The Ethics of Full Disclosure on ScubaBoard

[drrich2]

That is different from posing as an objective reviewer and actively hawking that gear in exchange for some form of compensation.

Having looked at different conflicts of interest on this thread, it seems to me this is your main concern? Duplicitously posting an advertisement in the guise of an objective informed customer review? Worse yet if the customer is seen as an advanced, knowledgable diver.

Unless the person is over-the-top enough to tip his hand, or someone knows him/her personally and can 'rat'em out,' I'm not sure you can confirm the crime and stop it. And a call for ethical disclosure may not persuade.

I see a potential 'action plan' you could try, if you have a few posters you're suspicious of.

1.) Make sure the mod.s, or at least some 'inner circle' (I don't know your staff's internal culture) knows who they are & what they're suspected of shilling for.

2.) When they post, make a point to look hard at their post and present the other side. There are threads intelligently debating whether Suuntos are too conservative, diaphragm vs. piston regulators, etc... Have different staff intervene, so it doesn't look like the poster has a 'stalker' out to oppose him.

Anybody got other suggestions?

Richard.

 

[CamC]

It happens on other boards, sometimes it's subtle and takes a while to spot. Anyway, at this point can I just say it's about this time of day I usually have a Pot Noodle! It's a tasty delicious little snack! Ummmm! Let's try some, shall we? Doesn't that look absolutely yumscious! Ohhhh!

Mmmm, Bombay Bad Boy!

 

[Rhone Man]

Divers come to Scuba Board every day looking for advice on scuba gear and services. When they do, they get immediate advice from expert divers, which is one of the best services a site like this provides. But some of that advice might not be from the most unbiased sources in the world. To what degree would you believe a source if you knew the writer was being paid to give you that advice?

I know someone whose previous job was in marketing, and one part of his daily work was going to product review web sites and writing reviews—positive ones for the those paying him, and negative ones for their competition. Knowing that, I take all those reviews with a large chunk of salt.

Over the years, ScubaBoard has had many a thread explode with anger when a poster writing to praise or attack a certain product or service was revealed to have a direct financial connection to the topic being discussed. Those threads become understandably ugly but they are fortunately rare. On the other hand, I suspect such posting may be happening more often than we realize, and it can have a truly detrimental effect on the overall quality of the service ScubaBoard provides.

A former frequent poster on ScubaBoard once used to praise certain products and services while strongly condemning the competition, and eventually we learned that he was being paid to do it. There are some other ScubaBoard posters whose advice is so immediate and so predictable that I cannot help but feel there has to be some sort of financial arrangement going on there as well. Once those posts are made, if another product is mentioned, the poster will often make sure people know what is wrong with the competing product. If we are talking about an objective belief, that is one thing; if we are talking about a paid endorsement, it is quite another.

Most scuba professionals get some sort of discount for the gear they purchase—I myself rarely pay full price for anything, and if you see me dive, nearly everything you will see me wear was purchased at a deep discount from the manufacturer. That is to be expected, just as you expect ski instructors to get a discount on the equipment they use. That is not what I am talking about, though. That is different from posing as an objective reviewer and actively hawking that gear in exchange for some form of compensation.

In terms of ethics, any poster who has any sort of arrangement with anyone or any product they are endorsing should make that perfectly clear. That can either be stated in the message, or it can be CLEARLY identified in the signature line, but readers should know that this arrangement exists. It is simply the right thing to do.

I don't disagree with you in principle, but the line is grayer than you present.

I have gotten into mini spats with people before on SB because I criticise a diving destination. Invariably those pushing back and pushing hard are people who work in that destination. So, it is not their product directly, but it is tied to their livelihood indirectly. But does that mean that they shouldn't argue back against negative perceptions in relation to locations which, after all, they are experts?

I am all for pushing to do better, but like all ethical issues, it gets blurry at the boundaries.

 

[Rhone Man]

It happens on other boards, sometimes it's subtle and takes a while to spot. Anyway, at this point can I just say it's about this time of day I usually have a Pot Noodle! It's a tasty delicious little snack! Ummmm! Let's try some, shall we? Doesn't that look absolutely yumscious! Ohhhh!

Reminds me of the famous joke on Reddit:

I was offered sex today, with a 21 year old girl, in exchange I was supposed to advertise some kind of bathroom cleaner to my friends. Of course I declined because I am a person of high moral standards with strong will power. Just as strong as Ajax, the super strong bathroom cleaner, now available scented lemon or vanilla.
​

 

[The Chairman]

Well, ain't this a can of worms.

People in general and Americans in particular have an issue with people having a opinion that is different from theirs. We hate it. In fact, we have to somehow justify how this travesty could possibly occur. In politics, this is easy and we label any dissenters as the religious right, the whacko left or a Bernie-ite. Any news that contradicts our stance is 'fake' and we are quick to present anything, no matter how questionable, to support our own world view. It's human nature. Oh wait... it's never us who do that, but the other guys! Yeah... of course. We never question our personal motives.

Forums are not immune from this kind of insipid character assassination. Calling a person a shill or similar name, in an attempt to undermine their credibility is fairly common. In fact, we get a number of reported posts concerning this kind of behavior. Just because a person really, really likes something, or really, really hates something doesn't mean that there is any pecuniary incentive. Passion is kind of rampant in this sport and it shows. We really like what we like and really hate anything that isn't what we like. Scuba divers are bi-polar in that respect.

So yes, @boulderjohn is correct: if you have a financial interest in the Scuba community, you should put that in your signature line. Even if you don't plan on hawking your product or think it matters, you should still indicate who you work for or your affiliation in your signature. That removes any appearance of deception and frees you to comment as you see fit. Moreover, it enables SBers to know who to talk to. Have a question about Deep Sea Supply? I bet you could figure out someone in this thread who could answer those questions with some authority. That doesn't mean Tobin is the only person who could answer those questions, as you might want more of a user's perspective at times. That's OK, and Tobin has ethically identified his affiliation, so you won't be confused. That's the way it should be. Think someone is bamboozling you? Ask them privately. Still have suspicions? Report the offending post and ask us to check it out. Yeah, there's only so much we do, but we'll be glad to try. Just DON'T silt out the thread with those kinds of accusations.

One last think... If you're a manufacturer or are affiliated, then please keep your comments to your products, unless it's positive. Same goes for agencies or anything else. My mods aren't allowed to dis any other forums for this very reason. They can promote them all they want, but no, they aren't allowed to say anything negative. It's a clear conflict of interest in my mind and frankly: it gives them free advertising.

 

[The Chairman]

Caveat: I've been given quite a bit of gear and even classes to do gear reviews. Why not? I get read more than the average SBer, so they want me to do gear reviews. I take these pretty seriously, but I also acknowledge that my influence can impact a business in a negative fashion. I'm not going to perjure myself and write a positive report about crappy gear, but then I really don't want to write negative reviews in any event. I simply opt out of writing the review and send the product back or give it away to someone who would like it. In other words, if I'm waxing positive about a product, I truly like it. If I'm not,, then you'll never ever know if I like it or haven't tried it. There was a discussion many moons ago about a user who was discouraged from using split fins in a rescue class. I chimed in about why I agreed with their instructor, only to have three sets of splits show up at my door the following week. Yah. Fortunately, they were all the wrong size (I take an XXL fin), so I was able to gracefully bow out of trying them. I was told to give them away rather than return them and so I did. One actually resulted in a fairly positive fin review.

 

[redacted]

I don't disagree with you in principle, but the line is grayer than you present.

I have gotten into mini spats with people before on SB because I criticise a diving destination. Invariably those pushing back and pushing hard are people who work in that destination. So, it is not their product directly, but it is tied to their livelihood indirectly. But does that mean that they shouldn't argue back against negative perceptions in relation to locations which, after all, they are experts?

I am all for pushing to do better, but like all ethical issues, it gets blurry at the boundaries.

Sometimes that "defender" is a MOD who bans members who are critical of whatever they are protecting.

 

[Rhone Man]

Sometimes that "defender" is a MOD who bans members who are critical of whatever they are protecting.

Fair enough, but I can't get my underwear too bunched up about it.

• Firstly, this is an internet message board - not an elected political body. Standards are not as high, nor should they be.
• Secondly, soft advocacy occurs in many forms - some insidious, some not. I doubt we would all agree on any boundaries, even if we had the time or inclination.
• Thirdly, there is no mechanism to police or adjudicate. Aspirations are great, but on their own they don't amount to much. I had a minor run in with Pete and a couple of mods a few years back. Ultimately if you can't talk them around, you can get pissy about it, but there are no other options (other than leave, which some have done).

So we can all agree "let's try and do better" and that is a nice thing for us to agree to do, and probably the right thing. But I don't expect it will ever lead to wholesale changes.

 

[Wookie]

Well, ain't this a can of worms.

One last think... If you're a manufacturer or are affiliated, then please keep your comments to your products, unless it's positive. Same goes for agencies or anything else. My mods aren't allowed to dis any other forums for this very reason. They can promote them all they want, but no, they aren't allowed to say anything negative. It's a clear conflict of interest in my mind and frankly: it gives them free advertising.

Interesting. The one person I don't push is me. I think it's rude to toot your own horn. Unless someone is asking a specific question about my boat, I never talk about Florida liveaboard a except to put myself on a list.

 

[redacted]

I agree. If I had the capibility of the old board to ignore select forums, I would have never seen the Red Sea forum anyway. And I still don't need to participate in the Scubapro forum, if it is still active.