Consumer Reports has no advertising and they buy everything they review. When possible, they test items in blind trials. The magazine is also published by a non-profit. On the other hand, Amazon reviews have been gamed by both consumers and companies (two examples: Spore, Belkin). You can't be sure the people writing reviews actually bought the products they are reviewing. In my eyes Amazon reviews are better than nothing, but they don't come close to the value of a review by an unbiased party like Consumer Reports.

You have a good point regarding CR.

Over the past year we've tracked more than 30,000 published car reviews, including reviews by Consumer Reports as well as 100 other major publications. There is absolutely a correlation between review scores given to vehicles by publications that accept advertising and junkets, and those that do not. Make of that what you will.

"Can you really trust the product opinion of someone who hasn't put out their hard earned cash to acquire it?"

Hm, but in this case, I don't think the item he received as a bribe was the same as what was reviewed. (Otherwise it would be obvious which company it was, as he asked for a MacBook Air.)

I guess we can count that as a real endorsement for Apple though.

"Example 7: A college student who has earned a reputation as a video game expert maintains a personal weblog or “blog” where he posts entries about his gaming experiences. Readers of his blog frequently seek his opinions about video game hardware and software. As it has done in the past, the manufacturer of a newly released video game system sends the student a free copy of the system and asks him to write about it on his blog. He tests the new gaming system and writes a favorable review. Because his review is disseminated via a form of consumer-generated media in which his relationship to the advertiser is not inherently obvious, readers are unlikely to know that he has received the video game system free of charge in exchange for his review of the product, and given the value of the video game system, this fact likely would materially affect the credibility they attach to his endorsement. Accordingly, the blogger should clearly and conspicuously disclose that he received the gaming system free of charge. The manufacturer should advise him at the time it provides the gaming system that this connection should be disclosed, and it should have procedures in place to try to monitor his postings for compliance. "

From FTC Endorsement Guidelines http://www.ftc.gov/os/2009/10/091005revisedendorsementguides...

Meanwhile, reporters who sleep with the people who they cover are A-Okay. So are reporters who trade access for coverage.

Govt - solving the wrong problem, and badly.