Welcome to the 2010 online edition of Haunted Cincinnati! We focus exclusively on tri-state attractions providing you with the latest information and unbiased professional reviews based on twenty years of experience. Our information is outsourced to several tri-state outlets via radio, television, and print. We look forward to providing you with all of Cincinnati’s Haunted Attractions spooktacular information in 2010.
In 2010 when you’re online looking up haunted attractions and reading reviews it’s important for you to know that behind the scenes there are numerous conflicts of interest going on and money changing hands. Several bloggers have begun charging haunted attractions for front page listings. This practice of charging haunts for premiere space shows favoritism, and destroys any creditability the blogger has of an un-biased, or professional review of the that haunt they accepted money from. Why I don’t blame bloggers directly for trying to fund their websites I do question their motives on helping the attractions or providing any information on their website which is accurate. When you are looking at a reviewer’s website the easiest telltale sign of bias or money taking is a “Featured Haunt” section located on their front page. There are several websites in Cincinnati which charge haunted attractions for a “featured haunt” listing such as city blood, and Ohio valley haunts. They are both part of a group called H.R.A or haunt reviewers association.
According to information found on the HRAs website they are, “UNBIASED, ACCURATE, have a COURTEOUS STAFF, HELPFUL TO THE HAUNT COMMUNITY, UPDATES THEIR WEBSITE FREQUENTLY, and REVIEWS AT LEAST 10 HAUNTS A YEAR.” Let’s start out with that first one, UNBIASED. Webster defines unbiased as, “free from bias; especially : free from all prejudice and favoritism : eminently fair <an unbiased opinion>”. How can a website claim to be free of BIAS, yet charge haunted attractions to appear on their front page ahead of a non-paying haunted attraction? This is favoritism no matter how you slice it, i.e. BIAS. Conflict of interest is a slippery slope and can you really trust the review knowing he is getting paid by some of the haunted attractions?
They also claim to be accurate. A couple years back one of the HRA websites gave a haunted attraction a perfect 10 in length with that attraction taking 15 minutes to walk through. Another attraction was rated an 8 and they even stated it took 25 minutes to walk through. How can an attraction which is longer in length score lower? I remember them being called out by a haunted attraction over that.
Another one is the helpful to the haunt community. How does charging haunted attractions to be on your front page help the haunt community? Writing biased, inaccurate reviews helps the haunt community? What exactly have they done to help the haunt community? The HRA was founded and is run by a single position. If any complaints arise regarding their website can you really expect them to discipline themselves? Who watches the watchers?
So remember this year when you are looking at haunt reviews be wary of those making money from the haunted attractions.
Loading ...
