|
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 John Atkinson on March 07, 2015 at 04:28:19
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. :)
Follow Ups:
"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.
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: