Starfire I-12 Is Here

[fronobulax]

So the review is a sham, basically...

That's pretty strong language.

 

[GAD]

So the review is a sham, basically...

That's a bit harsh.

Guitar magazine reviews have always only been positive with what DrumBob's posted as ways to inject the "not so perfect" into the otherwise positive article. The simple truth is that no magazine would ever post a blatantly negative review for a product from one of its advertisers. The same is true for any magazine revolving around products. As he said, it's business, and it's been that way for decades, if not forever.

 

[fronobulax]

That's a bit harsh.

Guitar magazine reviews have always only been positive with what DrumBob's posted as ways to inject the "not so perfect" into the otherwise positive article. The simple truth is that no magazine would ever post a blatantly negative review for a product from one of its advertisers. The same is true for any magazine revolving around products. As he said, it's business, and it's been that way for decades, if not forever.

The exception would be review sources such as Consumer Reports and similar, that are supported by subscription and reader contributions and not advertising. CR is explicit about striving for unbiased, objective reviews supported by real data.

 

[GAD]

The exception would be review sources such as Consumer Reports and similar, that are supported by subscription and reader contributions and not advertising. CR is explicit about striving for unbiased, objective reviews supported by real data.

As a complete veer, Consumer Reports has always annoyed me because they never have the exact model I’m looking at.

 

[Prince of Darkness]

On the Surfliner, I said it screams for a whammy bar, in so many words. It was more like a suggestion than a criticism.

Seems to be a very widely held view, and one which I agree with They would be crazy not to add it as an option!

 

[lungimsam]

Ok, so now I know why I have never read a bad review of an axe in any magazine. But at least they allow politely phrased suggestions.

Veer:
A nurse anesthetist I know says the surgeons she works with told her doctors pay top dollar to get listed as the “Top 10 ______-ologists”in those doctor rating megazines. Now that’s a sham/referendum!!!

 

[DrumBob]

So the review is a sham, basically...

As others have said, it's not a sham, as there are ways to mention "slightly negative" aspects without trashing the product and pissing off an advertiser, or potential advertiser. If I got a product for review that absolutely stunk, I would email my editor and tell him so. We would decline to review it. I have never gotten a bad piece of equipment.

My former editor-in-chief at Premier Guitar quit over a review he wrote for the magazine. It was a new model Stratocaster. He wrote a positive review, but not a glowing one, and was told to rewrite it and make the copy more positive. He refused, and the publisher rewrote the article behind his back the night before the magazine went to print. The EIC was rightfully furious, and gave his two weeks notice. When Shawn Hammond came in as his replacement, he cleaned house and brought in his own writer cronies. I believe he's still there. Unfortunately.

That should show you how they do things at Premier Guitar. That would not happen at Vintage Guitar. The EIC will make changes he deems appropriate (that happens at every magazine), but he never changes the tone of the copy or the opinion of the writer.

 

[Rocky]

As much as we'd like it not to be true....

Ultimately, a magazine derives nearly all of it's revenue from advertising. It is a device to market to a group of consumers who hold the interests the publisher is grooming. Content exists to attract the customers.

Subscription fees? Those merely exist so that advertisers can be certain that the readers of the magazine are truly interested in the things they want to sell...enough that they're willing to pay money for it. Qualified customers. Advertisers pay extra for that.