|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
4.237.92.29
In Reply to: Re: If you really want to see magazines whoring themselves out posted by andy19191 on March 1, 2007 at 01:37:16:
>this ethics thing which currently seems to be being pushed by
>Stereophile is going to be double-edged as demonstrated by the avid
>audiophile bjh in a thread or two below.
Actually, I think "bjh" has way too much time on his hands, judging
by the fact that he has been going through my published equipment
lists to compare them with what I have posted on the Asylum, looking
for discrepancies.
>Since it is inconceivable over the decades that he has not picked up
>a reasonable understanding of sound, sound perception and audio
>equipment...
Yes. I believe so.
>this involves a fair degree of misdirection in support of what is
>commercially lucrative.
No.
>A reasoned debate on the advantages/disadvantages of doing this for
>audiophiles and the audiophile industry would be interesting but
>obviously wholly impractical in public. However, the point is that
>he has demonstrated that Sunday school black and white ethics do not
>apply but what is good for the health of his magazine.
I believe that the two are not mutually incompatible.
>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? Of course not. It could be commercial suicide
>unless all the other audiophile publications did likewise and,
>possibly, not even then because it would lose a lot of
>status/goodwill among audiophiles when it inevitably came out. Ditto
>taking direct payments for reviews 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.
>But can you sell this as ethics to audiophiles?
Obviously I can't sell it to you "Andy19191." But that does beg the
question, of course: were you kicked in the head by a horse as a child
or did that happene later in life?
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Follow Ups:
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
Step outta line, the man come and take your cables away...
Sadly I'm forced to say this in advance...
> > 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: