From the opening paragraph of the article ... Ironically enough, I actually believe them. ETA: It turns out that this counter-review has no affiliate links in it at all, and only exists to refute...
From the opening paragraph of the article ...
this purifier is inexpensive and pretty. But still, it’s terrible and you should instead buy a different purifier that totally coincidentally happens to pay affiliate marketing commissions.
Ironically enough, I actually believe them.
ETA: It turns out that this counter-review has no affiliate links in it at all, and only exists to refute shoddy claims in the other review which does have affiliate links to it's "superior" purifier.
The affiliate link thing is a bit overblown. Wirecutter has affiliate links w/ the retailer - e.g mostly Amazon, but R.E.I if it's R.E.I, and so forth - that they're suggesting. Not the product...
The affiliate link thing is a bit overblown. Wirecutter has affiliate links w/ the retailer - e.g mostly Amazon, but R.E.I if it's R.E.I, and so forth - that they're suggesting. Not the product itself.
So there could be a tenuous conflict of interest if a product is not sold from any of the retailers that they have affiliate programs with, since they are incentivized to suggest a product that is on one of those retailers. However, that's not the case in this specific situation (wirecutter has affiliate programs w/ ikea: e.g, see the links on https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-stuff-from-ikea/) but in general it's not that big of a deal, the affiliate web is large enough that I think that would be a problem in a very small minority of products, and it's unlikely that the product space is such that that is the one that's not sold on major retailers is the only good product in that space.
It’s speculation at best, though. They don’t give any evidence (either way) that Wirecutter’s reviewers choose products based on affiliate revenue. Repeating or making up rumors in a snarky tone...
It’s speculation at best, though. They don’t give any evidence (either way) that Wirecutter’s reviewers choose products based on affiliate revenue. Repeating or making up rumors in a snarky tone (as is so common in social media), without elaborating, loses credibility points with me, compared to someone who sticks to sharing things they’ve learned that are based on evidence.
I shared this anyway because it seems to be mostly based on scientific studies.
Hi! I uhhh work at the company that owns Wirecutter! I guess I don’t have any proof of this, but I personally know several Wirecutter writers. They… do not make recommendation decisions based on...
Hi! I uhhh work at the company that owns Wirecutter! I guess I don’t have any proof of this, but I personally know several Wirecutter writers. They… do not make recommendation decisions based on affiliate revenue, full stop. They go through a ton of work to pull initial lists of options, whittle that down to a testable set, and then do fairly rigorous testing to make their choices. Obviously sometimes this process is not perfect. Regardless, affiliate links come last, after recommendations are made!
Just adding to weight to what you were already saying!
Yeah, I also have noticed that Wirecutter reviews aren't really 'expert' for quite a few things. A while back I was looking at their recommendations for hot tubs and they didn't even consider the...
Yeah, I also have noticed that Wirecutter reviews aren't really 'expert' for quite a few things.
A while back I was looking at their recommendations for hot tubs and they didn't even consider the major brands, instead going for the cheap mail-order-only ones. For a very generalized sense of scale of how bad those are, those are the ones that are so cheap they'll fall apart within a few years, while the major brand ones are generally designed to last for decades.
The last time I used Wirecutter to decide on a moderately large purchase was when I wanted to buy a refrigerated ice cream maker. I ended up buying the one that was down the list because it created icecream that was 'too airy'. The air is what gives ice cream the delicious texture!
But it looks like they are either getting a lot of complaints or have learned their lessons because I checked both of these things and they seem to have gotten better; their hot tub advice is still not great, but they appear to have completely removed their garbage recommendations altogether. Their 2021 ice cream maker recommendations are mostly the same but are rewritten to better explain overrun
Air filters do not work like sieves. They are complicated materials that create a maze of tangled paths for air to run through.
[...]
Air filters easily catch both large and small particles. It’s the intermediate regime where things are hard. The size where the filter performs worst is called the Most Penetrating Particle Size (MPPS). Typically this is around 0.15 microns.
[...]
Both 99.5% and 99.95% are close enough to 100% that performance is almost entirely determined by the volume of air they process.
I loved the context of that last quote you posted when I saw this earlier on HN: To be fair, I thought air filters worked the same way I assume Wirecutter thought they worked prior to today. This...
I loved the context of that last quote you posted when I saw this earlier on HN:
If you run that purifier with an E12 filter, the fraction of particles that will remain after one minute is:
.1 × (1-.995) + .9 = 0.9005.
Meanwhile, if you run that purifier with an H13 filter instead then the fraction of particles that remain will be:
.1 × (1-.9995) + .9 = 0.90005.
If you noticed that 0.9005 and 0.90005 are almost identical then congratulations—you understand air filters better than the Wirecutter. Both 99.5% and 99.95% are close enough to 100% that performance is almost entirely determined by the volume of air they process.
To be fair, I thought air filters worked the same way I assume Wirecutter thought they worked prior to today. This article is the first time I've been exposed to the concept of MPPS. There's something really satisfying about being educated by a person who's passions align with their area of expertise.
From the opening paragraph of the article ...
Ironically enough, I actually believe them.
ETA: It turns out that this counter-review has no affiliate links in it at all, and only exists to refute shoddy claims in the other review which does have affiliate links to it's "superior" purifier.
The affiliate link thing is a bit overblown. Wirecutter has affiliate links w/ the retailer - e.g mostly Amazon, but R.E.I if it's R.E.I, and so forth - that they're suggesting. Not the product itself.
So there could be a tenuous conflict of interest if a product is not sold from any of the retailers that they have affiliate programs with, since they are incentivized to suggest a product that is on one of those retailers. However, that's not the case in this specific situation (wirecutter has affiliate programs w/ ikea: e.g, see the links on https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-stuff-from-ikea/) but in general it's not that big of a deal, the affiliate web is large enough that I think that would be a problem in a very small minority of products, and it's unlikely that the product space is such that that is the one that's not sold on major retailers is the only good product in that space.
It’s speculation at best, though. They don’t give any evidence (either way) that Wirecutter’s reviewers choose products based on affiliate revenue. Repeating or making up rumors in a snarky tone (as is so common in social media), without elaborating, loses credibility points with me, compared to someone who sticks to sharing things they’ve learned that are based on evidence.
I shared this anyway because it seems to be mostly based on scientific studies.
Hi! I uhhh work at the company that owns Wirecutter! I guess I don’t have any proof of this, but I personally know several Wirecutter writers. They… do not make recommendation decisions based on affiliate revenue, full stop. They go through a ton of work to pull initial lists of options, whittle that down to a testable set, and then do fairly rigorous testing to make their choices. Obviously sometimes this process is not perfect. Regardless, affiliate links come last, after recommendations are made!
Just adding to weight to what you were already saying!
Yeah, I also have noticed that Wirecutter reviews aren't really 'expert' for quite a few things.
A while back I was looking at their recommendations for hot tubs and they didn't even consider the major brands, instead going for the cheap mail-order-only ones. For a very generalized sense of scale of how bad those are, those are the ones that are so cheap they'll fall apart within a few years, while the major brand ones are generally designed to last for decades.
The last time I used Wirecutter to decide on a moderately large purchase was when I wanted to buy a refrigerated ice cream maker. I ended up buying the one that was down the list because it created icecream that was 'too airy'. The air is what gives ice cream the delicious texture!
But it looks like they are either getting a lot of complaints or have learned their lessons because I checked both of these things and they seem to have gotten better; their hot tub advice is still not great, but they appear to have completely removed their garbage recommendations altogether. Their 2021 ice cream maker recommendations are mostly the same but are rewritten to better explain overrun
From the article:
[...]
[...]
I loved the context of that last quote you posted when I saw this earlier on HN:
To be fair, I thought air filters worked the same way I assume Wirecutter thought they worked prior to today. This article is the first time I've been exposed to the concept of MPPS. There's something really satisfying about being educated by a person who's passions align with their area of expertise.