Calling shenanigans on MacUpdate Parallels vs. VMware link

Okay, for all you people who don't know about journalistic principles, editorial vs. advertising, I'll give you an example from my dead trees day at newspapers.

We produced a special to the Sunday paper every year on autos. It's a special advertising supplement. But some of the content is written by the journalists and photographed by the staff. We do not do advertising. Our jobs is to inform our readers regardless of what advertisers want.

So what went wrong one year? We dared to write an article on how to buy a used car. The local new car dealers had a tizzy fit. (One of my friends was one of those owners of news dealerships.) So guess what happened?

They took out the article on how to buy a used car to appease the advertisers. Why is this bad? Because people didn't have information in the supplement to help them make a wise decision no whether to buy a new or used car and the economic benefits and pitfalls of doing so!

That's what happens when you mix advertising and editorial and give over control to the wrong people. The reader loses out. Not maybe with this one particular incident. But the face of the matter is, Mac Update has pretty much announced they are willing to sell their credibility down the river for money. And though this one things might seem like not a big deal, it's the slippery slope that leads to much worse in the future.

You NEVER mix church and state. You NEVER should mix advertising and editorial. Mac Update just lost one more reader here.

This is silly. They did nothing wrong or deceptive. If I was shopping for virtualization software, I wouldn't mind hearing about an alternative -- especially one that comes bundled with a bunch of other apps. They even pointed out in their text that it is the competitor for Fusion. It all seems very honest to me. Plus, I think you are confused about the words "Editor Note" when you say: "Having it say 'Editor Note' implies that the editors of MacUpdate judge the value and worth of applications by whether or not they choose to participate in a promotional bundle." You might have a point if they'd called the bundle an "Editors' Pick" but the term "Editor Note" (or "Editor's Note" more commonly) simply means "Hey, we're butting in here for a minute to tell you something that the author of this article (or in this case, a product listing) didn't originally include."

Such...internal conflict. It is hard being a Mac proponent, huh?

Even when something stinks to high heaven, with photographic proof, no less, scores of Mac users just can't seem to be ojective, honest and call a stink a stink because they've got such a vested interest in the cause.

So now, its OK to mis-label search results and not be honest about it, eh?

Tell that to Dan Watanabe :)

All of this stupid bantering back and forth between Macupdate and Macheist, including this 'article', are simply to drive traffic to their sites, and it's working. You guys might as well have used a referral link, you might could have won a prize, instead of driving traffic their way for free.

Developers are well-aware of MacUpdate, hum.., problems. They routinely fail to pay developers on time and usually blame this on being too busy. Developers know what they are dealing with, and use them to get things done. Whether we agree or not with their tactics, it’s meant to create more sales for them and the developers who sign with them.

I do believe that they operate in the gray zone between rip-off artists and offering incredibly good values to consumers. This same gray zone is currently occupied by used-car salesmen and the MacHeist folks: you can get incredible deals, but don’t count on them to get the “thruth”. Telling the truth is just not their mandate

Most users think that MacUpdate is just about user reviews -- a neutral platform. Even I thought so for quite a while. And if they turn their catalogue into one huge MUPromo advertisement, they should at least give developers a way to remove their products from MacUpdate.

Imagine:

- User googles for VMware
- User finds (seemingly neutral) MacUpdate page
- User sees Parallels promo
- User buys Parallels

And VMware doesn't have a way to have their product removed from MacUpdate. Bad form, indeed.

And for the record: I have sold software via MUPromo, and I like MUPromo. But I do think they should keep these things strictly seperate. Knowing that my application is advertised on a competitor's review page would definitely give me a guilty conscience.

--

BTW: It's funny that there's a MUPromo Parallels bundle at the bottom of this page. Is this the most clever marketing plot ever?

its one thing to advertise "Advertisement Here". Its another to says its an Editor's note when in fact, it is not. This is misleading.

I don't have a problem with macupdate advertising, and I prefer their updates' database better than versiontracker (I don't have to be a member to get updates and nor do I have to deal with clicking a confusing download page), but I also agree that offering links to updates with competitive products labeled as "Editor's Notes" is deceptive.

So MacUpdate saying, "By the way, you can buy the competing product on sale right now", is bad.

Yet Apple's Get A Mac ads saying, "The competing product SUCKS!!!", is good?

Or if we're trying to pretend that the "editor" of a website is anything like the editor of a newspaper, then shouldn't we expect fair and balanced treatment -- e.g., both sides of the story? We should be applauding MacUpdate for this move and encouraging them to pursue this new ethical standard with more vigor!

The other day I was in Toys R Us buying a toy for my daughter. TRU has the balls to put a rack of batteries for sale right next to the electronic toys. Egads! OMG, the sky is falling! Boycott TRU! Dogs and cats living together!

Go ahead, wear as many hats as you want. But some behaviors are deemed questionable for certain hats. This is one of those. It is a lapse of judgement on MU's part. Maybe too excited about convincing Parallel to join the bundle!

The mentality of "this is my/their web site, they can do whatever they want" is complete unsubstantial farce. MU is more than a personal blog. It is a business, therefore, subject to ethical standards and customer feedback (I am a MU customer). And if it is considered media, it will be subject to public opinion. MU has a marred image in my book.