Guy Accuses IPVM Of Marketing For And Being Paid Off By "Chinese State-Sponsored Agencies"

JH
John Honovich
Dec 28, 2023
IPVM

After we explained the article (Hikvision VMS Beats Genetec, Milestone and Verkada In "Gartner Peer Insights"), he deleted his comments, but there are some interesting lessons about dealing with social media posts.

We shared that article on LinkedIn recently, and a person responded:

IPVM Image

We responded by asking him why he thought so, given our track record of exposing PRC entities' human rights abuses, which has become so well known that it has been covered in profiles by The Atlantic, Wired, and Time.

He responded that we were marketing for them:

IPVM Image

Which we responded by asking if he had read the first paragraph of the post, sharing it:

While Gartner is one of the oldest and most well-known names in IT, its lack of expertise in video surveillance and intent on being found in search results show in its "Peer Insights" VMS Market ranking Hikvision's iVMS-5200 over virtually all other entrants, including Genetec, Milestone, and Verkada.

After that, he deleted his comments.

One thought is about titles / headlines. The one we used was factually focused - Hikvision VMS Beats Genetec, Milestone and Verkada In "Gartner Peer Insights" without an explicit disclaimer or emotive language. An alternative title could have been Horrible Hikvision VMS Wrongly Beats Genetec, Milestone, and Verkada In Bogus Gartner Peer Insights.

Titles/headlines are tough since one is trying to convey a lot in only a few words and slight changes in words can significantly impact tone or understanding. We aim to be more factually focused with titles, though, as this showed, it resulted in an industry professional falsely concluding we were promoting Hikvision.

As for social media posting, he probably would have been better off spending 30 seconds before posting or posting a question before making such an obviously false allegation. I think though this incident ended relatively well, he deleted it after we clarified, and we are not calling him out personally.

Social media is still relatively new and all of us are trying to learn how to optimally engage. And while chaos on social media (e.g., the wild ride of Twitter/X over the last few years show) is still real, I am hopeful that we will all learn how to better engage.

(4)
UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #1
Dec 28, 2023

All of us can probably benefit from having this picture near our computer for the times it's needed.

IPVM Image

(5)
U
Undisclosed #2
Dec 29, 2023

Proof that people scrolling social can't even manage to read through a full headline before making an uninformed post.

IPVM Image

(2)
(3)
UI
Undisclosed Integrator #3
Dec 29, 2023

(2)
RS
Robert Shih
Dec 30, 2023
Independent

What's next? They call me a shill for the CCP?

(1)
Avatar
Greg Hussey
Jan 02, 2024

Journalists are supposed to provide information/facts etc. not opinions. That is why they are protected by the first amendment - i.e. the press. Media outlets are not the "press" because they offer more opinions, not facts. The press is supposed to provide me with the info I need to develop my own opinion. Not tell me what to think. Our issue today is that Media outlets misrepresent themselves as the Press. So, regarding this topic, I would suggest John, you guys continue to think in the same way - i.e. the Press. Be a resource for data, market trends, facts, information... My guess is the person that commented was assuming this platform was like a Media Outlet and was looking for more of an opinion, that matched their idea of the Truth. Fun stuff.

JH
John Honovich
Jan 02, 2024
IPVM

Journalists are supposed to provide information/facts etc. not opinions

This may be a philosophical question or issue, but I think it's infeasible to provide information/facts without any opinions. Even the selection of what facts are relevant are, at some level, arguably opinions (e.g., why did you report on topic X instead of Y?).

I think good journalism or analysis should strive to find as much related evidence as possible both for and against the reporting being done.

And to be clear, if this person had said Hikvision's iVMS-5200 was better than Genetec, that's an opinion and one can hold that. The problem in this very specific case was that this person thought we were saying that Hikvision iVMS-5200 was better when clearly we were not.

(3)
UM
Undisclosed Manufacturer #4
Jan 02, 2024

Headlines can completely define what a large majority of those that see them infer from the rest of the article, primarily those who don't read beyond them (the majority). Best example of that I've seen is this quick lesson from a great movie called The Shipping News.

JH
John Honovich
Jan 02, 2024
IPVM

Thanks! I had never seen that movie or clip. So while I don't know the full context, my impression from 39 seconds was that the bearded man was exaggerating on purpose to get attention. In this example, a reputable journalist should only use the headline "imminent storm threatens village" unless they have good facts / data that the likelihood is very high. On the other hand, if a reporter simply says "horizon fills with dark clouds" when indeed an imminent storm threatens the village, than the report has failed the other way by not communicating clearly what risks readers face. Thanks for sharing!

New discussion

Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.

Newest discussions