Potential conflict, what do you think?
So last week I was invited to attend and speak at a semi-exclusive pre-trade show press event; not at all unusual or noteworthy in and of itself, but there are some things about it that some might find gray. In the interest of transparency, I figured I’d see what you think.
Among other things, our long-standing editorial policy at Engadget strictly prohibits junkets — paid airfare and accommodations to visit a company and engage their staff — of any kind. Since the event is on behalf of a major trade show, what’s proposed is not technically a junket, and they do appear to be sensitive to editors’ need to steer clear. But there are aspects that certainly feel a bit like it is: CE companies make up the governing board of the trade show, and the offer is to pay my way to Spain to stay at a four-star resort for three days, as well as speaker’s fee (a few thousand) to be on a panel and “share my perspective on US trends” in consumer electronics. (The audience would be comprised of journalists and execs from tech companies participating in said trade show.) There are no expectations of coverage on Engadget, although there will likely be something there worth covering.
Some other big names in the space have apparently received and accepted the offer under what may be different terms. My take? I’m leaning on the side of passing — there might be too many red flags and too much ambiguity. What do you think?
I say go for it. So long it doesn’t affect your reporting and you stay impartial and unbiased I don’t really see any problems.
Comment by Alex Norton — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 10:16 am
Hey there Mr. Block!
Indeed it sounds like a not so right thing to do.
But I guess you could suggest some things to the people that organize the show, that you would not attend as Engadget and that you won’t post anything concerning the event in Engadget.
If there’s something interesting to post Engadget in spanish could do it, besides with the fee the pay you, you could pay for their entrance fees.
Or even considering a little charity, like giving some VEX or LEGO kits to needed schools in the bay area.
Plus you could do an Engadget meetup in Spain.
Comment by Ricardo — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 10:25 am
I think that if you go on someone else’s dime you will lose some integrity. What I like about engadget is that I feel that you are not being pressured by anyone to post (or not) something.
You had no issue posting that (insane) legal threat about the color magenta. If t-mobile had just paid for flying you out to some event it would most likely have changed your decision. Even if they did not want any coverage from the event, it changes your opinion of the company.
I say take the Dvorak approach and not take any “bribes”. No matter how great it might be, it will affect your judgment.
Comment by Zac Garrett — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 10:40 am
Give your readers some credit. They are able appreciate that there is a lot of gray in the coverage of consumer electronics.
You should feel free to attend and cover it however you want.
Since you are clearly already on alert for this, your coverage will probably lean toward the critical anyway, so why worry?
Comment by Stefan — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 11:00 am
I worry because we treat this stuff with the same gravitas as the NYT or WSJ — there’s a very hard line and you’re generally either on one side or the other, you know?
Comment by Ryan Block — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 11:21 am
Hey Ryan, I think that if you have a doubt about it, it’s not worth doing.
Integrity is easy to lose and hard to regain, and if you desire to maintain it but are unsure if being on this panel is worth the risk of potentially losing it, than it’s not worth taking the risk.
The high road isn’t always the most convenient or easiest.
Comment by portorikan — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 12:11 pm
Your concerns are obviously valid, and if it’s raising red flags for you, it’s going to for others, too. While certain of us readers will recognize that what you’re being asked to do is most decidedly different from a vendor junket, not everyone will make that distinction. I think your cautionary instinct is the right one, personally.
On the other hand, I’d be happy to go in your place. ;)
Comment by John B. — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 12:13 pm
Pass for all the reasons “portorikan” listed.
Why not have a contest and send an Engadget reader in your place ala the Beastie Boys “Awesome, I f*ckin shot that!”
Comment by Todd — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 12:59 pm
I say go for it. There is no expectation for Engadget exposure and it could be a great networking opportunity. Your detractors might try to use it against you but who cares what they think anyway. As an Engadget reader I see this an opportunity to improve your coverage - go for it. Its free money!
Comment by Evan — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 3:42 pm
Go!! Are you crazy? I believe that you can separate the two activities.
Comment by MikeB — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 4:40 pm
If you’re just going as a speaker, I think it is legitimate to be paid and flown out there as part of your speaking compensation package.
I do think that it would rule out coverage of any kind on the Engadget site, positive or negative. Either you’re there to cover the event or you’re there to participate.
Comment by David — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 4:51 pm
Send me as a correspondent! ;)
Comment by veronica — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 5:50 pm
if you don’t feel good about it, stick to your principles. It has obviously worked great for you so far.
Comment by Al Block — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 10:15 pm
I’ll mirror #10, but really, I’m pleading for Veronica’s spot as the special correspondent.
Comment by Darren — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 10:24 pm
You should go. If it was “Sony Presents Its View on The Future of Gadgets” it’d be a little more of a conflict. Technically you could argue that CES is the same thing, just on a grander scale.
No conflict whatsoever IMHO.
Also, you should try to get an extra ticket for a good industry friend and loyal blog reader.
Comment by Jeremy Toeman — Wednesday, April 2, 2008 @ 11:42 pm
I think I’d go with the complete opposite of porktorian.
The very fact that you’re posting this here and are worried about it shows that really you shouldn’t worry about it.
It’s the journalists that have no qualms about accepting these things and don’t even consider potential conflicts that could cause a problem.
I say go for it, and perhaps don’t accept the speakers fee. Being paid to do something is perhaps a little different that having expenses covered - after all you’re providing them a service and you shoudn’t have to pay to do that.
Comment by peteremcc — Thursday, April 3, 2008 @ 2:02 am
Hey Ryan, from what it sounds like, it seems like they are trying to use you as a prominent speaker to help build crediability and enhance the image for their event. I think that’s quite a common thing to do in different trade events. I personally believe, as long as the deal does not require you to endorse any particular issues, I think it is good to go. Obviously, you are worry that reader might co-related your presence as a panel speaker to the position of Engadget. I believe everyone is entitle to their views, even the editor of a news channel or in your case, editor for Engadget. So as long as during the pre-show event, you are speaking for yourself and not for Engadget, I think you are good to go. Just my two cents! Peter
Comment by Peter Wong — Thursday, April 3, 2008 @ 4:55 am
My thing with ethics: Could you read it on the front page of NYT or WSJ and feel good about it? I’d imagine it’d say:
“Editor of Engadget paid to speak on panel”
To me, they’re not paying for Engadget to go, they’re paying for Ryan Block’s views and opinions, which is definitely worth something.
Not that it matters, but that’s my two cents.
Comment by Randall Bennett — Thursday, April 3, 2008 @ 5:13 am
Ryan,
Not sure about it, with what you say I think is fine to go, anyway if you come to Spain let me know, it would be great to have some beers :)
Comment by Alvaro — Thursday, April 3, 2008 @ 6:36 am
hmm, this is a close call. But, the bottom line is that you are taking money from folks who are in the industry you are covering, even if through the layers of a trade show organization. While those layers may be enough insulation to protect from any backlash (and, of course, there is no *real* conflict in your case, since you are above that), you are in a unique position.
Your site is fighting the uphill battle to retain legitimacy in a field that is full of amateurs and those much less professional than Engadget. As with women in some businesses, you are in the unfortunate position of having to be better than your competition in some ways.
While it is very unlikely that anyone would raise the issue, I would be tempted to err on the side of caution. Of course, I would also be tempted to go hang out in a resort in Spain if it was offered! So, I would not blame you either way.
Comment by Vance — Thursday, April 3, 2008 @ 8:20 am
The fee is the most problematic element - as you say, it creates a conflict of interest, and the right thing is for you to refuse it.
The rest of the package is a bit of a grey area but, provided you disclose it to your readers, I think you should be on the right side of the line.
Comment by Dan — Thursday, April 3, 2008 @ 4:06 pm
I’m of the same opinion as #21/Dan and a few previous. I agree that accepting the fee would be the greatest conflict but I beleive if you are there are Ryand and clearly not Engaget then you are mitigating that risk.
At the end of this, you’re clearly having concerns about it and frankly I say trust your gut. If it doesn’t feel right, it probably isn’t.
Comment by Kurtis — Thursday, April 3, 2008 @ 10:37 pm
Sounds like a net-positive career & financial decision (plus a nice getaway?) to me… Take the gig and 72 hours (or whatever) of paid leave from AOL/WIN and then fly home without providing any Eng coverage. If other Eng writers are sent, they can do their jobs.
If AOL/WIN was sending you anyway and you feel uncomfortable, participate on the panel with NO fee since you’d already be “on the clock.”
Comment by Dave Zatz — Sunday, April 6, 2008 @ 8:22 am
Ryan,
You know the old politican who tells the specal interest person ” I have no problem with eating your food, drinking your booze and (fornicating) with your women so long as you know I am going to vote what I think is right.” You have principles, or we would not be having the conversation.
I think there is a need for you to take your tech views to those who need to hear it. Getting paid is gravy. I will say that you should go as Ryan Block internationally beloved technology pundit (wait I think that title is taken) but not as editor in chief of Engadget and don’t report on it and don’t have anything to do with the editing of any report that might come out of it.
However, in the final analysis, you should go with your gut feelings. If you don’t feel confortable about it you probably should not do it.
(Just hope they don’t offer to pay Lady V’s way too-there is only so much man should be tempted with)
Comment by Rick C — Sunday, April 6, 2008 @ 2:23 pm
Hi Ryan.
I agree that you should give your audience some cred.
We see gray all the time. Your reputation is earned - don’t fret about the optics of transparency. When you sell out, we’ll know, until then enjoy the fruits of your labour. (Canadian spelling, yeah, we have tech too.)
-Tom
Comment by Tom Hofstatter — Monday, April 7, 2008 @ 6:04 am
I see no flags here. Press people attend events and speak on panels all the time. It’s not unheard of. And if you aren’t showing favoritism in your coverage, then I wouldn’t worry too much about “conflict”.
Comment by Darnell — Friday, May 9, 2008 @ 3:09 pm