[
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2008, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]
24.99.198.15
In Reply to: RE: The prototypes that won a Golden Ear. posted by Bruce Kendall on May 21, 2008 at 11:17:54
It doesn't strike you as the slightest bit improper for a high-profile reviewer to bring home a pair of prototype loudspeakers, have those loudspeakers undergo evolutions and developments while in his care, and for that reviewer to then award this unobtainium prototype his magazine's highest honor?
It doesn't strike you as there being the slightest conflict of interest for the veil between press and manufacturing to have been pierced, such that there has been a very fundamental change in the role that the press plays in the schema of the industry? A veil that is otherwise intended to protect all parties, press, manufacturer, and reader alike? Is it now fair game for the press to behave as consultants to manufacturers?
It doesn't strike you that this reviewer has granted an unprecedented privilege to a manufacturer - to the exclusion of all other manufacturers who might otherwise want the same opportunity - especially since the entire enterprise has resulted in the awarding of a Golden Ear?
Does any of this strike you as unfair and unbalanced?
Do we expect audio journalists to be impartial and maintain a public trust, or have things decayed so horribly that we simply no longer expect them to maintain impartial detachment?
Has audio journalism devolved into tabloid candy?
"Your theory is crazy, but it's not crazy enough to be true." - Niels Bohr
Follow Ups:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2008, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]