Home Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

Re: If you really want to see magazines whoring themselves out

>> this involves a fair degree of misdirection in support of what is
>> commercially lucrative.
>
> No.

So this is where I bang on about the scientific method, audibility, cables, amplifier sound, controls, etc... You know it already and so it would only have a point from my side if I was trying to score points or reach the readership here. As an interesting debate it would appear a nonstarter from my side and the lack of reasoning in your reply suggests your not much interested either beyond the required.

>> So would it be good for the health of the largest mainstream
>> magazine to use the content as part of an individual manufacturers
>> advertising campaign? ...[]... and similar which crops up quite
>> regularly.
>
> It appears that what you are saying is that if I were to behave
> unethically, as did the unnamed reviewer for a magazine that is not
> Stereophile, I should be condemned. But if I do behave ethically, that
> is also to be condemned, because my motives for behaving ethically
> are, according to you, themselves unethical.

Suspiciously far from the target but you did get in the unnamed reviewer for the readers. I was responding to John Marks question by pointing out that his hypothetical situation made no business sense and therefore trying to sell it as an ethical action was not particularly effective. Good ethics and good business were aligned and so your point does not seem to make much sense.

>> But can you sell this as ethics to audiophiles?
>
> Obviously I can't sell it to you "Andy19191."

What have I got to do with it? I am interested in audiophiles and their response to this apparent ethics initiative.



This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Amplified Parts  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
  • Re: If you really want to see magazines whoring themselves out - andy19191 12:03:59 03/01/07 (0)


You can not post to an archived thread.