aBlogtoWatch began on the premise that I would give myself a space to publish watch reviews. Having been interested in timepieces for a number of years, I found myself full of strong opinions and perspectives that I wanted to share with others. I’d grown up reading product reviews; before watch reviews and other product reviews existed on the internet, I would voraciously read magazines about cars, cameras, computers, video games, adventure gear, and more. That allowed me to experience a strong culture of seeing professional content creators photograph items and then write review and recommendation articles about them. Reviewers had allegiance to readers, and if the reviews weren’t helpful, people would stop spending time writing about them. In the U. S., Consumer Reports and other publications made their mark by writing reviews that consumers would pay to read. Car companies were so happy when their vehicles earned good reviews that they used such accolades as part of their marketing materials. Strong consumer reviews were an important part of helping buyers make good choices in a competitive marketplace and also provided strong feedback for product makers regarding what was correct and incorrect about their designs and ideas.

I take watch and other product reviews extremely seriously because I believe entire industries like the enthusiast watch space rely on consumers making good choices so that they are happy with their purchases. The entire aBlogtoWatch writing team considers it a responsibility to produce transparent, fair, opinionated, and in-depth watch reviews. To me, a watch review is an article or other piece of media that first presents a watch’s details and specifics, then expresses an opinion about it. While this sounds straightforward, I wanted to write this article because very little of the “watch review” content on the internet actually meets the above definition of a “review.” In fact, the term “watch review” (and “review,” in general, for that matter) has been so bastardized that it barely means anything anymore aside from some type of content about some type of watch.

A long time ago, people figured out that consumers like reading reviews of products before purchasing them. A study I read about watch buyers found that around 85% of timepiece consumers seek out watch reviews and similar content online before making a purchase decision. That makes sense: Watches are expensive items, and “making a mistake” on a timepiece that doesn’t deliver happiness can be a costly error. It is natural for people to want to read an expert opinion (or at least an informed one) on the matter and see how they feel about the watch and the experience of wearing it. But the internet has proven that not everyone feels they have a responsibility to the consumer to spend the time creating honest, thorough reviews. Content creators are aware of the demand for such reviews and have been trying to capture the attention of consumers by publishing content masquerading as watch reviews. But it turns out they aren’t watch reviews at all.

There are also watch retailers who publish “watch reviews” about the watches they are selling. You clearly cannot offer an objective opinion about the merits or worthiness of a watch when at the same time you are hoping someone will hand over top dollar for it. It is a clear conflict of interest for anyone selling a timepiece to be publishing a review about it. Any consumer should immediately question said content. But these days, the line between retailers and media has blurred so much that I don’t think the average consumer understands what to make of the complicated content landscape. Suffice it to say that when asked if they trust the opinion of someone trying to sell them a product, most consumers would clearly respond that someone selling the product is highly biased and would not want to say too many negative things about it.

Watches are like any other product and can range from amazing to awful in terms of quality, construction, design, appeal, and overall personal value. Watch reviews should address all of this. They must, of course, include a description of the watch, but too many stop there. Further, a lot of “watch reviews” out there don’t offer any original imagery but instead rely on publicly available images that almost always fail to accurately represent a timepiece. (Usually, they are highly polished marketing photos and sometimes even renders, or worse, images stolen from other content producers.) A description with stock brand-supplied photos is a low-value piece of content, and because there are no word police on the internet, anyone can, without repercussion, give their content any title they want in an attempt to game search and other content-finding algorithms. These are not watch reviews, and your time has been wasted.

Watch reviews also must include an opinion, and it’s best if that opinion comes from someone worth listening to. One of the more amusing things in the timepiece space is the emergence of the armchair expert. In a way, I started that way and simply gained more and more experience along the way until I was a bona fide expert. There are far too many armchair watch experts who know how to create pretty videos and are out there striving for your views. Bless them, but be wary of those who want to review watches for you even though they have no real perspective or experience to share. I don’t say this to denigrate any novice watch media colleagues out there — more voices create a richer media landscape — but rather to reinforce the significance of the responsibility inherent in advising people how to spend their money. In an era in which investment recommendations are cheap and ubiquitous, the onus falls on the consumer to practice the wisdom “caveat emptor” (buyer beware) at all times.

Watch reviews by the staff at aBlogtoWatch are meant to be the next best thing to handling the watch yourself and are written as though a friend is sharing his or her feelings with another friend. Friends want to explain what they are talking about but also make it clear how they feel about the topic, and perhaps why. aBlogtoWatch uses that same mentality when writing all watch reviews. At aBlogtoWatch, our reviews cover the specifications of a watch, how well it performs its basic tasks, how well it achieves its stated purpose, how comfortable and attractive it is on the wrist, and, where appropriate, whether the price makes sense given the personality and design. We are both explaining and critiquing a timepiece at the same time, and we have the expertise to do so, making the reviews worth your time. Further, we use original photography and video to better tell the story, and while we strive to create beautiful media for our reviews, we also ensure that they accurately represent each watch. And while we’ve worked with brands to design a few limited editions, we have not, do not, and will not ever sell watches on aBlogtoWatch.

What we also don’t do, and I think is worth mentioning very clearly, is review how a watch’s movement actually performs during the review period. Each watch movement architecture has both a theoretical performance and an actual performance that can change for each specific movement. Movements can be adjusted and regulated to improve their accuracy and performance, but some things can affect individual movements for the worse that are beyond the control of a brand or manufacturer (and some brands insist on sending review samples with non-working movements). aBlogtoWatch’s writers understand how watch movements work and can fluidly explain how to understand them and how they operate; we’ll always be sure to let you know what the movement is and how you may expect it to perform.

Watch review articles and videos are probably what aBlogtoWatch is best known for. That’s good because they continue to be my favorite thing to do here. I enjoy them not because they are easy and quick, but rather because a good watch review takes time. I wear the watches, I compare the watches, I think about the watches. I spend time photographing the watches and looking at them in a very close-up and intimate way. When I write a review, I want to express my enthusiasm when it is merited but also quickly point out things that I think could have been done better — or are simply mistakes. I do this as friendly feedback to the watch designers, helping them to perfect their designs and earn more consumer attention the next time around. Not all watches are meant for all people. That fact has resulted in a beautiful variety of designs and styles within the wristwatch space. That also means finding the right watch for you (especially when you get started with the collecting hobby) can feel like a long hunt. It is.

aBlogtoWatch espouses the virtues of the watch-collecting hobby more so than allegiance to any given brand or model. In other words, I want to encourage people to like watches, but I don’t really care what watches they end up liking. What I can do is explain the larger context of the watch world through my writing and produce watch reviews that help people understand the impact and promise of any given watch — even if it isn’t right for their wrist. There is nearly nothing I or anyone can do to stop the steam on non-review “watch review” content on the internet. I just hope consumers think critically when it comes to what they are viewing and ask themselves if there is actually any type of “review” in a watch review article, video, or other piece of content they are looking at. Happy watch collecting.