Confederate
Member
I've always been a critic of gun magazines in general. I'd like to ask you what you like and dislike about them and what you would do to improve them and make them something you'd read.
Here are some points of my own.
Many articles are written in template style (and being a writer, myself, I can spot template writing a mile off). Gone are personal stories and asides. It's just fill in the blanks.
These are just some of the things I can think of, and it's one reason I keep stacks of old magazines downstairs and spend a good amount of time reading them. I wouldn't go so far as to tell magazines not to use any advertising--that's too extreme and it jacks up the price. I've also noticed that many computer magazines will publish a large ad by a computer manufacturer and then proceed to trash it in print. If they can do it, why can't gun magazines?
For those poor unfortunate souls out there who are too young to remember Skeeter Skelton, check out this website. This is how articles used to be written. One article by Skelton on the .357 magnum starts out:
That's great writing because it makes you want to read on. I just don't see that in today's gun articles, alas!
What would make YOU subscribe to a gun magazine? And if you already do, what would you like to see?
What's wrong with B&W? This was a low-budget magazine first
published in the 1980s. It attempted to tell it like it is and rejected
all advertising. The price was a bit high, but it was entertaining
despite terrible grammar and numerous typos! I still like reading
them to this day.
.
Here are some points of my own.
- This month's issue always looks like last month's issue. It's not that the guns are the same, but it's that the types of guns are the same.
- Gun reviews are heavily, almost shamefully, influenced by gun manufacturers. There are no serious criticisms of any advertised gun. How many times have you read that a gun is inaccurate, unreliable, or that the actions are terrible?
- Articles are only about guns that are in production. But what about second-hand guns? Would you like to read a gun magazine with an article about original Colt 1911s, Colt Gold Cup, S&W 66 or Ruger Security-Six?
- Gun writers write dry, dry, dry. The gun can be photographed in color and stretched across two pages. Yet the writer will describe it in painstaking detail! Gone are the days where writers spin yarns like Bill Jordan and Skeeter Skelton.
- No consistent methods are used to discern accuracy. Some writers shoot off hand at 25 yards, some shoot at other distances, while still others use a Ransom Rest. (I'd be for the latter.) They also use different brands of ammo, making it impossible to gauge a gun's accuracy across the board.
- Most magazines need better photos, and not necessarily in color. Black & white photos often show more detail and are more interesting than color photos.
Many articles are written in template style (and being a writer, myself, I can spot template writing a mile off). Gone are personal stories and asides. It's just fill in the blanks.
These are just some of the things I can think of, and it's one reason I keep stacks of old magazines downstairs and spend a good amount of time reading them. I wouldn't go so far as to tell magazines not to use any advertising--that's too extreme and it jacks up the price. I've also noticed that many computer magazines will publish a large ad by a computer manufacturer and then proceed to trash it in print. If they can do it, why can't gun magazines?
For those poor unfortunate souls out there who are too young to remember Skeeter Skelton, check out this website. This is how articles used to be written. One article by Skelton on the .357 magnum starts out:
YOU CAN MAKE remarks about the ancestry of my dog. Have your doubts about the gas mileage toted up by my family sedan. Spread the story, if you wish, that my backyard barbecues could be best digested by a brood of Arkansas razorbacks. But if you cast aspersions on my .357 Magnum sixgun, get somebody to hold your coat. We'll continue the discussion in the alley. For the rest of the article, check it out.
That's great writing because it makes you want to read on. I just don't see that in today's gun articles, alas!
What would make YOU subscribe to a gun magazine? And if you already do, what would you like to see?
What's wrong with B&W? This was a low-budget magazine first
published in the 1980s. It attempted to tell it like it is and rejected
all advertising. The price was a bit high, but it was entertaining
despite terrible grammar and numerous typos! I still like reading
them to this day.
.
Last edited: