Something of Merit....

[Dave McCracken]

A recent shotgun magazine gave me hope.....

As you probably know, most gun mags are more or less pimp sheets for the advertisers. If an article praises a product, you can bet your favorite gland there's going to be a high dollar,full color full or half page ad for that product nearby. I doubt all those articles are objective and truthful Sarcasm override employed....

An exception came under Yr Humble Scrivener's scrutiny this week past. The November Issue of Shotgun Sports magazine contained an article on a new turkey load from Winchester and articles on an O/U shotgun from Mossberg and a Charles Daley semi in 28 gauge. All three products were extolled.

So I cynically started looking for the ads to go with the articles.

They're not there. No ads for Mossberg, Chas Daley or Winchester ammo.

None.

Let's hope it's a trend.....

 

[ACP230]

Dave:
On occasion, I commit gun prose for national and regional magazines.

So far, I've received one muzzleloader for eval and wrote a review with both pros and cons of the gun stated. (I got it because I used to shoot rifle matches with a guy who went to work for the company.) All the rest of the guns I wrote up were my own, or borrowed from shooting buddies. I have gotten some holsters to review from another magazine.

I've usually written about guns I appreciated because the ones I don't like don't get used, or get sold off.

I've also done book reviews for a national mag. It doesn't appear that there is a lot of coordination between the book reviews and the ads.

I usually have no idea what the advertising folks at the magazines my articles appear in are doing.

People like to slam gun writers and gun mags. I'm not sure it's always justified.

 

[sm]

Yes sir!

I hope so as well.

I recall reading Field & Stream as a kid. First thing I turned to was to read Ruark. The only brand name I can recall at the moment in The Old Man and The Boy was Hoppe's No. 9

Tapley's Tips, he just gave tips. He never mentioned a brand name. His pictures, often were generic, I mean a Johnson Spoon was pretty generic in itself, the picture of a lipstick tube looked like all lipstick tubes did...just smear the lipstick onto the spoon to give some personality to a shiney, chrome fishing lure.

Brister wrote and shared. Often times just referred to a Pump, Semi, SXS,O/U, or single shot shotgun. Might often just write a low brass loading was fine for small game such as quail, using a higher brass shell would not be needed - in fact could cause one to get a flinch, and more misses than hits.

In the back of the magazine sometimes were the post-cards to order stuff, or cut out the coupon to get a bottle of Hoppe's No. 9 for 15 cents...

The magazine articles were about Correct Basic Fundamentals, Learning, Sharing, Passing Forward, and contained Ethics on not only being a Sportsman, but Preserving and Conserving as well.

Marketing was born. Media grew. Credit came about.

Up until - folks used to save up until they could afford something, did without, bartered, or did Lay-a-ways.

Different Credit back then. Back then you signed the tab during the week- and paid it off on Friday.

In the meantime these folks could actually shoot, take game to feed families. They could also fish.

Venison tastes the same if taken by a Single Shot slug...
Crappie tastes the same if taken by cane pole with crickets...

Always the user of a tool - not the tool.

Some things never change - no matter what the Marketers say.

Now we have some folks - some on THR and THR that write reviews. That is a bit different.
Pax, George, Chris, Stephen Camp...etc. Are NOT trying to sell or convince - they are just sharing experience strength and hope- providing information and insights.

These folks, as many of us - were raised to read/ listen and to formulate an opinion for themselves.
NOT to take take everything read or heard as the definite answer.

One researched, asked questions, did evaluations for themselves.

Steve

 

[BozemanMT]

I really like that Shotgun Sports magazine. We kinda find it by accident through Amazon, but thought what the heck.
It's been really good. Good articles, lots of details, all kinds of shotgun shooting. Worth checking out.
a satisfied subscriber.

 

[Dave McCracken]

ACP230, not slamming you or many other writers. I'm not even slamming the mags. I decry the pimping that sometimes goes on while acknowledging that ads pay the bills, not newstand sales nor subscriptions.

And you're right, sometimes it's not justified.

One now deceased writer said it well. He said that his articles all had lots of good things to say because he didn't bother writing up the junk. If he sent in an article, it was because the item was worth having.

Steve, I've fished Johnson Spoons in a couple states and I miss Brister, Tapley, and a bunch of thers. Woolner, Buckingham, etc.

Brian, there's three mags I get at home. Shooting Sports, Sporting Clays, and now Shooting Sportsman. B-day present from Daughter. None are perfect, all are good.

 

[Marshall]

Yours truly has a 9 pound 4oz largmouth mounted I caught on a black Johnson Silver Minnow/spoon, ardorning a Uncle Josh #11 black pork rind. Was in 1983 fishing it by walking it across moss beds. Wham!

Can't remember the year I got married but I remember that.

 

[sm]

Magazines-

I let my SWAT subscription expire. Matter of priorites, I appreciated and repected the writers. I especially appreciate the attitude of Rich, Denny and everyone associated at SWAT in regard to advertising and product reviews. REALLY nice is being able to read an article with out flipping all over to keep reading and finish.

The only magazine I currently receive is American First Freedom.

I 'might' read a magazine out somewhere, or one given to me because of something interesting the person feels I would appreciate.

I still peruse the 1955 Field & Streams I have. I read the Classics by Brister, Misseldine, and similar.

The reality is -

In 1955 it was suggested to use light target loads for quail, the height of brass made no difference on hull strength, one should pattern their guns and loads for task - made NO difference what the barrel "said", the box of ammo "said" or what some guy in a diner "said".

One was supposed focus on target, and using correct basics like gun fit, stance, positioning, they would hit what they were "looking" at because shotguns are pointed - not aimed. Folks actually hit what they were looking at too!

Here it is 2005 and the very same principles apply.

Some things are Earned like Merit, Respect, and the ability to shoot.

One cannot buy these, no matter how much marketing, monies spent on magazines, the latest greatest firearms, or ammo.

One has to actually go out and DO these things. Get a gun that fits THEM. One has to get proper training, and continue correct practice of skills learned.

Pax, Dave, Denny, and so many others have EARNED my respect. These folks have Merit, and these folks can shoot.

This is why I have walked away from some people, places and things in my life. I finally turned into my Mentors & Elders. I earned it.

I earned the right to be wrong as well - so be it. I accept and own that too.

Too many folks, ladies and kids especially , since these make better students, have earned their skills too. They may of read Brister, Misseldine, and others upon my suggestion - these classics actually work if you practice them. These folks I taught did NOT try to buy skill and targets - they earned it.

Mr. Steve...I can do 12 repetitions with my gun now, my goal is 15...-8 years old
Mom and I had so much fun shooting the pong pong balls with that BB gun with no sights... 9 year old.
You got any bright ideas on how to mount a orange clay in the garage...seems my child has outgrown the orange construction paper one she had been swing thru...-Single mom with a 11 year old.

It is nice to see the pretty pictures, and such in new mags - sometimes - I guess. I just really do not care for much of anything new now-a-days. I prefer the old ways, yellowed pages of classics, the soul of wood and blue.

Bummed out - Not really.

Prefer to deal with folks willing - damn straight!

I earned this right. Right ,wrong or otherwise - I earned it.

 

[pax]

Dave ~

It seems to work the other way around, no matter what the ad space looks like.

I choose which guns to review, and run the list past the editor in advance. The editor presumably hands those brand names to the ad sales people ("Hey, we're going to be reviewing something from H&K in a couple months. See if you can get them to buy an ad.")

Granted I've only been doing this for a couple years, but I've never yet had the editor come to me and say, "Hey, Company X just bought a bunch of ads, so could you write a really good review of their newest whiz-bang?"

What I write isn't based on whether or not they've sold advertising to go with it, because I flatly have no idea what's happening at that end of things and wouldn't care if I did know. If I hate the product, I don't bother asking to review it. If I like it but it's got a wart or six, it'll probably be at the bottom of my list, but if I review it, I'll mention the warts in my review. But mostly I write up stuff I like, because life's too short to waste time shooting icky guns.

pax

 

[ACP230]

Dave:
A cranky spell might have coincided with reading your post.

I think I wandered off from your main point a bit too.

I confess I have almost always liked the ads in the gun mags. When I started buying them I'd read the articles, (Skeeter, Askins and Keith were writing then) then read the ads, Then I'd read the articles I liked most again, and then look at the ads for stuff I wanted to buy. Still do that to some degree.

 

[Dave McCracken]

Steve, thanks for that. I miss Brister, Keith, and O'Connor but find solace with Randy Lawrence, Gierach when he can be coaxed away from fishing and Dave Holmes.

Pax, I'm glad to see that. I doubt, however, that all writers are so objective and free from, uh, influences.

Life IS too short for shooting icky guns. That should be on a Tablet of Stone.

ACP, fuggedaboudit. I also peruse the ads, albeit with a skeptical eye.