, yeah I think that is nice.
Once people are not being objective, all you have left are commercial reviews. If your objectivity is being clouded by financial considerations- be that actual payment or free gear- than I think you have crossed the line.
And when I said “you” I did not specifically mean PilotDog, I meant anybody.
Take everything with a grain of salt , especially on the Internet. Nobody is completely neutral. It doesn’t matter who posted the review, I look at the pictures and specs way more than what they said. When it stops being fun, those people with the nice cameras stop posting reviews and we have less information to go around
I haven’t read all 3 pages but I wanted to add something…
Just a couple days ago Amazon had their “prime day” and there was this SAMSUNG 55” curved LED 4K UHD TV for just $650. It was a new item and immediately just after being released about 10 reviews showed up all of them 4 or 5 stars, fake obviously as no one could’ve own this product yet. People noticed this and started posting 1-stars reviews to complain about the fakery. Most of the negative reviews were deleted and more fake ones were added later to increase the score. By that time the item had 2.5 stars and now it has 4.5.
Did Amazon or samsung submitted the fake reviews?
See it here: Amazon.com
The review business is growing at an alarming fast rate, mainly because it has now become the deciding factor between buying or not, most of the times when I buy something from Amazon I don’t even bother reading the specs when an item has less than 4 stars, probably those stars are from fake reviews and I know that, but somehow they still manipulate me as a consumer and I will always go for the item with highest rating.
Everything revolves around money and fake review is the new advertising!