Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads|
In Reply to: RE: Art Dudley: The Goodness of Your Heart: A Tragedy in One Act posted by Jeff Starr on May 22, 2016 at 17:46:25
"And I find it odd those that question the motives of Art's article while giving 6Moons a pass. That is requiring payment for a review."
Where on earth did 6Moons get a pass? Maybe in THIS thread, as Stereophile published Art's piece, not 6Moons, and Art's piece is the subject of the thread.
6Moons decision to charging for reviews has been discussed at length on any number of Asylum boards.
Could it be that the reason 6Moons appears to get a pass in THIS thread is because WE DON'T KNOW the review site or publication he's talking about?
And because we don't know the review site or publication referenced in the piece, NOBODY gets a pass here (but Stereophile, of course).
We are left to guess. Could be ANYONE (but Stereophile, of course). And as a result, the piece taints EVERYONE (but Stereophile, of course).
Is it wrong to suggest that MIGHT not be an accident?
....and accusations of wrongdoing were being made against a Stereophile writer, and rather than contacting Stereophile, the manufacturer gave the information to the competition, and the competition then published the accusations against the Stereophile writer, how would Stereophile be reacting?
Not that it matters, but I feel very strongly that PSAudio should have contacted the publication involved before turning over private emails to the competition.
Ivan303, I agree with much of what you are saying. And, of course, I have nothing against PSAudio, and would never ask them for any freebies :-)
There is plenty of innuendo floating around but until people name names, nothing will change.
What are the manufacturers afraid of?
They're afraid of being sued. If they had evidence to back up their claims they would win the lawsuit. So perhaps their "truth" won't stand up in court?
..or ezine or even a print publication is going to sue an audio manufacturer who claims he was offered a good review for some compensation.
First of all, other manufacturers have probably been offered the same thing and a single reviewer or ezine doesn't have the more resources than the manufacturer.
So I really don't think there is any excuse for manufacturers not to come forward and name names.
At the very least the manufacturer should tell the editor of whichever publication it is because editor's don't always know what is happening. Even Stereophile has fired writers for being ethically challenged. How long were those writers going under the radar as bad apples?
> We are left to guess. Could be ANYONE (but Stereophile, of course).
> And as a result, the piece taints EVERYONE (but Stereophile, of course).
> Is it wrong to suggest that MIGHT not be an accident?
Dead Horse. Beaten. To Death. What is your problem with Stereophile - did
the late J. Gordon Holt make a pass at your mother when you were in the
I think you clever enough to know what you are doing.
Bill? Not so sure.
Do you REALLY feel that Art's piece is the best way for Stereophile to point out that it maintains a HIGHER standard of ethics regarding reviews than at least one or two other web/print publications?
A point that I, for one, have never doubted nor claimed to doubt.
You dont get to determine what is or is not a "dead horse". The piece in question should never have been run. Your judgement stinks!
You must be so proud of your integrity .. tactics ... judgment!
Bye johns dad.
Fax mentis incendium gloria cultum, et cetera, et cetera...
Memo bis punitor delicatum! It's all there, black and white,
clear as crystal! Blah, blah, and so on and so forth ...
Post a Followup:
Post a Message!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: