• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Theme Park Worldwide

Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
speedy said:
I'm pretty sure you have to disclose sponsored content. So if he's accepting money/free days out he would/should have a note in the description.
Click to expand...

He need to put it more than in the description, he needs to tick the box in the YouTube upload section and make a clear statement to the effect at the beginning of the video, and "receiving payment" does not just cover actual cash, anything that can be considered payment in kind or by product (I.e. Free entry, free travel, free food, etc.) is in the ASA's eye considered payment.

If he is not doing this and it's later found that he did receive something in return for a review (even just free entry) he will have his channel closed down by YT because they seem that petty atm, and likely be fined by the ASA, this is not petty jealousy talking either, it's the law and applies to everybody, not just a few.

Of course if he isn't receiving anything then there is no problem.
 
These ongoing imaginary audits of Shawn are really funny, given his utterly affable nature.

Personally, I can't see Cedar Point of the park bringing him over on a sponsored trip.
 
Rules are rules and they apply to everybody, I can't upload any of my drone footage to YT because YT may choose to monetise it on my behalf, which would then mean I'd be in breech on the ANA for receiving payment for the footage and be fined by the CAA, this has and continues to happen, even though some people choose to ignore this, I don't.

Perhaps he would stop the speculation if he came here and said whether he'd ever received "payment" in return for a a review or not, but I doubt he will. I personally couldn't care less whether he gets paid or not, but at the end of the day as his business grows, he will eventually attract the attention of someone more inclined to follow rules than the majority of the forum seem to be, and take it from someone who has dealt with these kids of people, you want your ducks in line, not all over the shop.
 
I'm pretty sure he is not being paid by Cedar Point. You can tell straight away by the tone of the video. If you look at the Isle of White video, you can clearly tell that somethings different. The Cedar Point one's just seem like normal Vlogs to me.

I did message him about putting the intentions of the videos at the very start if he paid/ getting in free, just so we can know as consumers and he thanked me for the advice.
 
Look Shawn gets paid money every time someone clicks on his videos. Like his new video has already hit 21,395 views and there’s 1865 videos on his channel and you tube get there money back from the advertisers put at the start of the videos.
 
Yes...Until people realise that that money is pitance and more can be made by self advertising. WHICH IS FINE. As long as it's open and honest. :)
 
I don't get why just because Shawn is being particularly positive about a park, it automatically means that he's getting paid. Shawn, like I like to think I am myself, is a very positive person, and he states that multiple times in his videos! The Isle of Wight Vlogs seemed no different to his usual ones, in my opinion. I can see why someone might think Shawn was getting paid, but Shawn's not the sort of person who would lie about being paid.
 
He said part way through that vlog that he was invited to the park by the owners...It was a passing remark. Thats why i picked him up on it. If the park invited him, let him in free, gave him lunch, maybe even paid his fuel in return for a review then that should be stated clearly at the start.
 
Croftybaby said:
He said part way through that vlog that he was invited to the park by the owners...It was a passing remark. Thats why i picked him up on it. If the park invited him, let him in free, gave him lunch, maybe even paid his fuel in return for a review then that should be stated clearly at the start.
Click to expand...
I guess he did state it then, but he should definitely make sure the viewer knows the video was sponsored.
Alsty said:
Who would want to be famous? It brings so many haters out of the woodwork.

Just watch the videos, be inspired, make up your own minds and then get out there and experience some of these places for yourself :)
Click to expand...
Exactly, no point hating. Although I think handing out free tickets to already well off people (or anyone, really) is wrong, I certainly can't blame him for taking advantage of it!
 
I Don't think anyone is hating.

Alsty said:
ust watch the videos, be inspired, make up your own minds and then get out there and experience some of these places for yourself
Click to expand...

Yup. But you're totally missing my point. If somebody is being given special treatment then it's not a true reflection of an experience. Which is fine if it's explained in the video.
Then there is the legal argument...
 
There's too much hostility these days around Youtube, there is also a lot of questions about what should and shouldn't be sponsored content... Being invited to a place does not guarantee a good review, although most people think otherwise... In the context of product reviewers on Youtube, if they are sent something to review does that class as a sponsored video even if you say that the product is awful? So back to Theme park Youtube channels, if you are given two free tickets to review the place and you say the park has a lot of flaws, does that class as being sponsored?

With most Youtube channels they are paid a certain amount to play or review a product, that definitely seems to warrant a sponsored video as you are saying "Hey, if you review this product for us, we will give you some sweet sweet wonga" rather than, "Hey, you can come to our place and we will get you in for free" with no added incentive if there is a favourable review, allowing for more of an honest and non-biased review. It would be a different story if they say "Come to our park and we will pay you for doing a review".

Personally, I don't care either way... I'm a responsible adult and can make my own decisions and choices. I know not to ever take one review as gospel and if I was looking to visit a park I would watch a few videos to see if it was something I would look at visiting rather than trusting one review that said it was fantastic (and even the opposite where one review says it is awful) as I know people are all different and prefer and enjoy different things, however, I know a lot of the audience is younger and treat most words that come out of Shawn's mouth as gospel (see the Shambhala effect) so are more suseptable to treat potentially biased reviews as honest opinion.
 
KingNemesis said:
In the context of product reviewers on Youtube, if they are sent something to review does that class as a sponsored video even if you say that the product is awful?
Click to expand...

Yes, if you look on YT for Quadcopter101 as an example, he does quadcopter reviews and he always makes it clear whether it's been provided free and who by or whether he has bought it himself.
 
IanSR said:
Yes, if you look on YT for Quadcopter101 as an example, he does quadcopter reviews and he always makes it clear whether it's been provided free and who by or whether he has bought it himself.
Click to expand...

Not a sponsored video though, sending someone something does not mean you are sponsoring them / changing into a paid advertisement. Basically, what Shawn did? "The park invited me out"
 
Last edited:
KingNemesis said:
Not a sponsored video though, sending someone something does not mean you are sponsoring them / changing into a paid advertisement.
Click to expand...

How many Drones do you think he will get sent for free from DJI if he started rubbishing them though? They are paid by Proxy. Sent free items/Exclusives/New Releases = Get more views = Get more money from YouTube/Patreon .Give a crap review then the products dry up and your channel is down the swanny
 
Croftybaby said:
How many Drones do you think he will get sent for free from DJI if he started rubbishing them though? They are paid by Proxy. Sent free items/Exclusives/New Releases = Get more views = Get more money from YouTube/Patreon .Give a crap review then the products dry up and your channel is down the swanny
Click to expand...

To be honest, that's the way it works but it shouldn't... There are a few good Youtubers who have the right morals and say products have flaws even when they are sent them for free. It's good for the consumer at the end of the day. If the manufacturers are childish enough to pull sending products to the said individual due to a negative review then they shouldn't be sending them to be fair...

It also all depends how the review is done... If the reviewer says there is literally nothing good about this product and does that repeatedly for every single item from X manufacturer then fair enough, however, if he has been positive on the manufacturers' products before and the latest one is negative, they might just have to admit they haven't won them over this time. Also, have to bear in mind adding negatives to a positive review as well... very few products are perfect.

Youtube is a legal mind field...
 
Most channels that get freebies tend to either praise the product too enthusiastically, or balance it out and stay pretty neutral. I follow tech channels quite closely and always notice a "the phone offers no optical image stabilization and performs poorly in low light" followed by "BUT it provides good quality photos for the general consumer". Pretty much every channel ever when they are given something mediocre, but don't dwell on it too much so they get more free stuff in future.

Most of the channels I follow never state when they're given something for free. I wouldn't really count a freebie as a paid/sponsored for video. The tech channels I watch do mention being sponsored/paid/invited when they get all expenses paid trips to tech events. So there must be some kind of difference, it's all a bit complicated when it comes to YouTube and the law.

I guess it's trickier with free theme park tickets. I wouldn't necessarily count it as something that needs mentioning at the start of a YT video, unless travel expenses, food & drink and the like gets all paid for.

Now if Shawn gets invited to Barry Island Pleasure Park and praises it as the Disneyland of the UK then I will start to get suspicious (although with the way the Merlin parks are going...).
 
At the end of the day I just consider TPW a form of entertainment, just showing us his day at the park. It's also a way to see parks that I haven't been to yet. I don't consider the videos a form of review or endorsement.
 
Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
Top