In Reply to: Interesting post from another forum posted by Charles Hansen on August 23, 2017 at 22:38:46:
This I think is key:
"Second, and more important, anyone who specializes in reviewing a particular type of product becomes a part of that industry. After a while, they identify less with average consumers than with their 'peers' - in the business they cover. This 'camaraderie' is a big source of subtle bias. Gifts of gear may factor into it, but it's the absorption of identity that really matters. Publications can counter this effect by encouraging tough review standards - but most don't."When JGH started Stereophile the magazine identified with the consumer of High Fi equipment. Now it identifies with the industry. What's good for the industry is good for Stereophile and TAS, the last two of the great alternative audio magazines. What helps the industry sell product, gives the magazines, no longer alternative magazines but mainline ones, more product to review, more advertising, more shows to cover, more sales for what appears to be a shrinking industry. This leaves out the incestuous nature of the industry, where one may be a reviewer today and next week working for a manufacturer or importer. Dave Wilson, Bascomb King and Steven Mejias are examples of the nature of the industry. It is hard to give a bad review to a friends product, it is hard to not go along with a product that make most other products of it's nature obsolete.
I'm not impugning anyone's ethics. The reviewer believes what he is writing, though he may hype it a bit. But then he wants to believe the truth, it gives him something new to write about, to gush about, to help the industry that he identifies with. It's a normal path for a magazine to follow. I don't believe anyone is dishonest, it is just a mindset that develops.
When they discover the center of the universe, a lot of people will be disappointed to discover they are not it. ~ Bernard Bailey
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Interesting post from another forum - BubbaMike 08/24/1700:08:49 08/24/17 (39)
- RE: Interesting post from another forum - fantja 06:21:25 08/28/17 (38)
- RE: Interesting post from another forum - Charles Hansen 20:59:49 08/28/17 (37)
- RE: Interesting post from another forum - John Atkinson 16:02:52 08/29/17 (32)
- RE: Interesting post from another forum - Charles Hansen 00:14:31 08/30/17 (31)
- How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - DAP 02:02:56 08/30/17 (30)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - Charles Hansen 05:22:38 08/30/17 (29)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - BubbaMike 14:25:58 08/30/17 (23)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - 4everyoung 15:28:15 08/30/17 (17)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - Charles Hansen 22:16:16 08/30/17 (16)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - 4everyoung 16:03:13 08/31/17 (15)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - Charles Hansen 21:30:24 09/7/17 (6)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - 4everyoung 12:13:52 09/8/17 (5)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - Charles Hansen 00:40:14 09/10/17 (4)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - 4everyoung 10:17:42 09/10/17 (3)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - Charles Hansen 10:59:15 09/10/17 (2)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - 4everyoung 18:06:58 09/10/17 (1)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - Charles Hansen 00:18:20 09/11/17 (0)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - Mel 19:36:01 08/31/17 (7)
- There's the rub - DAP 07:22:57 09/1/17 (6)
- RE: There's the rub - SpotcheckBilly12345 09:11:54 09/1/17 (1)
- RE: There's the rub - 4everyoung 11:49:13 09/1/17 (0)
- RE: There's the rub - 4everyoung 08:30:46 09/1/17 (3)
- MQA is the goodest, bestest thing ever! - DAP 04:52:04 09/11/17 (1)
- RE: MQA is the goodest, bestest thing ever! - 4everyoung 20:23:46 09/14/17 (0)
- RE: There's the rub - Mel 09:18:16 09/1/17 (0)
- Thanks to the excellence of the AA search box ... - DAP 15:05:19 08/30/17 (4)
- RE: Thanks to the excellence of the AA search box ... - Charles Hansen 21:34:10 08/30/17 (3)
- There was no such distinction in your original posts, then or now - DAP 07:54:18 08/31/17 (2)
- DAP = Apologist? - SpotcheckBilly12345 08:16:40 08/31/17 (1)
- It's easy enough to check - DAP 08:51:15 08/31/17 (0)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - DAP 12:50:57 08/30/17 (1)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - Mr_Steady 06:01:28 08/31/17 (0)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - 4everyoung 12:20:10 08/30/17 (0)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - jamesgarvin 11:46:55 08/30/17 (0)
- RE: How is that link evidence for pay for play? n.t. - John Atkinson 07:45:28 08/30/17 (0)
- "Just because they print it doesn't mean that it is true." Ditto for S'phile and every other hifi mag. - Rick W 15:44:00 08/29/17 (3)
- RE: "Just because they print it doesn't mean that it is true." Ditto for S'phile and every other hifi mag. - John Atkinson 15:58:43 08/29/17 (2)
- What I would like to read, what I think most readers would like to read ... - DAP 06:31:10 09/1/17 (0)
- RE: "Just because they print it doesn't mean that it is true." Ditto for S'phile and every other hifi mag. - Rick W 08:36:02 08/30/17 (0)