It's not news to any of us that we live in a world where we're constantly being advertised to. Free-market capitalism dictates that companies try to get us to spend our money on what they're selling. Simple as that.
In the past, "ads" were very obviously advertisements. There were formats where commercials were just the given, the expected even. A 30 second "spot" during a "commercial break." The website of a manufacturer or retailer. The radio. A magazine. Even blatant product placement in movies where the camera lingers just a bit longer than necessary on that can of Coca Cola or Chevrolet emblem. All of those are examples of where it is just the norm to see, and even expect, advertisements.
BUT, in the last decade or so, we've seen the rise of "influencers." And our little airgun hobby has not been spared from this effect. These are individuals paid (in one way or another) to promote products. They flood YouTube and Instagram and TikTok and even industry-specific forums like Airgun Nation. They post "content," sharing information about the products that have been placed in their hands by....those companies that decades ago would have marketed their products in all the usual places. These seemingly real-world users are the ultimate "product placements." Payment for this promotion of products takes on myriad forms. Some are literally on the payroll, drawing regular pay checks. Others are paid by how many "views" the "content" garners or how many sales can be traced back to their influence. Some are given the products that they promote. Some are paid in transportation fees. Rarely do we see disclosures of how the influencer is being compensated. And, the worst is when the influencer plays the part of the average joe, leaving those susceptible to believe they're just enjoying freely given information.
As a collective groups of airgun-addicted individuals, do we care to know the back-story behind the information being "shared" with us? If what we're reading is an advertisement to influence our decision-making (read wallets) should we be informed? Should we be made aware if someone is receiving compensation (of any form) for what they're sharing?
A full disclosure bolsters the validity of what is being shared, in a "I've got nothing to hide" fashion. Furthermore, disclosure can help the reader to know that what they're reading is coming from someone with direct ties to the manufacturer, which in many cases gives the reader confidence that what they're consuming is factual information.
Finally, disclosure of a potential conflict of interest does not make it an actual conflict, but it definitely helps eliminate the perception of malfeasance.
In the past, "ads" were very obviously advertisements. There were formats where commercials were just the given, the expected even. A 30 second "spot" during a "commercial break." The website of a manufacturer or retailer. The radio. A magazine. Even blatant product placement in movies where the camera lingers just a bit longer than necessary on that can of Coca Cola or Chevrolet emblem. All of those are examples of where it is just the norm to see, and even expect, advertisements.
BUT, in the last decade or so, we've seen the rise of "influencers." And our little airgun hobby has not been spared from this effect. These are individuals paid (in one way or another) to promote products. They flood YouTube and Instagram and TikTok and even industry-specific forums like Airgun Nation. They post "content," sharing information about the products that have been placed in their hands by....those companies that decades ago would have marketed their products in all the usual places. These seemingly real-world users are the ultimate "product placements." Payment for this promotion of products takes on myriad forms. Some are literally on the payroll, drawing regular pay checks. Others are paid by how many "views" the "content" garners or how many sales can be traced back to their influence. Some are given the products that they promote. Some are paid in transportation fees. Rarely do we see disclosures of how the influencer is being compensated. And, the worst is when the influencer plays the part of the average joe, leaving those susceptible to believe they're just enjoying freely given information.
As a collective groups of airgun-addicted individuals, do we care to know the back-story behind the information being "shared" with us? If what we're reading is an advertisement to influence our decision-making (read wallets) should we be informed? Should we be made aware if someone is receiving compensation (of any form) for what they're sharing?
A full disclosure bolsters the validity of what is being shared, in a "I've got nothing to hide" fashion. Furthermore, disclosure can help the reader to know that what they're reading is coming from someone with direct ties to the manufacturer, which in many cases gives the reader confidence that what they're consuming is factual information.
Finally, disclosure of a potential conflict of interest does not make it an actual conflict, but it definitely helps eliminate the perception of malfeasance.
