
Wirecutter CEO Sells Top Reviews for Kickbacks (2014) - forgotmyhnacc
https://www.xdesk.com/wirecutter-standing-desk-review-pay-to-play-model
======
untog
It's worth clarifying that this is from 2014/15\. The New York Times bought
Wirecutter in 2016, and Lam isn't CEO any more.

The site doesn't hide that it makes money from affiliate links:

[https://thewirecutter.com/about/](https://thewirecutter.com/about/)

FWIW, the XDesk post mentions The Wirecutter's response to their initial post,
but doesn't link to it. That response is here:

[https://thewirecutter.com/our-response-to-
nextdesk/](https://thewirecutter.com/our-response-to-nextdesk/)

They suggest the Wirecutter refused to review their desk (though the e-mails
don't seem to actually say that?):

> We offered a review desk to your CEO and the response was basically “pay us
> a kickback”. So, the only NextDesk you’ve ever reviewed was our original
> model that is now 4 years old (2-3 versions ago)

When the current standing desk review page
([https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-standing-
desk/](https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-standing-desk/)) features the
"Terra 2", which appears to be the exact same desk XDesk's own site is
promoting. And the page states:

> Xdesk did not return multiple requests for comment on our impressions.

~~~
tonystubblebine
At first I thought this was a disappointing scandal and then I realized it
wasn't.

What confused me was the word kickback by the Wirecutter business team. If
they'd said affiliate fee, which is what they really meant, then it would have
fit perfectly with my model of what they do. That model is review products as
best as they can and make money through affiliate fees.

I'd never thought through the edge cases of that affiliate model before since
almost everything I look up on the WireCutter has an Amazon link. If the
product they recommend is on Amazon, then getting the affiliate payment is
straightforward. But if the product they end up recommending isn't on Amazon,
then, yeah, I guess they have to approach the company about setting up an
affiliate payment. The problem there though is that The Wirecutter has no
leverage if they actually do practice editorial independence. If you were
NextDesk, why would you say yes?

What bothers me is that NextDesk is using a PR pattern that I find predatory.
It's preying on the fact that I wouldn't have time to think critically. So
NextDesk has jumped on this word "kickback" which obscures that the actual
accusation is not airtight. But because kickback sounds so bad, I'm inclined
to believe NextDesk. In other words, I find that post manipulative and I don't
like it.

The meat of the scandal though has two sides with a much less clear cut
answer: A) On one hand, the NextDesk got downgraded. Possibly as punishment.
B) On the other hand, as explained by The WireCutter, it was downgraded
because of a new option that was half as much.

I tend to believe B because I find that The Wirecutter is consistently price
sensitive. Overly so in my mind.

~~~
egdod
> B) On the other hand, as explained by The WireCutter, it was downgraded
> because of a new option that was half as much.

Except it wasn’t new, if the article can be believed. It was one they’d
already reviewed and found to be inferior.

~~~
geofft
NextDesk/XDesk is lying, and you can determine this by reading their own
webpage carefully. Quoting from it:

> _Here’s what the Wirecutter writer of the article said:_

> _“I don’t part with that kind of money easily, but after seeing all the
> desks out there, I bought a NextDesk Terra.”_

> _The Wirecutter ultimately said: The best electronic adjustable height desk
> is the NextDesk Terra._

> _Also important is what the Wirecutter said about another desk, the Ergo
> Depot Jarvis Fully desk (later name changed to Fully:_

> _They are noisier and clunkier. It’s a more basic technology, so it’s
> cheaper._

> _\- The Wirecutter Writer_

Except if you follow the article's link to the web.archive.org version of the
review (captured 2014-01-06), you'll see this is what the Wirecutter actually
wrote:

> _There are two cheaper options that I looked at: ErgoDepot, and VertDesk.
> These are cheaper desks first and foremost because of the motors. The
> expensive desks hide their motors in the legs, they work quietly, and they
> become something you almost forget about. The cheaper desks instead hook a
> motor to a rod that attaches to the other leg on the desk, and as the motor
> runs, the rod turns. These are motors that you notice. They are noisier and
> clunkier. It’s a more basic technology, so it’s cheaper. That’s how the
> desks can cost so much less._

That is, they looked at a desk from the _company_ Ergo Depot (the company is
now named Fully) - they did not look at the Ergo Depot Jarvis.

If you scroll down later in that snapshot, you'll see a mention of the Jarvis
- in the comment section, where someone notes that it's brand new.

So, the Wirecutter did not review _and could not have reviewed_ the Jarvis at
the time they made those quotes about it being "noisier and clunkier," because
it didn't exist yet. The Jarvis was released after their review. (That also
provides a legitimate reason for the Wirecutter to have put a "hold" marking
on their review, commenting that new options had just come out.)

The Wirecutter's official response to NextDesk/XDesk agrees with that
timeline: " _When we changed our top pick in February 2015, we did so because
another company had entered the field with something nearly as good but for
half the price._ ... _We still recommended the NextDesk product when there
wasn’t an affiliate relationship, up until February 2015._ "

And if you look at the Wirecutter's February 2015 review, also from the
web.archive.org link graciously provided by NextDesk/XDesk, you can see that
they have several positive things to say about the NextDesk Terra - but the
Jarvis is cheaper and almost as good overall, and _better_ in a few ways. Look
back at the 2013 review, as quoted in the article, and you can see that
they're clearly unhappy with the price - they only think the Terra is the top
pick because there aren't competitive cheaper options.

Another hint - the old web page for the Jarvis,
[http://www.ergodepot.com/Jarvis_Desk_p/jrv.htm](http://www.ergodepot.com/Jarvis_Desk_p/jrv.htm)
, has its first web.archive.org snapshot on 2013-11-05. The review that favors
the Terra is from 2013-08-29.

~~~
egdod
Nicely done. I was just taking them at their word instead of looking into the
archive.

------
zchrykng
Read through the entire thing... mostly sounds like a pretty normal attempt to
get some kind of affiliate revenue from Nextdesk. And it doesn't look like
there is anything in the emails that says "pay us or we will decrease your
ranking" or "pay us and we will increase your ranking". At worst, the CEO
erred by using the phrase "kickback", instead of affiliate program or similar.

------
gok
(2014)

Wirecutter's response: [https://thewirecutter.com/our-response-to-
nextdesk/](https://thewirecutter.com/our-response-to-nextdesk/)

previous discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16729408](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16729408)

------
bryanlarsen
I highly recommend a Consumer Reports subscription. Yes, you have to pay for
it, but that's the point, no conflict of interest.

~~~
jeffdubin
It's been a few years since I've used Consumer Reports, but I found their
reviews were too few for the given category (e.g. rating perhaps eight items
[TVs, detergent, whatever] out of a generally available selection of two
dozen) or stale (a just-published article was for devices one or two
generations old). I'd often look for a recommended appliance and find that
only one retailer sold that model, two years ago. Or I'd look at rankings and
products I owned and considered excellent (and not niche) weren't included. I
felt that their methods needed to be updated.

There were still some places they did a good job, e.g. their car reviews
provide good information for the average consumer, and I will turn to them
next time I'm in the market. I certainly applaud that their unbiased
viewpoint.

------
pbreit
Not a great story but also not as hysterical as the headline implies.

1\. Man/most/all wirecutter links are relatively benign "affiliate" links,
mostly to Amazon.

2\. Wirecutter updates review, usually annually, and frequently selects a new
#1.

3\. Price is a key component of Wirecutter selections. They are not just
picking "the best" but instead, "the best for most people".

------
SQueeeeeL
Not defending them, but it seems like a lot of online websites have kickbacks.
I mean hell, you can set up an amazon referral link for your youtube channel
in like 2 seconds. The intensives of the review "industry" are fucked... it's
not like movie reviewers make 10 cents if I see Star Wars

~~~
rchaud
It's for this reason that I find myself watching amateur video reviews of
phones and other expensive gadgets. You know the type; bad lighting, shaky
narration with lots of pauses and uhhs, and not-great camera work.

The fancier the production values are (splash animation, music, pro lighting),
the more likely it is that I'll be hit with a "like and subscribe" ask, and a
sponsor message. If by some chance the video doesn't have these, there will be
an affiliate link on the bottom.

~~~
SQueeeeeL
I think you'll appreciate this, it's a little long but definitely worth it

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FJEtCvb2Kw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FJEtCvb2Kw)

------
ricefield
Can the mods add a "(2014)" in the headline for this one?

------
rahimnathwani
Previous discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16729408](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16729408)

------
TheOperator
I genuinely don't care how corrupt Wirecutter is because at the end of the day
I still find their recommendations to be well above-average.

------
egdod
I am Jack’s total lack of surprise.

~~~
dang
Please don't post unsubstantive comments here.

~~~
egdod
It’s... jokey. But it’s not exactly unsubstantive.

It really is unsurprising to hear that a company that purports to give
unbiased reviews is actually asking for kickbacks from manufacturers. That is
the most obvious way for such a company to operate. Did anyone expect them not
to act like that?

