A Conflict of Interest
March 12, 2025
I don’t think pickleball paddle reviewers should wear paddle company clothes on camera during their podcasts. I think it’s a clear conflict of interest. My brief mention of this last week prompted enough comments that I thought I’d take a deeper dive into the topic today.
A paddle reviewer is supposed to be an objective voice for consumers. Wearing paddle company caps or T-shirts can give the perception of being biased. If a reviewer wears a hat containing a paddle company logo, how can that reviewer criticize the company if it comes out with a bad paddle or exhibits lousy customer service?
When was the last time you saw a respected movie reviewer on camera wearing merch that’s part of the movie’s marketing campaign? How about a respected restaurant reviewer wearing a T-shirt with the restaurant’s logo on it?
I’m not referring to what reviewers wear off camera in their private time. But I don’t think reviewers should even accept free clothes from paddle companies. Tell the companies to stop sending merch except paddles and if they do send other freebies, donate them to charity. Accepting free paddles is understandable because reviewers critique hundreds of paddles a year and it would be unrealistic for them to pay for each one.
To me, this isn’t even a close call, I think it should be an obvious one. I realize we’re talking about pickleball paddles. This isn’t 60 Minutes or Watergate (Google it, kids).
However, with pickleball’s explosion in popularity and more paddle buyers than ever, I think credibility in all aspects of the sport is important. Let’s not be bush league, let’s be professional.
The Federal Trade Commission’s disclosures for social media influencers states in part,
“If you endorse a product through social media, your endorsement message should make it obvious when you have a relationship (“material connection”) with the brand. A “material connection” to the brand includes a personal, family, or employment relationship or a financial relationship – such as the brand paying you or giving you free or discounted products or services.”
In other words, podcasters should disclose when they receive free merchandise, not just free paddles. Most reviewers I’ve watched do read a disclaimer, essentially saying the paddles they receive are free and that they made no promises to the paddle company.
I was curious to find out what ethics experts think about this.
Don Heider, executive director of the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University, said, “Accepting free goods from the makers of products you review is an ethical problem and a fairly clear conflict of interest. Then wearing those free products in your videos takes it another step, because in the viewer's eyes, it can be seen as an endorsement of that brand. Most credible reviewers refuse free products, because even if they think it does not influence them, to the audience it appears to be an endorsement."
Robert Thompson, a longtime college professor of media at Cornell and Syracuse, said, “A reviewer wearing a company logo seems to be an advertisement for that company and raises all kinds of questions about credibility. Do they have no better sense than not to do this?”
Kelly McBride, Senior Vice President of the Poynter Institute, a non-profit based in St. Petersburg, FL, that provides journalism ethics training. McBride says when reviewers wear free merch from paddle companies, “Your credibility, your objectivity is diminished.”
I asked several paddle reviewers for their take.
Chris Olson, host, “Pickleball Studio:”
“When I was newer to the space, I used to wear a lot of company merch because I didn't own a lot of athletic clothing. So, getting it for free was helpful. It wasn't out of support for the company though.
“However, I quickly realized that it doesn't look good to review stuff while wearing company branding. So, I eventually stopped wearing any of it to avoid any confusion by viewers. I ended up donating all of the clothing that was paddle brand related.
“I don't think it's the end of the world if someone does wear something branded, but if they care about how people may view them because of it, then it wouldn't be advised.”
John Kew, “John Kew Pickleball:”
“I generally don't wear pickleball branded clothing when I'm filming the pod or paddle reviews, to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.” Kew wears caps with a hat company logo, but he pays for them, and the company does not make paddles. By the way, the caps sold by this company start at $79 and many cost $99. What do they do, re-grow hair?
Kew also wears clothes from a pickleball athletic apparel company that sponsors his podcast. I don’t think that’s a conflict because the company doesn’t make paddles and John states on-air that they’re a sponsor. It would be a conflict only if Kew was an apparel reviewer.
Braydon Unsicker, “Pickleball Effect”:
“While I admit to wearing a company cap on my podcast a few times, I agree that reviewers shouldn't do that and l have made a conscious effort to avoid it.
“Wearing brand gear on videos can show bias or favoritism and that's something I want to avoid. Early in my review journey, I made a video about a paddle and wore a T-shirt with [the company’s] prominent logo. A viewer commented, essentially questioning my impartiality, suggesting I might be biased due to the apparel. That comment resonated with me.”
Dustin Fowkes, host of “Pickleball Medicine,” says he’s worn paddle company shirts during two podcasts that featured other paddles.
“I do think that wearing a shirt of a company on a review video or podcast episode where you are talking about that company's paddles may imply some underlying bias, speaking based on some knee-jerk impressions I get when watching some of those segments. I also think wearing shirts, hats, etc. from companies does produce exposure for them (particularly for smaller companies).”
Matthew Kaundart, “Matthew K Pickleball,” has worn paddle company hats and T-shirts on camera.
“I totally understand where you're coming from, and everything I wear on camera is done so with intention. To put it simply, I like hats, and I test them just like any other product. Moreover, I like to feature and bring awareness to smaller brands on my channel in whatever ways I can.
“Raising awareness of smaller brands doing good work is key to keeping the latest tech in this sport affordable, and I'll continue looking for ways to be a champion of the ones I believe in.”
I disagree with Matthew and Dustin. They are both doing a nice job (I wrote about Dustin at length last year), but they can raise awareness of brands simply by giving their paddles a good review.
As Chris Olson says, this isn’t the end of the world. If you trust a reviewer who wears free merch, of course that’s your prerogative. Personally, I’d be more likely to trust a reviewer who maintains objectivity.
They are paddle reviewers, not clothing salesmen.
Thoughts of the week, not all pickleball
· Discord, the social platform app, might be the least user friendly app I’ve tried to navigate. Trying to find a particular conversation is like trying to find Amelia Earhart.
· Beware of the scam in which you get a text supposedly from the US Postal Service saying a package intended for you contains the wrong address. These texts are coming from scammers seeking your address and other personal information. Delete and report it. I first mentioned this scam last month but it’s reportedly on the rise.
· The current Netflix documentary Mr. McMahon, although compelling, doesn’t break new ground. It does remind you that World Wrestling Entertainment was rife was steroids and sleaze. Former WWE Chairman Vince McMahon has been sued by a former female employee for alleged abuse, sexual assault and human trafficking. The suit is on hold during a federal investigation. McMahon has reportedly paid more than $12 million to four women to “cover up allegations of sexual misconduct and infidelity.” The 79-year-old former WWE boss denies all allegations. He was acquitted in 1994 of charges that he conspired to distribute steroids to wrestlers. Incidentally, McMahon’s wife, Linda, runs the US Department of Education.
· When many pickleball players are waiting to play, I think rally scoring should be used. Maybe even rally scoring and nine points win. You could use traditional scoring to nine points but I’ve seen those games take as long as games in which 11 points win.
My first blog of each month includes a contest question to win a free Hudef paddle. Congratulations to Mitchell Summers of Crestview, FL, for being the first reader to email Hudef the correct answer to last week’s question, which was, “In my February 18th blog, I used a catchphrase from Seinfeld. What was the exact phrase?”
The answer: “Not that there’s anything wrong with that.”
Mitchell wins the Hudef Viva Pro Gen 3 paddle, valued at $169.99. Nice going, Mitchell, enjoy the paddle.
Remember, if you buy any Hudef paddle that costs $169.99, use my discount code MS30 to knock down the price by 30%, to $119.99. Any less expensive paddle, the code is MS15, giving you 15% off.