Great post and thanks for sharing. I do find it interesting that Johnny Carter recently said (in regards to his expired Longthorne sponsorship) on The Dead Pair podcast that (paraphrasing) he didn’t think it was appropriate to have a gun sponsor. He stated that he wanted to remain unbiased and not influenced with all of the different guns that come through on the channel.

 

You are correct. He spoke of his breakup with longthorne and highly praised their guns but stated to have too close of a relationship with a manufacturer while shooting and reviewing many brands was not a good thing.

 

$$$s and a good line of gab can bring success....always has, always will.

Do people really watch TGS and the like to learn or to be introduced to different or....to be entertained?
I would say 'entertained' is #1 and 'different' is #2.

I have enjoyed the banter, etc with the frequent guest who prefers SxSs....for the guest's down-to-earth reality of what gun works and also carries an undeniable appeal behind the wear and the Time in someone's hand.

Jonny.....naturally does not know much of anything about American Upland wild bird hunting....no fault to him as it is not his gig.
His sponsorships...seem his business and the entertainment angle says...who cares?

 

Look at the PGA, & LIV, you really need a line of BC to be successful, most of those guys don't get rich winning tournaments. The big money is in endorsements, merchandizing, and media coverage. Kind of reminds me of football, baseball, basketball, hockey, etc. One mistake and nobody ever hears from you again.
Mike
PS: At the alter when I got married 55-years ago, I heard this ominous voice say: I can't promise you happiness in this life, only in the next.

 

Jonny talked about being sponsored by Beretta on The Clay Lab with Will Fennell recently.

The way I see it is this: First of all, the top rack B, P, and K guns are all really good. They have to be to dominate the field, regardless of how much money changes hands. If your gun is crap and breaks all the time, a serious competitor isn't going to risk their livelihood to shoot your gun (and they'll probably lose out on future sponsorships if they can't win).

Secondly, TGS is a content creation channel involving high dollar items that unless you, as the proprietor of the show, are fabulously wealthy as to personally purchase all the guns, you'd best not bite hands that feed you.

 

Given the quality of his work it is obvious that Carter’s product does not come cheap. Great cinematography, editing, music, etc. We’ve benefited from his labor through greater knowledge of our passions and hours of entertainment. If he can continue this high quality, and we can continue to receive its benefits, then let Beretta defer the cost. If Carter is reasonably convinced he is free to say what he thinks then I’m satisfied. I‘m impressed that he openly voices his concern about the perception of the legitimacy of his opinions. This is quite rare in our world where agendas are frequently hidden and opinions are trumpeted as fact.

 

The concept is influence.
Beretta pays the expenses for Jonny's VIP trip to the Bresica factory. Who would turn down a trip to Bresica? That ain't a free trip to Gary, Indiana. They cover the expenses of creating his video. Youtube pays him for the video, not Beretta.

Profit = Income - Expenses. Beretta increases Jonny's profit.

Perhaps he gets a custom fitting at no charge, and the "friends and family" rate when he pays for his shotgun. They give him a nifty free shooting vest and cap. But he's not paid anything directly. Perhaps they pay to shipping and transfer fees on products sent to him for review, and provide ammunition.

Jonny seems like a nice young man, someone I would enjoy taking on a very anti-posh, American style, do-it-all-yourself bird hunting hike. The most expensive part of my hunting is if we stop for lunch. He may even believe that he is giving his unbiased opinion about Beretta products.

I believe these cozy relationships lead to unconscious bias. I respect when entertainers disclose the relationship they have with manufacturers, and the more up-front about it, the more respect I have. Hickock45 does a nice job of consistently disclosing his relationship with Bud's Gun Shop. Other Youtube reviewers make a point that they purchase their review items with their own money. When I want to know about a household product, I pay ConsumerReports for their review. They use their own money to buy the test products from a distributor.

Unconscious bias has an effect. When a judgement call is close, it's human nature to give an edge to your friends.

These relationships can be subtle; I don't think I have ever seen Hickock45 give a negative review. Jeff Quinn (RIP) was even better, in my opinion. Although he could give a negative review, he seemed to find good things about any product. People like positive people, unless you're a snob like me who loves a cranky, truthful old buzzard who tells it like it is.

If a company is on-the-ball, having relatively independent reviewers can be a good thing. Sometimes, in-house product review has too much riding on the product to give an objective review. Someone needs to keep telling Franchi to ditch that stupid butt pad until they do, for example.

A poor reputation works the other way. Once a company establishes a reputation for making rubbish, it's very difficult for the company to turn that around. I read an article about Microsoft trying to enter the automotive software business. They couldn't do it. Absolutely everyone had the same bias: "You want to make my car to be as reliable as my PC? No way!" Never mind that automotive software has no PC software inside it at all.

That's why I love Shotgun World. I get to hear from the fellows that pay their own money. True, we only hear from people when they have problems, but let's take that into account.

 

I spent twenty years writing for shotgun publications. As I watch Johnnie and the plethora of podcasts popping up, I have to chuckle. It is quite a chore to constantly come up with new topics. It’s always a tight rope walk trying to be useful to the industry while being honest with the audience. Shoot coverage was always enjoyable because it was a topic in a nutshell. For those on You Tube who are trying to make a living at it, I wish you well. For those with a sponsor like Johnnie and Beretta, always remember you are a business decision when you start and a business decision when you end. Shotguns are pretty basic: a stock, barrel and action. There’s been nothing revolutionary for a long, long time, in spite of marketing ads to the contrary. There are only a few shooters people are really interested in listening to and in the large scheme of things, very few people have the slightest interest in shotgunning at all. It will be interesting to see how the media part of the game evolves. I can say without hesitation that the worst part about being away from the media aspect of shotgunning is not getting to see old friends. The absolute best part? Getting to shoot my own guns!

 

Jonny's Response, less than an hour later: Great question - The UK importer paid for Sasha's time to edit the factory tour vids, they also paid for expenses whilst out learning about their barrels. Making films to our standard costs a fair amount of money and wouldn't be possible without this sort of support.
...

Beretta knows marketing and has money. Jonny knows media production and needs money. Seems like a natural enough relationship...

 

Jonny is doing a great job for shotgun enthusiasts. Very professional and down to earth. Very entertaining. He is positive and does find the good in all guns including Baikal. Obviously, you have to exercise your own discernment.

 

posted deleted by author

 

In my opinion, not clearly disclosing that you were financially compensated or even just reimbursed in exchange for a review reflects poorly on your brand.



This should be clearly disclosed in the text description for the videos.

It's in every video "and now a word from our sponsors"...

 

It's pure marketing. Nothing more, nothing less. Beretta obviously sees the opportunity to increase market share by being popular with the hosts of shows we watch and putting their gear into the hands of those that make them look good.. Rewind the clock 10 years and replace the name Beretta with Perazzi. They all have this great story to go along with their well marketed product. It's just good business sense.

 

TGS video content is better than anything in the US. Jonny Carter is a really good personality, and the content is usually very informative. Most of these writers, personalities and spokespeople take gifts and gratuities from companies in the line of business they are involved with. It's called sponsorship. Goes on all the time in business. It's entertainment, what's the big deal?

 

It's entertainment, what's the big deal?

IMO it's a huge deal. TGS started, and built a big audience on gun reviews. The fact that it's entertaining just drives more people to their gun reviews. Acting like this stuff isn't driving a huge amount of sales in the shotgun market is just incredibly naive. We have the word 'influencer' now for a reason: $$$.

I believe Jonny is a good guy who wants to do the right thing, that's most likely why he was so quick to respond to my question. When you have as big an influence as he does over what people spend their hard earned money on, you have a responsibility to disclose this sort of thing.

I'm glad he is clearing this up now, but I also agree with everyone who is pointing out that this should have been disclosed in the Beretta videos up to this point. Even if he wasn't officially 'sponsored' at the time, he should have said what they were paying for. Do the payments, vip treatment, and free stuff have any bearing on the opinions he shares in his videos? That's for each of us to decide individually, assuming we have all the information.

 

I don't think he's pursuing journalistic integrity standards, not that integrity exists in that field any longer. It's entertainment and he's not being enigmatic about it as others are when asked.

 

It's not a gun review channel primarily. It's a shotgun shooting lifestyle channel. The best one out there. The video they posted yesterday was amazing. I don’t see what the problem is here. He's not a journalist, and never claimed to be one. He's also living the dream and getting paid for it.

 

Plain and simple, I prefer disclosure even if it's just text saying "some of the costs associated with this video were paid for with support from Beretta."

There are laws in the UK (and the US, and many other parts of the world) which make it illegal to promote a product or service for which the content creator has been paid, and doesn't disclose that payment. That includes YouTube videos. In this case, I don't think this was specifically an advertisement for a specific product or service, though several firearms are named and discussed. That is a grey area.

The UK's law doesn't consider something necessarily an advertisement unless there is both payment and some form of editorial control from the sponsor. Many in this position will say "I was provided XYZ by the manufacturer, but they do not have editorial control." This is where Jonny's statement "There was a big caveat from me that i can still say what i think about theirs, and any other product that i want." comes in. Is he saying this to imply journalistic integrity (why would he care if he's not attempting to be a journalist as so many are saying), or is he saying it to indicate Beretta doesn't have editorial control, so he doesn't need to publicly disclose when, or for what, he is specifically paid?

 

posted deleted by author

 

His disclosure is appreciated. It's nearly impossible for some bias to not occur. One does not bite the hand that feeds.

 

He is likeable and his vids are entertaining, but his opinions are just that, opinions, and possibly biased because he isn’t doing the vids for purely altruistic motives. I think most people get that.

 

Great for Jonny! Putting on a production like TGS is NOT easy. And anyone, repeat, ANYONE, that thinks the shotgun makes the difference is smoking to many dubbie's!

 

The thing is " Beretta " owns a bunch of shotgun brands. All of those brands are pretty good guns in the $500 to $500,000 price range.

 

I enjoy his videos because they are well produced clay shooting entertainment. I quit thinking he was talking from the heart when he did the Longthorne bit. The aimpoint episode was so comically ridiculous as to end even the most ardent Johnny fan's belief of independence. Such is life. I'll still watch but just for entertainment and certainly not to actually glean independent opinions on any gun.

it's a shame Youtube has just become independently produced marketing for the highest bidder but that is exactly what it is. And it is exactly what we have with TGS now. Can't fault the guy for chasing the $$. Wish he wasn't but I'm not contributing to his costs so I got no say in it.

 

So, are Digweed and Husthwaite also comically ridiculous? Just a bunch of hucksters on that side of the pond?

 

TLDR: 'Yep, I took the money'

 

Does anyone but me think some folks are being premature in their negative judgements of Jonny’s integrity before the deal is even done? Beretta probably can’t be noted as a sponsor until the actual sponsor contract is signed, sealed and funded…IMHO. He’s been open regarding his connections with his ammo, glasses, etc. Let’s see what shakes out after he makes the sponsorship official.

As far as the influencer tag goes I’m unimpressed. There are an unlimited number of so called influencers on YouTube, both good and bad and I for one don’t make my financial decisions based on their opinions. Anyone who doesn’t do their due diligence on something at the price point of a DT11 deserves whatever they get…IMHO.

Lastly, I really enjoy his show. I consider it entertainment with good imput from his guests. I’m glad I saw the show on how it takes the eyes time to adjust to changes before I had my cataract surgery. Post surgery my shooting tanked but came back even better than before after about 500 shells down range. Had I not seen that program I would have had far more stress to deal with.

Disclaimer, I shoot both Beretta and Perazzi shotguns for sporting clays and skeet but that fact has not “influenced“ my reply nor have I been compensated for my opinions, be they ever so humble 😎

 

Sounds like Jonny has upset some people in the US. Maybe a little jealous?

 

Imagine how upset some would be if they knew Glock's initial push and subsequent dominance in the US police market was the result of supplying guns essentially for free.

Honestly Johnny Carter is good for shooting and hunting both in Europe and North America. He presents a great image in a refined and entertaining manner. If the top gunmaker, and oldest manufacturer in the world finds he and his viewers worthy of sponsorship, more power to him.

I'm off to Amazon to find a tweed peaked cap.

 

I've enjoyed his videos for a couple of years now. I'm pretty sure that I've watched most of them. They are very entertaining. How many people are going to buy a gun based just on his review? What happened to going into the shop, shouldering it to see if it "fits?" Most of the guns above the entry level Turkish guns are probably pretty damn good. If they "fit," then do a little more research. Try to rent one...
Good for Jonny for getting Beretta as a sponsor! I'll keep watching and enjoying his videos. Full Transparency: I do pay something like $2/month for membership. Go TGS!

 

In the words of Chuck Berry....

Go Go
Go Johnny Go
Go Go
Johnny B. Goode