|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
107.205.10.55
In Reply to: RE: I was silenced, years ago, on a panel, for trying to say something similar. posted by samtellig on February 25, 2015 at 13:17:33
...readers have to come first.
The duty an audio review publication has to a manufacturer is to be thorough, ethical and fair in their assessment and treatment.
Follow Ups:
flatfooted.
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
It seems to this reader that Mr Atkinson is coming out of all this quite nicely, actually. It seems that the worst that can be said of him is not all that bad.
Daniel
was referring to his comment tied with Sam's statement.
While John Atkinson was more personable through his writings 20 years ago {and the magazine was far more fresh}, the magazine has changed greatly.
There can be do doubt that it WAS patently impossible for Stereophile to grow and maintain the integrity of JGH's standard of NO advertisements... even Audio tried 30 years ago in striving to attract advertisers NOT in the Audio business... the business model IS dead... sadly, print IS dying.
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
> There can be do doubt that it WAS patently impossible for Stereophile to
> grow and maintain the integrity of JGH's standard of NO advertisements...
J. Gordon Holt started publishing adverts in Vol.3 No.3, published in 1972
(see the article linked below). The ads in this issue were all from dealers;
the first issue to publish ads from manufacturer was Vol.4 No.1, published
in December 1977. This was long before I joined Stereophile.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Audio was the best "Audio mag" heeeevar, they took ads and they are gone, errr just saying.
Really? And how about when manufacturers supply a complete turn key mega buck reference system to your editor and senior reviewer...like at TAS..can they serve two masters...lol
...Harley and Valin since HP is not here to defend himself as you have been reminded before.
If you don't like what the magazines do then don't read them.
Which is probably the case - the ones who complain the loudest usually have no skin in the game.
Naysayers...
What are you talking about?
Manufacturers/Advertisers are CLIENTS of both publications. Any firm that does not serve their clients goes bankrupt.
Subscribers and readers are NOT customers. As John Atkinson has pointed out, subscription revenue is a pittance. It does not even cover the cost of producing one issue.
So logic ensues. You server your CLIENTS first.
The assertion that readers come first is comical.
And specifics? HP was furnished with systems he did not pay a nickel for for decades, and Harley and Valin have followed suit.
Are you playing dumb or in a bubble?
Magazines serve their clients (mfg'ers and advertisers) best, by properly serving the needs of everybody's client, their readers..
Without readers, there is no publication.
How does a publication best serve its readers? Well, that's a whole nuther topic.
But it starts with intellectual honesty and leadership. Leadership as in having enough expertise to lead a good percentage of its readers to superior levels of musicality. Not the type of leadership that tries to dazzle the masses with their intellect or get down in the gutter practicing mental masturbation with the masses when they themselves cannot produce a system that sounds any better than the majority.
IMO, that's been the biggest problem and performance-limiting governor since day one.
Nothing to disagree with here stehno.
In a perfect world, you would be right on the money.
But Stereophile writers and editors don't socialize and attend parties with readers. They don't personal relationships with readers. Case in point. Stereophile writers regularly attended social functions at the Devore factory, and yet still write about the speakers. There is no separation, and we know damn well who butters the bread.
Not just stereophile, the whole hi-end industry and their little lunchBox closed circle, Easy to spot , no one gets in unless you pay or get invited, so dont take it personal, The public is just that, the internet is prying away alot of the control they had in the past, Hey Tellig may spill everything.
Brrrrewwwwhaaaa
Edits: 03/04/15
Every industry has its inner circle and cliquey relationships. I have no issues with that.
Just don't feed me a line of horseshit that the readers come first. No company ever survived intact for long not servicing its customers first.
You can read Stereophile for free, but you can't advertise in Stereophile for free.
> Just don't feed me a line of horseshit that the readers come first.
"Horseshit?" Why is it that people like you, who know nothing of the
publishing industry, always claim to have valid opinions? This is what my
mentor, the late John Crabbe, editor of Hi-Fi News from 1965 to 1982,
had to say on this subject, extracted from the essay at the link below:"If you tell the truth about components you review, there will always be
a small percentage of companies at any one time who are not advertising
in your pages. But if you publish the truth, you will have a good
magazine. And if you have a good magazine, you will have readers. And as
long as you have readers, disgruntled advertisers will eventually return.
But if you don't tell the truth, you won't have a good magazine. And if
you don't have a good magazine, you won't have readers, at least not for
long. And if you don't have readers, you won't have advertisers."> No company ever survived intact for long not servicing its customers first.
An editor's customers are the magazine's readers.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Edits: 03/06/15
"An editor's customers are the magazine's readers."This is the only place we would disagree. You yourself have state that subscriptions won't even pay the electricity bill. Advertising revenues fund your payroll, rent, and production costs.
Now WHO are you are customers again?
And let me clarify this. I have never made any claims here that reviews in Stereophile are in ANY way inaccurate, misleading, or intentionally slanted. I do have issues with methodology and format which I personally consider antiquated. But that is just me.
What we do have, is human nature, which is to be just a bit kinder to our friends. The clients we socialize with. The clients that write us checks.
Before you think I am going in a certain direction..UNLIKE some of the posters here, I don't think you are doing ANYTHING the least bit unethical, or inappropriate. There, I said it.
The magazine is run like any other business, as it SHOULD BE, and it is ultimately well done entertainment with some product information thrown in. Your writers, and NO audio writers a really journalists, they are not uncovering NSA spying or are on fact finding missions to Syria. All good. They are columnists by definition.
I have gone on record with my position, if anyone actually cares.
Edits: 03/06/15 03/06/15
"This is the only place we would disagree. You yourself have state that subscriptions won't even pay the electricity bill. Advertising revenues fund your payroll, rent, and production costs.
Now WHO are you are customers again?"
If an editor says that their readers come first, there is no reason to surmise that they're being disingenuous or naive. There is no challenging, dismantling, or putting a fresh spin on longstanding ethics.
It's either black or white and grey is not good.
> If an editor says that their readers come first, there is no reason to
> surmise that they're being disingenuous or naive.It's also easier for me to say than to practice. Over the years, I have been
pressured by a succession of publishers to abandon my commitment to
putting readers first. Those publishers make much the same arguments that
Sprezza Tura has expressed in this thread. I have successfully resisted that
pressure, but not without stress and conflict.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Edits: 03/07/15
I want to commend you on your post. Nobody who lives in the real world would ever think it was an easy task to hold steady under intense pressure.
You said in one response I don't understand publishing. Actually I do. I spent ten years in publishing. There basically two models, high subscription and low volume, or ad supported and high volume/distribution.
I stand by what I said, your customers are the ones that keep the lights on, and those are manufacturers. That does NOT mean, or imply you can't produce a good product.
I think audiophiles need to have a bucket of cold water poured on their fantasy of the review journal locked away from all outside influences, that refuses to accept advertising, and yet is widely available for a low price. As I said, Stereophile is a business, and it is run like one, and that is exactly what should be.
Posters here seem to think it is some sacred journal that will expose all those crappy sounding "over priced" components and speakers and uncover every "giant killer" bargain.
When compared to the financial, political, and scientific press, who have totally abdicated their responsibility to the public, stereo mags are downright golden. :)
"I think audiophiles need to have a bucket of cold water poured on their fantasy of the review journal..."
This is wrong thinking.
> You said in one response I don't understand publishing. Actually I do. I
> spent ten years in publishing.In which case I apologize for saying you didn't know what you were
talking about.> I stand by what I said, your customers are the ones that keep the lights
> on, and those are manufacturers.And as I said, some of the publishers for whom I have reported to over
the years have agreed with you and have tried to force me to put those
manufacturers' interests ahead of those of my readers. I have always
resisted that pressure, sometimes to the point of job-threatening
insubordination.> That does NOT mean, or imply you can't produce a good product.
And as I said, if an ad-supported magazine puts the interests of its
advertisers before those of its readers, it will ultimately fail. The
audio publishing landscape is littered with their corpses while Stereophile
remains in rude good health.> I think audiophiles need to have a bucket of cold water poured on their
> fantasy of the review journal locked away from all outside influences,
> that refuses to accept advertising, and yet is widely available for a
> low price. As I said, Stereophile is a business, and it is run like one,
> and that is exactly what should be.And we are back to someone who has no connection with how Stereophile
is run refusing to accept that he is incorrect. :-(
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Edits: 03/08/15 03/08/15 03/08/15 03/08/15
The rest of this thread has been deleted by the moderators. But there was
something I had written in a now-deleted posting that had elaborated on
what I wrote in the posting above. I hope that it is okay for me to repost
it. Sprezza Tura had asked:> how am I incorrect that stereophile is run like business? Is it a
> charity or a non profit?Of course Stereophile is run as a business. But I strongly believe that
though some ad revenue is inevitably left on the table (which is why I
have had some conflicts with various publishers over the years), putting
the interests of a publication's readers over those of its advertisers is
the only business strategy that is successful in the long term. And as
someone who will be celebrating 40 years in the magazine business next
year and has been editor-in-chief of 2 very successful audio magazines in
those 4 decades - HiFi News and Stereophile - the long term is what
concerns me.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Edits: 03/10/15
Thanks for reposting.
Which begs the question..why were posts deleted? I saw nothing offensive or inappropriate, simply on going discussions.
Unacceptable moderating.
> Thanks for reposting.
You're welcome.> Which begs the question...why were posts deleted?
I have no idea, but the moderators have every right to delete posts that
they feel are in appropriate.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Edits: 03/11/15
I did not imply you knew why..
Yes, the moderaters have the "right" to what ever the hell they want.
And I have the right to call them spineless.
You don't seem to be too unhappy about it either.
> You don't seem to be too unhappy about it either.
There's no point in fighting battles you can't win. :-)
I reposted the text I felt important to keep in circulation, which I assume
was not the text that had led to the moderators taking action.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Can't argue with that.
As stated, but to quote Jack White, it bears repeating, this is a private forum, and mods can do what ever pleases them, but if preventing open and honest discussions from evolving is one of their manifestos, that is rather sad.
synergistic relationships , you cant have ying without yang , readership is the product, reviews are the product ...
Key to note, there's no product without readership ..........
Edits: 03/06/15
...if the magazine does not serve its readers, it will have no subscribers - then no one will place ads, so no revenue.Serve the manufacturers first and it becomes a big infomercial with no critical content.
Every single review now is critical.
Get a clue.
Edits: 02/25/15
.....and reality.
From chicken/egg to circle jerk perspectives. I've come to learn that 'reality' is not the last word in 'Reality Shows'.
Ouch. How rude of you, as a fellow former TAS writer to burst his bubble. POP!As someone who was there I am sure you can tell us the pecking order.
Edits: 02/25/15
My apologies to Mike if my comment came across as being rude. I have always enjoyed his posts and respected his opinions.
While I had nothing to do with advertising at TAS, it always made me wonder when I heard complaints from small manufacturers about preferential treatment for larger manufacturers with megabuck advertising budgets. No proof of anything I suppose, but maybe I'm just suspicious in nature.
As for the readers, I've always felt the reviewer should be responsible for their loyally by being honest.
I think Mike is a great poster, and I agree with him most things, including politics. But his HP Halo is so over the top.
He also has a different perspective since he did not make a "career" out of reviewing like Harley, Valin, et al.
What color are the skies on your planet? here on earth they are blue..for now.
Tell us about the selection process, how does one get a review, how are the products selected...
Regards ..
"Tell us about the selection process, how does one get a review, how are the products selected..."
This is just mechanics. The necessary activities of ANY magazine.
Bottom line is any magazine that wishes to survive caters to the needs of its readers. Without readers there is no need for the magazine and how or if they do anything becomes irrelevant.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: