When the ‘conversation’ with consumers backfires.

Oh yeah. Take one parts YouTube, one part Pay Per Post and one part QVC to end up with Expo TV, aka, “What is it I’m reviewing again, Sony PSPA, um, Acks spray? Oh yeah.” I may never have to scour YouTube for whacky car dealer or lawyer ads again with this kind of target-rich environment. I know people have to earn a living, but this totally undermines any credibility I would invest in the products reviewed. I have a hard time believing advocates for brand conversations would cite this as a positive example when they say the consumer is in charge.

Because as much as I think brands should and are engaging consumers differently than ever before, most of the video reviews I saw do nothing to support that notion, and in many ways they become a parody of brand efforts. The one thing you hear now is how consumers know when you’re lying to them, when you’re selling them, etc. True, they do. (Didn’t they always though?) So how is having paid reviewers hold stuff up to the camera they obviously could give a shit about any different?

Talk about being lied to.

As a brand, I’d be pissed that my stuff was being reviewed this way. It’s one thing having 20 prominent bloggers review a single product. With Expo, it’s like, how much money can I make reviewing things I could care less about. I guarantee that while I may buy some of these things at some point in the future, it sure as shit won’t be based on any of the reviews from people there, no matter how little they wear. But thanks for the blog material gang. Now, put your clothes back on and get a real job.

Tags: Expo TV