|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.85.148.53
In Reply to: RE: Ask... posted by A.Wayne on March 04, 2015 at 11:32:01
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.
Follow Ups:
> 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
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: