In Reply to: Art Dudley: The Goodness of Your Heart: A Tragedy in One Act posted by Isaak J. Garvey on May 18, 2016 at 08:05:59:
There were three names mentioned in the piece, and you couldn't keep them straight?
I've worked with many manufacturers through the years, and handled reviews and advertising all over the world. Most reviewers, editors and publishers are highly ethical, and I've never had an issue with them. Some follow a model I find repellant, and I choose not to deal with them. In the past, my clients have agreed with my take on such things; at present my employer, PS Audio, agrees with me.
When we advertise, we do it because we know from experience that ads in/on a given outlet return increased traffic to our site and/or increased enquiries to our sales department. We never advertise as a result of coercion or extortion, nor do we ever give freebies to reviewers, either as a reward for a favorable review or in order to provoke a favorable review.
We just don't. Ever. Aside from the fact that we don't have to---PS is a well-established company with highly-regarded products---we wouldn't do it anyway. It's an offensive practice that undermines the validity of the whole review process, and implies that our products are incapable of receiving good reviews unless there is a payoff in some form.
I have worked with John and Art for many years, as has Paul McGowan. We hold them in the highest regard, and trust them implicitly. When the exchange with "Randy" occurred, I happened to mention it to JA and AD as a "you're not gonna believe this..." anecdote.
The exchanges depicted did occur as described. The "soliloquies" were my words.
To view the depiction of actual occurrences as vague slurs against an entire industry indicates to me that the piece wasn't read carefully, and the inability to track who-is-whom further confirms same.
Paul was aware of all events, and supported my decision to share the info, and approved of the mention of my name and that of PS.
It is both bewildering and astonishing to me that Stereophile's depiction of these incidents has been turned against them. They're the GOOD GUYS, for goodness' sake!
Bill Leebens
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- "Assclown"?? Let's get a few things straight.... - Bill Leebens 14:22:22 05/22/16 (21)
- RE: "Assclown"?? Let's get a few things straight.... - Ivan303 14:55:27 05/23/16 (0)
- Please explain what benefit acrues to us from that piece. - Rick W 10:25:35 05/23/16 (2)
- A better question: what benefit accrues from responding to this? As far as I can see, there is none. (NT) - Bill Leebens 11:34:43 05/23/16 (1)
- Could be some for us. But apparently no benefit to you, no response. nt - Rick W 12:03:03 05/23/16 (0)
- An eloquent response for those whom delight in character assassination - Cleantimestream 06:04:17 05/23/16 (0)
- RE: "Assclown"?? Let's get a few things straight.... - Dave_K 17:30:24 05/22/16 (2)
- This is typical... - Bill Leebens 18:00:41 05/22/16 (1)
- What did you expect readers to take away? - Dave_K 11:08:20 05/23/16 (0)
- RE: "Assclown"?? Let's get a few things straight.... - Isaak J. Garvey 14:44:57 05/22/16 (12)
- RE: Pay for Play - John Atkinson 15:28:40 05/22/16 (1)
- RE: Pay for Play - Isaak J. Garvey 15:33:40 05/22/16 (0)
- To clarify: - Bill Leebens 14:49:13 05/22/16 (9)
- Hey Bill... - mkuller 14:53:07 05/25/16 (1)
- RE: Hey Bill... - Isaak J. Garvey 18:05:42 05/25/16 (0)
- RE: To clarify: - Isaak J. Garvey 14:53:11 05/22/16 (6)
- RE: To clarify: - sautterj6 09:42:39 05/23/16 (4)
- RE: To clarify: - Isaak J. Garvey 10:09:21 05/23/16 (3)
- RE: To clarify: - Jeff Starr 11:12:33 05/23/16 (2)
- RE: To clarify: - Isaak J. Garvey 11:22:43 05/23/16 (1)
- RE: To clarify: - Jeff Starr 11:48:13 05/23/16 (0)
- Well, yeah. ;-) (nt) - Bill Leebens 15:08:39 05/22/16 (0)