Cookaholics Bulletin Board :: View topic

I'll say it: ATK/CI is claiming "no advertisers", but is then completely erasing the line between sponsors and advertisers. For example, "participating in promotions" is something you do with advertisers ... not sponsors. I know, I'm on the board of several 501(c)3's; if we gave a "sponsor" access to our membership list for advertising purposes, the IRS would be all over our butts. And rightly so.

Y'all get me soooo hot&bothered with all this winnin' chat that I couldn't resist :!:

From ATK: Congratulations! You have successfully registered for the America's Test Kitchen Garden to Table Sweepstakes.

Maybe - - - I'll share my winnings

So, do I think thta ATK/CI is dishonest and untrustworthy when it comes to ratings, comparisons, and product recommendations? Yes, I do.

OKOK, that wasn't really suggested here.... it gets my panties in a bunch, clearly

Oh! A little too much coffee this morning :?:

Paul,

I know, I'm on the board of several 501(c)3's; if we gave a "sponsor" access to our membership list for advertising purposes, the IRS would be all over our butts. And rightly so.

Author:	Paul Kierstead [ Fri Mar 22, 2013 5:31 am ]
Post subject:	Re: No Sponsors?
tumblr, seriously? WTH? Interesting site. Fuzzy, I'd imagine they would claim that their changing views are due to their influence, or possibly they team with the best in the industry or some such lovely stuff. I'd also suggest that anecdotal observations of such phenomena and not very accurate, to say the least. We are not good judges of such things under those circumstances (long term, remembered data, etc). So, you think they sit down and intentionally alter the outcomes of reviews to favour the products from their sponsors?

Author:	wino [ Fri Mar 22, 2013 7:40 am ]
Post subject:	Re: No Sponsors?
Y'all get me soooo hot&bothered with all this winnin' chat that I couldn't resist From ATK: Congratulations! You have successfully registered for the America's Test Kitchen Garden to Table Sweepstakes. Maybe - - - I'll share my winnings

Author:	Amy [ Fri Mar 22, 2013 8:09 am ]
Post subject:	Re: No Sponsors?
TheFuzzy wrote: I'll say it: ATK/CI is claiming "no advertisers", but is then completely erasing the line between sponsors and advertisers. For example, "participating in promotions" is something you do with advertisers ... not sponsors. I know, I'm on the board of several 501(c)3's; if we gave a "sponsor" access to our membership list for advertising purposes, the IRS would be all over our butts. And rightly so. Actually Josh, that's not quite true. (Remember, I spent a lot of years as an executive in NY advertising agencies, and I negotiated many sponsorships for my clients.) It really depends on the sponsorship. ATK isn't blurring the line between advertising and sponsorship. They are providing sponsorships. Those sponsors are tying their brand to ATK's. While these are broad-reaching sponsorships in terms of what the partner company gets in return for their sponsorship dollars, ultimately their brand is always served up in the context of being associated with ATK, the hallmark of sponsorships. If they were advertisers, their message would be independent of the ATK brand. Amy

Author:	Da Bull Man [ Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:28 am ]
Post subject:	Re: No Sponsors?
wino wrote: Y'all get me soooo hot&bothered with all this winnin' chat that I couldn't resist From ATK: Congratulations! You have successfully registered for the America's Test Kitchen Garden to Table Sweepstakes. Maybe - - - I'll share my winnings God help you and your "inbox"...I pray that they didn't ask you for a credit card number...

Author:	Da Bull Man [ Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:31 am ]
Post subject:	Re: No Sponsors?
TheFuzzy wrote: So, do I think thta ATK/CI is dishonest and untrustworthy when it comes to ratings, comparisons, and product recommendations? Yes, I do. Ditto...

Cookaholics Bulletin Board http://cookaholics.org/

No Sponsors? http://cookaholics.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3045	Page 2 of 4

Author:	Da Bull Man [ Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:35 am ]
Post subject:	Re: No Sponsors?
Paul Kierstead wrote: OKOK, that wasn't really suggested here.... it gets my panties in a bunch, clearly Panties???

Author:	wino [ Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:42 am ]
Post subject:	Re: No Sponsors?
Oh! A little too much coffee this morning

Author:	Da Bull Man [ Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:43 am ]
Post subject:	Re: No Sponsors?
wino wrote: Oh! A little too much coffee this morning Sorry... ...got on a roll there...

Author:	wino [ Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:40 am ]
Post subject:	Re: No Sponsors?
I had to register they finally included the Canadian provinces in their 'states' file!!!

Author:	Darcie [ Fri Mar 22, 2013 5:50 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: No Sponsors?
TheFuzzy wrote: Paul, I know, I'm on the board of several 501(c)3's; if we gave a "sponsor" access to our membership list for advertising purposes, the IRS would be all over our butts. And rightly so. I'm not sure about this. Do you know the code/rule section that governs this? I'm thinking about places like public radio stations. I'm pretty sure they provide membership info to "sponsors." As for ATK, I feel about them in pretty much the same way I feel about Consumer Reports. I don't agree with some of the criteria they use to judge a product, there are inherit biases with anyone's product review, and I take it all with a grain of salt. I also find it easy enough to see who sponsors CI and take that into account when reading the reviews. I'm not bothered by the sponsorships, but I'm also not impressed by them. Since I only subscribe to the bound annuals, I don't pay much attention to the sponsorships.

Page 2 of 4	All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/