
Testing out a new future for Consumer Reports - danso
https://www.cjr.org/business_of_news/consumer-reports-wirecutter.php
======
JumpCrisscross
I subscribe to _Consumer Reports_. (I only use their app.) As someone who
spends two weeks researching a product category so I never have to think about
it again, their data are a godsend.

That said, I find _Wirecutter_ to be a better fit for urbanites. I don’t buy
heavy appliances or cars or Swanson chicken broth. I _do_ want to know about
robotic vacuums and cat scratchers and speakers.

 _Consumer Reports_ could market a premium city-focussed product at a higher
price. I prefer their brand to _Wirecutter_ 's, in part because it attempts to
bridge our city-dwelling echo chamber.

~~~
wl
I would not trust Wirecutter. In the specific categories I have a lot of
knowledge, they seem to ignore some of the best products, emphasize things
that aren't important, and ignore things that are important. On top of that,
they've engaged in pay-to-play[0].

[https://www.xdesk.com/wirecutter-standing-desk-review-pay-
to...](https://www.xdesk.com/wirecutter-standing-desk-review-pay-to-play-
model)

~~~
snowwrestler
Consumer Reports does this too. I remember when they used to release their
annual camera and tripod recommendations... all my photographer friends
thought it was the funniest thing. Or their beer recommendations... many LOLs
from my beer snob friends.

These general review sites are not really "for" people who already know a lot.
The state of knowing a lot necessarily changes priorities.

I know a lot about photography--why? Because I have a motivated aesthetic
sense of photography. I didn't just acquire all this knowledge by accident--I
sought it out, in an opinionated way. So, my sense of what is important is
going to be different from a random person's. The idea of sacrificing image
quality to save a few ounces seems ridiculous to me; but most people don't
want to carry a heavy tripod around. So Consumer Reports would usually
recommend the lightest tripod that did an OK job.

~~~
brianwawok
I mean, I LOL at their laptop suggestions. They rank them on some silly things
sometimes.

But then I need to buy a microwave. I know 0 about microwave. Which heats
better? I have no idea. Consumer reports has a ranking. Sweet!

I really enjoy the product, at least in getting me from 0 to 50% knowledge on
a topic. Not that useful for things I am an expert in...

------
alexmarcy
So the basic gist is Consumer Reports is trying to find a younger audience by
building a new website to compete with The Wirecutter for attention?

This was a very long and convoluted article to get to that conclusion.

------
bryanlarsen
I believe they just need to hang in there and don't do anything to sully their
reputation. Most people still trust Amazon reviews, Yelp, tripadvisor, et
cetera. But people are starting to realize just how manipulated those sites
are and will start searching for reviews they can trust implicitly.

Wirecutter is better, but they're still affiliate revenue driven and of course
their parent the NYT is advertising driven.

------
RickJWagner
I love Consumer Reports. It's the best way to decide which car, tires,
appliances, etc. to buy.

Good luck to them.

------
pgrote
I think they made a huge mistake in closing Consumerist. They lost a great
marketing tool.

~~~
smt88
Counterpoint: I had no idea the two were related and have perused both for
many years.

~~~
evanelias
Consumer Reports purchased Consumerist from Gawker in late 2008, and migrated
off of Gawker's infra in 2009. They used to make frequent mention of the
association with Consumer Reports back then, but perhaps stopped after a few
years?

I worked on a piece of their migration from Gawker's custom platform to
Movable Type, although they switched to WordPress a few years after that, as
Movable Type lost momentum in the US.

------
perceptor
I haven't read CR in a long time, but in my youth I fondly remember CR
basically being pornography for test engineers.

Pick a product category, define measurands, develop _physical_ test methods,
and report results. You could often nitpick the measurands (do I really care
about heat ramp time for a hair dryer?) but it was always fun to see the
distribution and outliers.

Somewhere in the early 2000's it felt like they changed their model from test
engineering to customer surveys, I presume for cost reasons. They had relied
on surveys for truly subjective stuff like food, but it really started to
proliferate beyond. I know they kept their much-lauded test track for car
evaluations but almost everything other category started to feel survey based.

If they brought the test engineering back I'd resubscribe in a heartbeat.
Break out the bowling ball dropper for mattress testing!

------
technobabble
I'd hate to see CR go. While it's not the be-all end-all, they've been fairly
transparent about their testing methods and experiments.

In order to stay away from ads, I wonder if they can do something like give
free copies to coffee shops that younger people frequent to attract a
different demographic.

------
mdip
I've been a CR subscriber in the past (usually signing up for a year when I am
looking for a car or buying large appliances).

I signed up after I had blown $800 on a dish washer on the recommendation of a
friend who had purchased (what I thought was) the same model and was very
happy with it. Unfortunately, I purchased _almost_ the same model; it was the
following year's updated one and had I gone out and plopped down the money for
a subscription, I would have learned that the model that followed received a
very poor rating. I replaced it with a less expensive Bosch model, which
_also_ had a model immediately preceding it with a poor review and I'm going
on 10 years and very happy. My washing machine and dryer had a mixed review
but ticked the right boxes for what I was looking for[0] and I've had those
for 15 years with the washer failing about a month ago. CR didn't give it a
stellar review -- actually, the review was pretty poor IIRC, but I needed a
small front-loader due to constraints with where it was being put and I had a
limited budget, so I had to pick between about 3 different bad choices and out
of the three, this one scored high in getting clothes clean[0].

After that I haven't purchased a major appliance without paying for access. If
it's not reviewed, I don't even consider it. The one that receives the best
review that I can afford ends up being the one I buy. The only problem I ran
into is that I frequently found that the model I was looking for was already
discontinued. And because of how badly I was burned on the dish washer, it's
not a foregone conclusion that its replacement is "better". This, however,
worked out in my favor in the end. Yeah, it takes a bit longer to locate the
specific model, but _if_ I can find it new, it's on closeout and usually
20-30% less expensive. I just have to avoid the temptation to look at the new
model or I'll end up wishing mine had the touch-screen with Twitter
integration or whatever new, odd, feature they put in to justify updating the
models every 4 months.

The thing that I _don 't_ understand is why they're so hesitant to let
companies advertise "Consumer Reports #1" on their products. I understand the
conflicts they're trying to avoid by not accepting advertising revenue, and by
buying products at retail[1], but I think a _lot_ of people aren't even aware
of how great Consumer Reports really is. Some may not even be aware that they
_exist_. So allowing a company to indicate that they've been rated highly in
the publication serves a couple of good purposes -- it brings awareness to CR,
and it tells consumers that the manufacturer thinks that being rated highly by
CR is a valuable thing. That last bit might encourage a subscription more-so
than the risk that someone would skip subscribing if they could just go to the
store and see who's number 1. In my case, I've never purchased the "#1"
product -- it's often out of my price range -- I've purchased the #1 that
happens to fall in line with what I can afford. They could strike a happy
medium by allowing manufacturers who rank at the top to publicize that fact.

And while I commend them for their idealism in this area (it's, frankly, rare
to see an organization be so idealistic[2]), and it's entirely possible
there's a reason for this which I am unaware, it'd be a lot worse, for me, if
they disappeared or lacked the money to keep up the quality of the reviews
that they perform.

[0] And to this day, I joke that my 4 kids can do whatever they want to their
clothes. As long as I toss some Tide and Oxy in the load, it comes out. Yeah,
it occasionally rips a T-Shirt, and the delicate cycle is ... anything but ...
but it works a thousand times better than what it replaces and uses almost no
water.

[1] Accepting "loaners" or "discounted review" products is less of a concern
for me, it's the issue that some companies have been caught giving reviewers
"fixed" versions of products. By buying retail, there's the added assurance
that they picked up the product that you'd get off the shelf.

[2] Though the whole bit about selling subscriber information strikes me as a
whole lot more anti-consumer than merely allowing companies to specify a
ranking on a product, but I digress...

