YOUR OPINION - Golf Companies Control Over Media

[GolfSpy_X]

 

When I first started MyGolfSpy I was shocked at how much control the golf companies not only wanted but expected over what I and others in the industry wrote and published.  

 

The word in the sentence above that should stand out the most it "expected".  These companies had the expectation I and others would make the necessary changes to please their desires.  The definition of expectation is: a strong belief that something will happen or be the case in the future.  

 

Therefore it is reasonable to assume that if you expect something it is because that same result has happened prior to the future expectation.  Meaning this isn't their first camping trip regarding asking and getting what they want in regards to controlling the message we try to voice.

 

It happens a lot more then you think, less with us than others, but it is expected of us to walk the line. Just in the past week their have been two instances just with MyGolfSpy and golf companies.  

 

The first: was one where our readers were looking for an answer to a product that had been discontinued.  I requested an answer from the manufacturer, when they finally got back to me they said they would deliver the statement to me first .... but .... >>expected me to deliver the exact message they would be delivering

 

Hmm...how do you take that as not only a publisher but just on a human level.  You are basically telling me to lie and you expect me to just lie for you?  So, you ask yourself questions (at least I do, not sure if the trained media that already exists does anymore.  I can only speak for myself.) Why would I lie for you, I wouldn't even lie my own damn self to someone.  What are they trying to hide?  Why is there a need to lie in the first place?  How can I ever trust what you say in the future?

 

The second: happened this week.  We published an article where the company involved thought that a graphic we created was innappropriate.  Ok, I guess they have the right to their opinion, everyone does.  But asking us to take it down and remove it from our site?  

 

What would even give this company and individual the thought to even think it was even remotely in the right to demand such a thing?  

 

==============================================================================

 

So what is your opinion of publishers and media being taken over and controlled by major golf companies?

 

Do you think they have the right to harass media outlets in the attempt to control the message?

 

How do you see this effecting you the consumer?

 

Do you think there is anything we can do to change this?

[hckymeyer]

So what is your opinion of publishers and media being taken over and controlled by major golf companies?

 

Do you think they have the right to harass media outlets in the attempt to control the message?

 

How do you see this effecting you the consumer?

 

Do you think there is anything we can do to change this?

I think it's no surprise to anyone that most golf publications are at the very least influenced, if not out-right controlled by the OEM's.  If you spend any time reading about golf, researching equipment or talking on forums you will learn very quickly that there is a lot of BS to wade through to get the information you are actually looking for.  I don't think any consumer truly likes it and that is one of the reasons MGS has grown so much over the past years I've been coming here.

 

I do think they have the right to try and protect their brands.  They do have the right to request you to take images down.  You however also have the right to tell them no.  The fact that you exercise that right over and over again is the primary reason I love this site so much.  I think the key word there is harass though.  They can ask, but if it's gets to harassing then that's a company I want to know about.  It would definitely leave a negative impression on me.  More so than whatever the article was about in the first place.

 

Like I mentioned above I think learning about this harassment and behind the scenes maneuvering would leave a much more negative impression of an OEM on me that whatever initial article or less than flattering review would have.  OEM's need to learn that golfers in general just want the truth.  Anyone who is an equipment junky like us will realize that what works for one person might not be the best fit for someone else.  If you make crap then just own it and do better next time.  I'll easily forgive a poor product if you own up to it and do better next time.  I have a hard time if you try to cover it up by strong arming media into putting a bow on that box of crap.

 

As for doing anything to change the status quo, I think that sums up MGS in a nut shell.  You can see the effects on the industry that you are already causing.  Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and you guys are getting imitated all over the place right now.  I see that as a huge positive effect on the golf media industry and the way that equipment and OEM's are reported on.  The single biggest thing I can think of to help change the way OEM's treat publishers and the golf media is to continue to grow MGS and show our support of an outlet that doesn't buy into the back handed deals and pressure from OEM's.  It's kind of like Field of Dreams.  If you build it, they will come.  Well you guys built it and people are already coming!

[markb]

Traditional golf publications have always been little more than the unofficial publicity arm of the golf industry.  Everybody knows this, yet we don't take much note of their marketing propoganda until years later when we're thumbing through an old golf mag and we see an obsolete driver that made everyone's hot list and we recall what a clangy, bell-ringing turd it was.

 

My point is that, to some degree, we're all tacitly ignoring the little man behind the curtain pulling levers.  We should probably just acknowledge that the golf magazines are promotional trade journals in much the same vein as the "Up with Peoria!" pamphlet that your local Chamber of Commerce might print.  There's no shame in this.  Golf companies want to "move the needle" and they can't be faulted for using any avenue to move it.  

 

There used to be only two ways to move that needle:  A ) spend a large amount of money with pros and stores and magazines to make sure your product was everywhere and well respected, or b ) develop a product so demonstrably superior to its competition that customers flocked to you of their own accord.  

 

In recent years, a third approach has been discovered and this is the one that irks me.   With the decentralization of information in the internet age, savvy marketeers found that they could move a whole flock of consumers with very little money by simply diverting the highly-visible opinion shapers who were likely to get Googled or Liked or Re-Tweeted.  

 

In this way, golf manufacturers could fabricate a grass-roots "consensus" ready to be stumbled upon by new customers seeking information prior to purchase.   The new customer thinks he is perusing the considered judgements of a pool of other truth-seekers, but in actuality he is just reading the homerisms of a few insiders who pass along manufacturer press releases; or (even worse) who receive free trips and product and are thus motivated to protect the reputations of their benefactors in order to keep the goodies flowing.

 

This third way is the least transparent and most dishonest.   If I sidle up to the wagon-side of a snake-oil salesman, I expect him to give me his best pitch with honey-toned words.  I'm ready for him and I can probably separate truth from dross.   But I'm probably not prepared for the planted shills in the audience who shout "Hallelujah, I'm cured!" on cue.   

 

I'm not ashamed to admit that certain social media golf shills have fooled me with their hallelujahs in the past, even though I'm about the most jaded, cynical skeptic in spikes.  I admit I'm still susceptible to smooth wizardry.   That's why  I'm grateful for the opportunity to even debate this topic in a site that admits that wires are being pulled and rabbits are being stuffed in hats.  A wizard who is willing to discuss how the trick is done is not the wizard you need fear.  Beware the wizard who says there is no trick and that magic is "real".  

[revkev]

Good points by my fellow spies but to your questions,

 

1.  I don't like it at all.

 

2.  Not in the US. We have this thing called the first ammendment.

 

3.  This is the first tough one to answer.  I was considering one of the major golf publications the other day.  They sent me an email wanting to know what area of the game that I felt was my weakest.  They then were going to suggest how I could strengthen that weakness.  If they were concerned about my game they should be recommending that I take lessons.  You used to get that recommendation a lot more from publications, now it's seldom.  I suspect this is because if I invest in lessons I'll have less to invest in equipment and in fact may become content with my current equipment because I'm hitting it better.  I think that the major impact here is that the desire to sell product is so great that the OEM's have in some cases lost sight of the fact that if they can help me play better I'll be more likely to purchase their product.  I honestly think they are hurting the average golfers quality of play.

 

4.  I think you already are making an impact on the OEM's.  They are at least sending product to MGS for testing and it seems as if they have a certain level of respect for what happens here.

[sp0rtsfan86]

I read both the major golf magazines. I love when one uses demand as criteria, because they are the ones who can influence it. Drum up demand for one company and let the other fall. 

 

I like this site for the honesty and snakiness of the reviews. When a manufacture tries to use buzzwords because they actually didn't put effort into a club, you call them out. I just like that it's not a soundboard for the companies and there are good solid reviews and things you wouldn't hear from some of the companies out there.

[ZenGolfer]

Im actually not surprised at all.  The golf industry is so much about perception and marketing that Im sure all of the OEMs are very careful of the image their put forth and are very protective of that.

As with everything else, you have to take everything with a grain of salt and keep in mind that at the end of the day, they are all still trying to make money by selling us golf equipment.

[GolfSpy Barbajo]

Couple of thoughts --

 

The big golf magazines are basically trade magazines.  In my business there are several (Plumbing & Mechanical, Contractor, PHC News, etc) which rely on the advertising dollars of manufacturers to survive.  They're careful not to offend the hands that feed them, and they almost always offer useful info to the tradespeople who read them.  Golf Digest, Golf, and the rest really aren't any different.

 

That's media, not necessarily journalism, in my opinion.  Part of the marketing machine?  Sure.  MGS isn't taking the big OEM's money, but you still have some decisions to make regarding what to write and what not to write, and how to write it, if you want continued access.  Whatever you choose to do with the above situations, you have to sleep at night. 

 

For me - I'd have a tough time with #1. Lying is a slippery slope.  #2 is a little more interesting.  Did they say "hey, could you change that graphic? This is tough enough and we're not sure that delivers the right message," or did they say, "Hey, take it down or we'll make your life a living hell."  One is asking for cooperation - the other is a threat.

 

And I'm not sure the First Amendment has anything to do with this.  The 1st Amendment says the government won't make laws limiting your right to say what you want.  That means you won't get thrown in jail for espousing your political beliefs (except for sedition). Doesn't cover stuff like this -- you can say whatever the heck you want as long as you're willing to take the slings and arrows that come with it. 

[Blade]

Couple of thoughts --

 

The big golf magazines are basically trade magazines. In my business there are several (Plumbing & Mechanical, Contractor, PHC News, etc) which rely on the advertising dollars of manufacturers to survive. They're careful not to offend the hands that feed them, and they almost always offer useful info to the tradespeople who read them. Golf Digest, Golf, and the rest really aren't any different.

 

That's media, not necessarily journalism, in my opinion. Part of the marketing machine? Sure. MGS isn't taking the big OEM's money, but you still have some decisions to make regarding what to write and what not to write, and how to write it, if you want continued access. Whatever you choose to do with the above situations, you have to sleep at night.

 

For me - I'd have a tough time with #1. Lying is a slippery slope. #2 is a little more interesting. Did they say "hey, could you change that graphic? This is tough enough and we're not sure that delivers the right message," or did they say, "Hey, take it down or we'll make your life a living hell." One is asking for cooperation - the other is a threat.

 

And I'm not sure the First Amendment has anything to do with this. The 1st Amendment says the government won't make laws limiting your right to say what you want. That means you won't get thrown in jail for espousing your political beliefs (except for sedition). Doesn't cover stuff like this -- you can say whatever the heck you want as long as you're willing to take the slings and arrows that come with it.

Haha! I almost said the same thing. The first ammendment has nothing to do with it. These aren't government entities telling people what to write or not write.

 

And you're right, did they ask if MGS could change something or just tell them with an implied threat? Big difference.

[DanD]

I no longer read the magazines because they didnt seem authentic, just as Ive stopped following other golf media because of the same reasons.  While I think it does still happen at MGS a bit, it seems to be far, far less than other outlets on the web.

 

The OEMs do not have a 'right' to harrass the media, but they can make it a stipulation of the business 'partnership' if theyd like.  If that is the case, the media outlet has the right to refuse and tell their community about it.

 

Consumers will decided with their dollar what they believe.  Fanboys on the internet will hype anything they want in hopes of getting free product, but how many of them buy with their own money.  I follow and listen to posters who prove they buy the goods they hype.

 

Transparency is the only way to control it, set expectations with the OEM and the reader and everyone should be happy with it.

[mnfats95]

I consume anything golf. It doesn't matter who it comes from. I really don't pay a lot of attention to anything other than teaching articles or fun things that are about the game and not equipment.

 

I take most reviews for what they are, opinions on what is good and what is not. It doesn't matter what the product is, you can usually find someone on the net that dislikes it. Whenever I'm in the market for anything I will research it as much as possible. With the amount of information available to the average person today it's usually fairly straight forward in regards to is something is good or not.

 

I will take into consideration all reviews regardless of where they come from. I do admit however that I will weight the reviews from lesser known sites or people who have used the item higher than an official review by someone who may or may not rely on advertising from the company who is producing the product.

 

I like the reviews from MGS because you go to great lengths to explain your process. While it might not always be the perfect way to review something, or there may be things you have left out that are important to some of us, at least I know what it was based on. That alone helps me decide how much weight to give to the review. I am not someone who would run out and purchase product X because it was rated the best by you or any other third party who is reviewing it. The information is great though in helping me create a list of potential winners and especially opening my eyes to a product I might have not even considered before.

 

So what is your opinion of publishers and media being taken over and controlled by major golf companies?

I guess I just don't care. I take their information for what it is which is basically a paid advertisement in the disguise of an unbiased review. While I will never base my decisions solely off of the recommendations of a media outlet they do have good information hiding in the ads and if they are comparing multiple vendors' items you can usually glean some good information from the comparisons.

 

Do you think they have the right to harass media outlets in the attempt to control the message?

Yes, they do have the right to do this. It's then of course up to the media to either accept their requests or respectfully deny them. If the outlet is doing something wrong you can bet they will have legal action taken against them. If they however are simply telling the truth about their opinion I doubt there is anything that can be done to stop them. It's up to the consumer of said media to decide how much weight to give the information based on any number of factors.

 

How do you see this effecting you the consumer?

It simply is a fact of being a consumer. If you are diligent and do your homework you normally will be just fine. If you are impulsive or don't have time to make an informed decision then you run a greater risk of getting burned. It's just a simple decision of how important it is to you.

 

Do you think there is anything we can do to change this?

Not really. We already have laws about misinformation and false advertising, but I can't remember the last time I heard about someone being successfully prosecuted for breaking one. All of the companies these days have legal teams that approve whatever message they are sending out and there are always CYA statements somewhere in the fine print. As long as media is dependent on money from the same companies they are asked to keep an eye on it will be status quo.

 

I consider MGS to kind of be the Consumer Reports of the golf sites in that your opinion is probably as honest as it can get. I do however still consider it an opinion. You might use more data than any other site I've seen to form your results, but at the end of the day you are still relying on humans to do the testing and that brings in variables that skew the data one way or the other. There just is no getting around it.

 

That being said, I wouldn't change the way you test. I don't believe robots are the answer for many of the same reasons you have already stated. The fact is though, that using humans brings in subjectivity and to me personally that means that I can't write off a product just because it rated low on your test or go out and buy it because it rated high. As I said before though, it does help me form a list of products to start with and also helps me weed out anything that might have some major flaws.

[GolfSpy Barbajo]

 

How do you see this effecting you the consumer?

It simply is a fact of being a consumer. If you are diligent and do your homework you normally will be just fine. If you are impulsive or don't have time to make an informed decision then you run a greater risk of getting burned. It's just a simple decision of how important it is to you.

 

Well stated MN -- I don't get why people get all riled up about golf marketing and advertising.  It's just an ad.  We are consumers and we control what we buy and don't buy and we control how we make those decisions - marketing, ads, "controlled" media and uncontrolled media are just more information to weed through while doing your due diligence.  

[markb]

I agree with the above.  I think few of us have a problem with clearly labelled ads.   MGS could take major OEM ads if it wanted to and I wouldn't care as long as I knew they were ads.  Likewise, most of us dislike those sneaky "advertorials" that are on the rise throughout the internet due to their effectiveness at fooling people.   We dislike them, but if I can still tell they're advertorials, I don't twist my panties too much.

 

But to use spy parlance, it's those "non-official cover" agents of influence who bother me.   The forum posters who claim to be joe-citizens, but who are actually on their site's short list to receive bags of free clubs and will therefore never post a critical review of anything or anyone that may interrupt their flow of goodies.   Goodies which seem flow more abundantly from some companies (Callaway, Bridgestone, Cobra) than others (Titleist, Ping, Mizuno, Nike) I notice.

 

It's hard to detect these hidden homers.  (And BTW I'm NOT dissing any of the MGS guys who are participating in the forum member reviews I'm following right now.   I know they're not deep-cover homers.   I'm talking about other sites.)  Often you can only tell what topics are approved by what they WON'T talk about.   You post a thread on a club not on the homer list and all you hear is crickets and silence.   They start a thread on an approved club and it's instantly echoed by a dozen quick "Want that!",  "I'm drooling!" posts. 

 

You can also begin to tell who's who by following the clubs in the homers' signatures and connecting them to the topics du jour that the site wants to promote.   You will start to notice that last month's irons, which they praised to the skies in faultless terms, are gone from their signatures, never to be mentioned again; while this month's irons are now the sine qua non of club design.   When you see this happen four or five times a year per homer, you start to see the old man behind the curtain pulling levers.

 

So Tony, I say take ads if you want to.   When the mannies pressure you afterwards, make individual decisions about whether you'll comply or not.   Sometimes they'll have legitimate points.   I don't mind that you took down the graphic in the Adams banner.   They had a point.  Heck, you can even post advertorials if you want to or reprint verbatim press releases, but keep them clearly labelled as such and we won't mind.  

 

But if you start using deep-cover homers, I am outta here.   No forgiveness for that.

[Maverickping]

Certainly a very fine line here. I can respect the OEM for protecting their assest but asking a responsible source (MGS) to tell a story is a different set of circumstances. I would hazard a guess that 90+% of the golf consumer is misinformed and  that comes from the stories that are paid for to get in the big publications. My take, if the consumer wants to believe the hype so be it, for those who are interested they can delve a little deeper to get the right answer.Asking a responsible outlet to tell/fabricate a story is wrong and people should know the truth and then base their purchases from the truth.

[golfercraig]

Honestly, I see nodifference between "moles" on sites and a PGA pro getting money into his retirement account from the OEM he is staffed with. Callaway chooses moles on sites, Titleist chooses to saturate the PGA pro's. When your livelihood is partially dependent on product sales, you will be partial to that product. It's human nature. When salesmen at a retail shop get bigger SPIF from one OEM than another, guess which way you'll be steered? It's the nature of sales.

 

A far as controlling the message, every company does it, in every sector of manufacturing. Access will be granted to those who play ball. It's not fair, but what is? There's a reason why EVERYONE within 2 miles of the PGA Tour knew about Tiger's transgressions (some of which STILL haven't hit the news) and no one said anything. Again, human nature. The message is controlled, at all times. Just keep doing what you do. It's a fine line. Just don;t go all THP on us, and we'll keep coming here.

[GolfSpy Barbajo]

Thinking more about situation #1 --- why would the OEM, let's call them "Ding," tell  you one story and then ask you to publish another one?  If you're going to spin, you gotta me committed to the spin!  

 

Perhaps they felt they had enough of a relationship with MGS that they were comfy telling you the "real scoop." while asking you to participate in the spin.  If you're gonna tell the truth, tell the truth.  If you're gonna spin, spin.  it's hard to do both...

[BIG STU]

It goes on in all the magazines not just golf. You read automotive magazines its the same. Like barbajo said in his case the plumbing industry it goes on in all trade publications from trucking to plumbing. Personally you have to demonstrate to me first hand because I got to see it feel it and test it first hand whether it is a golf club, car or truck. But those folks are in the business to make money and they have families to feed too so be it.