Truthfulness In Gun Publications

[Ryanxia]

The readers were the ones up in arms (no pun intended) which is a very big part of the decision.

I like how the anti's keep spouting about big gun companies making lots of profits. Good, let them have their extra 0's on their bank statements and the American people have our Freedom. As long as we're focusing on the same goal, it's a good partnership as far as I can see.

 

[cpileri]

One of the gun rags, might be Shotgun news but I could be mistaken on that, did an editorial on the metcalf situation and invoked Ronald Regan who said somethign like, 'What do you call a person who agrees with you 80% of the time? An ALLY, not a 20% traitor!"
Suggesting of course that Mr. Metcalf shoudl not have been so soundly shunned by the firearm community.

I thought about that for awhile and I find myself thinking:

That Regan quote may be true in and of itself, and might have applied to the gun freedom/control debate in the beginning (like in the 1960's). but getting in bed with the 20% traitors is what got us to he point of 'no more compromise' we are currently facing. We have reached the limit of tolenrance to encroachment on our freedoms, in this and other topics, and now view any further disagreement RIGHTFULLY as treason to the cause.

My thoughts anyway.

C-

P.s. edited: the source was an article and interview featuring Sen. Cornyn from Texas. But the point is the same.

 

[GEM]

It's the free market. Don't buy what you don't like.

I have had a small touch of gun writing in my life. A couple of pieces written for a friend went pretty well. However, the next one, asked for by editor one, went to editor two. The article was actually a technical piece about ergonomics of negligent discharges. The second editor thought it read to academically (oh, dear) and it didn't have enough vivid instances (which I assume was blood and guns).

A prominent editor of another magazine told me that he would have like technical articles but what drove sales was a cover with the Ultimate Self-Defense Man Stopper. Techy articles don't work in most major outlets. Have a cover article the latest in optical coatings on sight lens and see if that's a big seller compared to the conjoined twin 1911 mutation.

In the academic journals - if you try to write a piece that doesn't demonstrate that guns are bad and gun owners are nuts - it's a difficult pull to get that accepted.

But, in any case, SWAT had a devastating review of the Judge. Now how many folks on the Internet have sworn that the Judge is wonder weapon that will slay 10 at one stroke without having to aim? Remember those threads.

 

[mec]

Would anyone be willing to pay a high subscription fee for a publication that was largely ad free but was able to provide 100 percent honest, unflinching, reviews?

Would and did. back in the 80s. Phil Engledrum published quarterly a thick magazine called Gun Tests. It was expensive but extremely entertaining. He was inspired to do it because he had saved up his money to buy a Smith mode 59 and the thing wouldn't ever work with S&W Fiocchi ammunition. There were no gun advertisers- he did have ammunition -the Blitz Action Trauma. They liked ammo tests and in one article they massacred a bunch of hogs -allegedly in Mexico where Jane Fonda couldn't get 'em. They titled one article " H&K VP70Z T**d." All of the guns were bought over the counter because of the legend* that the factories send out ringers and of course they would not have handed 'e-drum a sharp stick to poke then in the eye in any case.

Engledrum was very impressed with Ruger and put out magazines praising everything they made at the time. The rest of the industry was notorious for having zero quality assurance and customer care when this magazine started but by the time he had been in print for a while the gun companies were turning out much better products.

* It would make sense if they did. it doesn't make sense not to but, they don't.

 

[tuna]

Gun rags are great to read while the wife is shopping. Get to finish all the useful articles by the time I leave the store.

For information - I like Gun Tests. They tell you where they bought the gun, not delivered by the manufacturer. They also describe the gun, warts and all. When Taurus is said to be better than S&W in a magazine, you know they're honest.

 

[mec]

Most things have a "viewing distance." -An oil painting that looks very nice at ten feet might be a chaotic blur from five. Gun Writers have an ideal viewing distance too. In the pre-Internet past, a gun writer might appear heroic and filled with wisdom when he is hundreds of miles and months of lead time away from the enthusiastic reader. Met at an NRA meeting or on the range and he might have emerged as an arrogant, sloppy drunk who Was Not Happy To Meet You. These chance meetings seldom took place and were not widely reported when they did.
In the Internet Age, one-on one interaction with the Modern Gun Writer is not at all unusual and the enthusiast fan frequently finds himself inside the GW's ideal Viewing Distance. Some of them have gone out of their way to make themselves Living Legends and come to believe their self-generated press. When they define "plain spoken-ness" as the Mark of a MAN! and treat rudeness as a virtue, their 'fans' evaporate.
One old self-promoting Industry Midget used to go on an enthusiast board where his legendary status attracted a hoard of admirers. He then proceeded to yodel "Big ME! Little, stupid, inexperienced you." Some of the posters hit back at him as an arrogant Old Chancre and ill-mannered puff of flatus. This would cause him to stomp off of the board- later to return and resume his superiority dance with diminishing frequency until he pretty much evaporated into senescence.

 

[Dframe]

Shooting magazines are for entertainment not great truths. The writers are sometimes knowledgable and sometimes only marginal. They're much like other famous and semi-famous people. Some are very good some are anal sphincters.

 

[CraigC]

A former editor of the magazine goes on to say that there will never be a bad review of an advertisers product. If the gun is found lacking, rather than expose that, it is quietly sent back to the company with suggestions for improvement.

I have never understood some of the reasons some shooters have disdain for gun magazines. Despite what some claim here, nobody really wants to read bad reviews. Period. Nobody pays their money and spends their time on magazines full of bad reviews. For every single person who appreciates a bad review, there's 1000 who hate it because it slandered their favorite toy.

Problem guns are statistically insignificant. If 99.99% of firearms work as they should, what is to be learned from the .01%??? Nothing. Bad guns don't get press, they get sent back. If the manufacturer can't provide a sample that works, they don't get press. There is nothing dishonest about that .

Nobody is willing to pay for "honest reviews" with no ads.

Most people want color pictures, I know I do. That costs money. Advertisers help pay for that.

I don't depend on magazines to make decisions for me. Some are very obvious in that they provide little to nothing useful. G&A is one such example. Others like Rifle and Handloader provide much more technical info and it is not restricted to new guns. All I expect any of them to do is to provide me with basic information and a little inspiration/enabling but I make the decision for myself. Gun porn makes us buy more guns and I have no problem with that.

 

[JohnBT]

"I like Gun Tests. They tell you where they bought the gun, not delivered by the manufacturer."

I used to believe that. My father had a subscription for many years and I read every issue. Then they published a bad review of a Rohrbaugh R9... sent to them by the factory.

Here is the link to Mr. Rohrbaugh's rebuttal to Gun Tests. It's very long.

www.rohrbaughforum.com/index.php?topic=4746.0

"Yet, the R9S you reviewed was sent to you from the factory as a testing and evaluation piece. I should know, since I am the one who sent it to you. Subsequently, you returned the piece after your evaluation. Nowhere, at any time did you purchase the firearm."

"You seemed distraught by the fact that only one magazine was provided and that thought was evident by the amount of verbiage that was used throughout the article." [Buy an R9 and you get two. JT]

"the pistol that was tested, by GUN TESTS, was the exact same one, Serial #R170 (see photos in the American Handgunner and the photo in GT,) that was tested approximately a month prior, by AH, and then sent to you. Ironically they seemed to have a different opinion of the function, accuracy and reliability. I might also point out that Serial #R170 was also tested by Massad Ayoob approximately one week ago at a workshop in Long Island, after you returned it to our factory. His opinion regarding the accuracy and reliability did not seem to match yours. "

"Fact 7: NOWHERE, and I repeat NOWHERE, is any plastic or polymer used in this firearm, except the follower in the magazine, which, technically, is not built into this gun. I specifically refer to page 13, in which you state that the grip panels were made of a stiff, light, and durable polymer. The material is called CARBON FIBER! A simple review of the manual shows this information"

 

[itsa pain]

When Metcalf or anyone else uses the tired phrase: the 1st amendment does not give you the right to yell fire in a movie house I get sick. What the 1st amendment has allowed is newspapers from the Spanish American war till now is to lie about events and whip up the people in a war frenzy with millions killed. The NYT did it before the Iraq war

 

[olafhardtB]

I have found a good way to get a good evaluation of a gun, ammo, sights, optics etc. Buy it, use it and see if YOU like it. I have bought things beause they looked so great and I wound up not liking them and vice versa. I am also amazed about people who love or hate things because of what "experts" or internet voices say. MAKE UP YOUR ON MIND or don't.

 

[TimboKhan]

Gun tests is not a great company to do business with. After I cancelled my subscription, I kept getting letters stating that "owed" increasingly large amounts for subscriptions I did not order or want. I finally had to call the company, who told me I had an "obligation" to continue my subscription. I told them they were obligated to perform a THR non-approved act, and it ended there. This was several year ago, but it left a bitter taste in my mouth. Additionally, while the reviews were unbiased and stuff, they were kind of super boring to read.

 

[mec]

Gun tests is not a great company to do business with.

In that respect, they closely resemble a large segment of the gun industry.

While an interesting notion they do have a reputation for going into print without actually knowing how the specific weapon works. This produces some troublesome questions about the overall value of some of their reviews but does not discredit them altogether. Still, it is kind of a good idea to bring some vestigial knowledge to the party.

One very eccentric gun maker has said that he finds that buying advertising in a gun magazine is a good way to avoid negative press. He follows his own advise and is a great example of the soundness of his theory- though many end-users are horrified by what he brings forth.

 

[RustyShackelford]

Massad Ayoob; gun reviews....

FWIW; gun-writer & sworn LE officer, Massad Ayoob wrote a few years ago that he is "banded from the property" of 2 major US gun makers but he didn't say who.

I don't buy or read any US gun magazines that often. The Harris Publications line is filled with errors & photos/images that don't match the article(s).

 

[mec]

Ayoob has a long-standing, unusual penchant for telling the truth. Decades ago he was the Industry Insider editor for American Handgunner. After a while, the editor, Cameron Hopkins took over that post for himself because the industry- or major elements of it were out to get Ayoob. Smith and Wesson made it a firing offense for any employe to be caught talking to him. Smith and Wesson, like a lot of other " Industry Giants' changes ownership about as often as an Onanist swaps hands. Eventually, one of Smith and Wesson's owners put Ayoob back in its good graces based on the irrefutable truth that his criticism of the company ( its former ownership) had been entirely accurate.

Mas is an entirely credible gun writer and has managed to survive in the industry in spite of it.

 

[Mohave-Tec]

This is not news; not for any interest publication.

 

[mec]

"?!"

 

[Mohave-Tec]

post 1