Mn Fats
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2017
- Messages
- 2,372
Glad I can get all the real world info I need from you fine folks
Does that include posts in threads about gun magazines - maybe only 25% of them are "useful and correct?"what's online. 25% is flat out wrong, 50% is of marginal value and maybe 25% is useful and correct.
Does that include posts in threads about gun magazines - maybe only 25% of them are "useful and correct?"
Just kidding around reddog81.
I will say Denis does not pull his punches when reviewing a gun-just like in his threads here, he'll tell it, good and bad, in his articles. Maybe that's why I like reading his articles. With Peter G. Kokalis gone, there are damn few like him left still writing for gun mags.It was about time for another gunmag bashing thread.
Used to show up quarterly, it's been a while.
While I agree that the article in question is meaningless when testing accuracy in doing it off-hand, this has been a continuing gripe of mine on Internet forums where posters proudly stick up pictures of 7-yard off-hand groups and proclaim how accurate their gun is.
No accuracy testing is valid in free-standing off-hand shooting.
You use a rest, period.
As for the other assertions-
Mag sales AND mag subscriptions are both demographics used to wave in front of potential advertisers. If an ad guy or gal can tell a company "Your ad with this mag placement will reach 50,000 readers", it's a metric for that company to use in deciding whether or not to buy ad space.
Like it or not, without the ads there'd be no mags.
And, since I'm still selling articles to them, I'm assuming people do still buy gunmags.
The "most are given to them" myth still persists.
I've been doing this for going on three decades.
I do have to borrow test products to review, it's a for-profit biz & I'd lose money bigtime if I had to buy everything off the shelves.
On the more expensive items like guns & high-dollar glass, I get the option to BUY at the end.
Typically a writer's discount, usually comparable to dealer cost.
I am NOT paid to write nice things about products.
As a freelancer, I've written for four major companies during my career, and never have I been told by an editor to write a positive review on a POS.
Never have I been given an assignment & told how to write it up.
I won't argue about other writers' work, beyond the above statements.
Sometimes a less-informative piece does get through.
Of course, that never happens on the Internet....
Denis
As Craig says- there's no place for reviews of total junkers & we've gone over this several times over the years.
These gunmag bashes are cyclical, rotating around two or three times a year, always with the same ratio of truth (10% valid, 90% misinformation, ignorance, old myths, and misplaced expectations).
I'm no shill.
I give the good and the bad.
If it's a total POS, it's cancelled.
I'm not your personal tester.
I'm not your personal shopper.
I'm not in the biz to make your decision to buy or not to buy.
I'm not here to write ad copy for gunmakers.
I'm not paid to write mag reviews by gunmakers.
I'm not getting free guns in trade for positive reviews.
I DO get "free" ammo, I couldn't do my job without it.
I DO get loaner guns, same deal.
I AM here to do a fairly decent test of a product, within the constraints imposed by the paycheck I get for selling an article to a publisher on that product.
I AM here to give an honest review. And I do.
You take what you find (as I've said about 30 times before) in any gunmag as ONE point of information, exactly like you do with a thread on an Internet gun forum.
If you find the mag writer, or the forum poster, to be generally credible, you incorporate that info into your life, to whatever degree.
If you don't, you move on.
There are more useful mag writers, there are less useful mag writers.
There are more useful forum posters, there are less useful forum posters.
If you never find anything useful in a gunmag, then don't buy one.
Same deal on the Internet.
I'll tell you this- pound for pound, there's a metric a lot of more bad info on the Internet than in gun mags.
Years ago, on another forum, Clint Smith (look him up) made the mistake of joining, to participate in gun discussions.
He was immediately attacked by the ignorant, the unknowing, the brainless, the arm-chair commandoes, and the video-game players, over statements he was making in efforts to discuss various gun-related things.
If you know who he is, you know his character & qualifications to make those statements.
I think he lasted about a week before he said goodbye. Not worth his time.
That forum lost a great reference source, a very knowledgeable guy, and a chance to LEARN how it is in the real world.
The Idiots With Pitchforks & Torches won the day.
This thread here is one reason why you see very few writers participating in Internet gun forums.
And I'm not sure that's a positive thing for the forums.
Some of these guys really know their stuff, and have a lot to offer.
I stick around because I still learn here, and I can pretty much ignore most of the "Writers Are Shills" BS.
Denis
I know who Clint is and he told me about the experience years ago at a Shot Show when he visited out booth. Heidi was with him and after he and Les finished their strategy session I got a few minutes with him. Few people can speak with more authority , gained from actual experience, than Clint. He is a Marine and a combat veteran. I would say ex-Marine but there is no such thing. He's been there and done that. We both agreed that the problem with internet forums is this; Everyone's an expert, and if you don't agree with their preconceived notions then you are just stupid!ears ago, on another forum, Clint Smith (look him up) made the mistake of joining, to participate in gun discussions.
He was immediately attacked by the ignorant, the unknowing, the brainless, the arm-chair commandoes, and the video-game players, over statements he was making in efforts to discuss various gun-related things.
When you buy a product from Amazon and it doesn't work how you expect, do you then get online and call out every person who wrote a positive review?
Nonsense. I have written many 1 star reviews on Amazon. Nothing gets censored, even the really stupid ones.No, you give them negative feedback once and are blocked from giving anymore feedback on anything you purchase.
It's a one way street. You don't actually see all of the negative feedback, probably very little. The negative feedback is censored and you only see what Amazon wants you to see.
As this relates to gun writers, they are self censored as you say. It's funny that one can go on YT and see all kinds of negative reviews. I saw one on a new M1 carbine and a new Remington rifle. Both very negative. A viewer actually gets to see all of the bad stuff. That kind of review would have never made it into a magazine......ever.
The very best way to sell anything is to tell people what they want to hear. Gun rags are mostly a medium for guns and ammo sales and their advertisers.
I've had many an argument on YouTube with people 'thought' they were knowledgeable enough to post a video as an authority but were obviously clueless. There are as many idiots on YT as there are on Facebook. Forums are actually better because the morons and trolls are usually weeded out. Still a lot of nonsense, myth & legend getting passed as fact. Like this thread for example. People who don't have a clue passing judgment, operating on assumption and arguing with those that do.
Nonsense. I have written many 1 star reviews on Amazon. Nothing gets censored, even the really stupid ones.
There is a HUGE difference between not publishing negative reviews and lying about positive ones.
Again, what are your expectations?
t's a one way street. You don't actually see all of the negative feedback, probably very little. The negative feedback is censored and you only see what Amazon wants you to see.
To that I will add that I frequently see the vendor comment on the one star reviews with offers to make good. I have even experienced this after writing a poor review of a product.Nonsense. I have written many 1 star reviews on Amazon. Nothing gets censored, even the really stupid ones.
No but you realize that works both ways, right? If Amazon was going to be cherry-picking reviews, there's a lot of crap I read by others that wouldn't be there. Is this another tinfoil hat conspiracy?So you must be passing judgement here solely based on your experience with Amazon. You do know that you are only one of 300 million Amazon customers don't you?
Might be something wrong here in your *because it didn't happen to me it's never happened to anyone else* logic.
I fear you may be an optimist with those numbers.25% is flat out wrong, 50% is of marginal value and maybe 25% is useful and correct.
Internet: A place where the intelligent can be moreso; and where the unitelligent equally moreso.
Besides, that's not what I asked. I asked if you buy a product with positive reviews and have a negative experience, do you then go and call out all those who wrote a positive review? Or do you be an adult and accept the fact that every experience is going to be different and sometimes you lose?
If people think what's in magazines is bad they'd better avoid 75% of what's online. 25% is flat out wrong, 50% is of marginal value and maybe 25% is useful and correct.