Quote:
Originally posted by winewood
Correct! why is independence needed? IN HOUSE BIAS!
|
Well, no. Not really.
The issue here really is the perception of bias.
Independent testing is needed because people will naturally perceive a manufacturer as providing biased results for their testing, regardless of how accurate that the data may be.
I do agree that if a manufacturer knows that if their product is not very highly performing that they won't push performance in their marketing spiel, but that is different to lying. That's selective marketing. Yes, it's bias, but it's not lying.
What I see as being confused here is "lying", as opposed to "bias".
There seems to me to be a broad number of categories that can be used to describe what's going on here:
1) Independent (unbiased) & accurate - the "ideal" reviewer
2) Independent & inaccurate (without intent to falsify) - large number of web-site reviews fall into this category
3) Independent & inaccurate (with intent to falsify) - this is a strange one, but we see it all the time in certain "independent" paid-for marketing reports. Really they are category 6) below.
4) Not-independent (biased whether perceived or real) & accurate - a manufacturer with good testing equipment
5) Not-independent & inaccurate (without intent to falsify) - a manufacture with faulty testing equipment
6) Not-independent & inaccurate (with intent to falsify) - certain web-site reviews
Seem to me that a lot of the fighting here is really about arguing where some people fit into each of the 6 (actually 5) categories.
winewood - you cannot expect to make accusations without allowing other people the right to reply. It doesn't matter that the comment was not directed towards me. I didn't see any questions directed at you in this thread before you replied, yet you chipped in anyway. Can't have the cake and eat it too.
[Edit - Fix some spelling mistakes and grammatical errors - really must get more sleep]