|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
|
|
|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
|
In Reply to: Hmmm... posted by abajaj11 on June 7, 2004 at 11:55:46:
but it is not necessarily valid for one and all. We write what we write regardless if they are our advertisiers or not - and much of what we review is from products by people who do not advertise with PFO. If you read our site, you will find many "balanced" reviews (the good with the bad) of products from one and all.
If what you say is true, then one could infer that products from advertisers (or those that we want to advertise) would read as being of a more favorable review than those from people who do not advertise. And as such, would not be reported on as being good in those publications that do not accept advertising. The facts do not support (at least with this with PFO). In reading BFS (an obvious example) I find many products that have been reviewed not only in PFO, but elsewhere, receiving similar write-ups when one reads between the lines (biases, system synergies, etc.).
That is, even in magazines that do not take advertsing, you will find reviews that for the most part, report very similar takes on gear that has been reviewed by those that do take advertising. True, there may be people who will write what they need to write to make sure the money flows in, and if one does not require the money they are "freer" to write what their heart tells them to - though they may have other agendas that are just as damaging to the field as well. But I really do not think that because Marty does not take advertising he is any less or more likely to say product X is good or bad than we are just because we will accept advertisng. If so, then by right I should find way more discrepancy between the two publications.
Truth be told, one is more likely to offer a fair and honest review so that people will want to send you gear when asked. If they think that only money can buy a good review, than only those companies that can pay up would receive them - and they don't. There is a lot of good gear around and speaking for the PFO crowd, "Who wants to spend time and effort reviewing crap?!"
If tomorrow PFO lost its advertising dollars, our content would not change. PFO has advertising to pay our writers as much as we can, to cover costs of the website and operation, and to pay the principal owners for their time. We all have day jobs that pay our bills.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- I see your point - drclark 15:58:20 06/07/04 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
