The Bzz Agent controversy has raised some interesting questions. Is it unethical for people to "buzz" (speak positively) about a product which they've received for free for the very purpose of spreading said buzz? Is full disclosure necessary? The public seems to think so, and BzzAgent seems to agree. They've repeatedly instructed Bzz Agents to disclose up front who they are and why they are buzzing. I see nothing wrong with this, but I think consumers are trying to shift the blame. As long as the feedback is truthful (and Bzz Agents are supposed to buzz how they really feel, even if that's negative) I don't think we can blame society for making us purchasing anything. I mean, really, people.
PS. visit my other blogs
/subliminal message
