Here's the deal. To establish a credible review site takes years and many thousands of dollars of growingly expensive products. And I mean many thousands of dollars (soon to lose value and dominance to yen). In sum we reviewers need product, and product producers and distributors need positive reviews.
The relationship is clear.
In this unspoken conspiracy the producer pretends the sample/bottle is free, as does the reviewer, who either avoids the subject completely or claims - falsely in my view - that the "free" product in no way influences his/her opinions. Monkeyshyte. I am serious. For example I ran across a review for a rather expensive bottle: a limited release of highly marketed "English Harbor 12 Year". The (unnamed) reviewer ended his glowing review thusly:
Methinks this gentleman protesteth too much. Like the bank robber who denies that he/she - "in no way!" - was anywhere near the bank, and indeed, doesn't even use banks, and thirdly even keeps his money under the mattress. Right. My response:
*The fact that this product has been sent to me free of charge for editorial purposes does not – in any way – imply any influence on the content of this article or my rating. On the contrary, it is always an indispensable condition for me to be able to review without any external influence."
*******"A fine website, but gentlemen can disagree. If as noted “…the fact that (my sample was) free… does not – in any way – influence (my review), well my friend, you are a better man than I, and allow me to reference the well respected Ralfy here as well.
Between Ralfy and I we are speaking of hundreds of reviews and – gulp – hundreds of purchases, paying the same price as everyone else. Yes, reviewers cannot exist without product, and vice versa. It is our mutual position and experience that getting a product is “free” inevitably affects our judgement. Of course, having to pay never does.
May I please offer an example: a close friend – knowing I review spirits – honored me with a rather expensive bourbon that sadly was 90% bottle design and 10% quality. It was drinkable, but no more. When I wrote my review, I was forced to reflect that a deservedly awful review was bound to hurt the well-intended gifter – so – I found myself hedging, and trying to take out a bit of the sting I’m known for.
Yes, it still got a negative review, but delivered considerably more softly and edited, had I otherwise paid the exorbitant price my dear friend had. It’s what I stand against.
So again – glad if you can pull it off – but I can tell you this: a couple bad reviews of a distiller’s product, and the freebies may indeed cease. Again – thanks for the review and an interesting site…
Bottom Line: For any one to claim that they are "in no way" affected by a gift, and especially when they find it necessary to aggressively deny the effect, has little credibility. I know this: to review the amount of product that a good review site needs amounts to tens of thousands of dollars for what is allegedly a labor of love. Next subject: campaign contributions...