Two weeks ago, I had what I can only describe as a punch-to-the-stomach moment (which luckily doesn’t happen very often). The AirGradient ONE - our monitor that was recognized in one of the world’s most rigorous scientific evaluations - suddenly became “Not Recommended” by WIRED magazine in their The Best Indoor Air Quality Monitors review.
Yes, this is the same monitor that got two awards from the AirLab micro sensor challenge , one of the most rigorous sensor testing programs, beating more than 30 other well known brands. And yes, this is also the same monitor that the University of Cambridge chose -after rigorous testing- for the largest study on classroom air quality in the world. And yes, it’s the same monitor that is loved by thousands of Home Assistant users for its easy and local integration.
Today, I want to share why we feel that this is a flawed review and the larger picture of how influential publications’ recommendations affect manufacturers as well as consumers.
As the founder of AirGradient, many of you know that transparency is how we operate. This is why we are open-source and why we openly talk about our successes as well as our failures. We work closely with scientists and communities to improve air quality.
We’re often more critical of ourselves than others are, constantly raising our own bar. So when something like this happens, it feels deeply unfair, like when a teacher gives you an F because your pencil broke during the exam, while giving As to students who didn’t even submit their work. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves; we will explain the details below.
We’re a small team building open-source monitors, competing against companies with massive marketing budgets and PR machines. We started as a volunteer project in Thailand, putting impact before profit.
What we lack in marketing power, we make up for with genuine care, transparency, and authenticity. Over 50,000 users trust our open-source approach because we believe in giving people control over their data and the ability to repair their own devices. Our monitors offer much more value at a lower price, and our competitors are probably not very happy about this.
Many companies would try to sweep this “Not Recommended” review under the rug or send lawyers. But I feel I have a responsibility here to address this head-on, because our community deserves to know the details, and hopefully, this will trigger a larger discussion around the integrity of tech journalism.
Now, at this point, I would really recommend that you read the review so that you can form your own opinion about it.
Why did the AirGradient One get a “Not Recommended”?
... continue reading