George Hill
Staff Alumnus
Seriously, you try to write 2,000 word review for another 1911, just like the last 1911 you reviewed only with different grips and a different name.
Are gun mag editors ......dolts?
- Thread starter Lavan
- Start date
- Status
Seriously, you try to write 2,000 word review for another 1911, just like the last 1911 you reviewed only with different grips and a different name.
This would not be difficult if the writer were truly interested in giving a thorough review of the gun.
1. write details on construction, materials used and methods of forming parts, frame and slide;
2. provide details on fit and finish;
3. take a tour of the factory; give some background on how the gun is made and what distinguishes it from the rest of the 1911's; or if its indistinguishable then just use the code words "good all-around 1911" to tell us its an average, nothing special "jump-on-the-band-wagon" 1911. Or, give us the details on the differences/enhancements.
3. torture test it.
That aught to be enough to write several chapters in a book. In other is it really asking too much to get a gun writer to actually do a little research, check out the factory and then write an honest, detailed account of the new 1911
Still some incredibly ill-informed posters riding this sick & lame old horse.
I could equally ask if forum readers are morons. But, since I know they're not (the greatest majority, anyway), I won't.
You guys never forgot & left something home when you walked out the door to go to work? Yes, contrary to the lack of thought that went into much of this thread- it IS work. It's a job.
Big frickin frackin flippin deal if somebody forgot something on the way to a T&E session.
How many of you load up the following when you go to the range:
One to four guns.
Four to six loads for EACH gun.
Portable shooting table.
Resin patio chair.
Spotting scope.
Chronograph.
Tripod used for spotting scope & chrono screens.
Portable target stand base.
Portable target backer.
Targets.
Notebook for test results (notes on each load for each gun).
Log book for miles driven (tax purposes).
Pens.
Water.
Lunch.
Jacket (if cold weather).
Gloves (if REALLY cold weather).
Hat (to avoid sunstroke).
Earmuffs.
Earplugs.
Shooting glasses.
Container for empty brass.
Rifle rest.
Pistol rest.
Sandbag.
Toolbox.
Toilet paper.
First aid kit.
Cellphone.
With one or two exceptions, depending on heat & whether I'm doing my stuff in the old quarry or doing rifles at a state range with built-in shooting benches & target stands, that's my work kit. Each & every time I go to work.
Over the years I've forgotten things like the chair, part of the ammo, my notebook, and even the gun I was going out to test.
People do, and you forget things, too.
At the moment, it's a 35-mile round trip in one direction for rifles, 35-mile round trip in the opposite direction for handguns.
Once I get there, I run with what I brung. I budget time & other expenses for any given article. I don't get paid for mileage, I don't get paid for gas. I get paid a flat rate if I take three days on an article or three months.
If I find I've left part of my ammo behind, I go with what I did remember. I don't have the time to go back home for it.
It happens. It is neither incomprehensible nor particularly rare.
There's a lotta crap to load up each time, and after many years of loading up the truck on the way out & unloading again at the end of a long day shooting, I got so tired of it that I have an old Blazer permanently loaded & locked with the standard stuff that goes each time, to save energy on my part AND to reduce the chances that I may forget something.
Weather? Really?
You think we have the luxury of waiting around for perfectly calm, warm, and bright sunny days?
Get real.
I've shot in 17-degree weather & 107-degree weather. I prefer not to. It ain't fun.
Weather's a genuine factor in shooting for results, as opposed to just "Hey, hold my beer while I blow off a few more rounds."
Wind can push me off the target. It can blow the target over. It can divert bullets from point of aim.
Rain shuts me down. Snow does the same. I can shoot through both, but they get the targets soaked & it's hard to either measure groups or write down the results.
Sometimes we can wait for a "better" day, instead of the "best" day, but often we have to take a chance, hope for the best, and then have to pack it in before we're able to finish what we'd planned.
I've had it happen, weather can be quite unpredictable. This is, after all, an open air activity.
Saying "The weather report looked shaky, but I had the day planned, I took a chance, I had a deadline, I got rained out halfway through, but here's what I WAS able to get for you", is a mortal sin?
We are people, pretty much sorta mostly like many of you.
We do the best we can with the system we have to work with.
Sometimes things just don't go according to schedule.
If this never happens in your life, you live in a different universe than I do.
Skans,
You, in particular, live in an alternate reality.
Nowdays I'm lucky if I can talk an editor into 2000 words. The standard piece used to be 2500-3000.
There's no room for half of what you want. Writers don't determine space allocations; editors, publishers, ad execs, and art designers have infinitely more say over how much room there is for a given article than the guy who writes it.
Space is expensive & hotly competed for. There are budgets for each mag issue that an editor has to juggle.
Tour a factory? You paying for the plane ride & hotel? I'm not.
What kinda money do you think we make? Hint: An average article for a freelancer not on staff isn't a helluva lot more'n half a grand.
And most of us are freelancers.
Out of which I have to pay expenses, and unless a company's footing the bill (which leads to great cries of indignation over undue influence, bought & paid for writer accusations, fraud, murder, rape, and stealing popsicles from babies insinuations), I can't afford to spend a couple thousand to produce an article that doesn't sell for half that much.
Torture test?
Been there, done that, most people are not impressed when I wear the T-Shirt.
Expensive, time-consuming, showy, and most don't reflect much reality at all.
10,000-round test sessions are long, boring, and EXPENSIVE! SOMEBODY has to pay for that ammo, and I guarantee it won't be me.
Drive a half-track over a pistol, drop it from a chopper, leave it on the ocean floor for six months? You rent the half-track, you hire the chopper, and you float the boat, call me.
I got a mortgage, I got a family, I got bills to pay, and I'll say it again: THIS IS A JOB!
That implies MAKING MONEY from it.
You don't get rich writing for gunmags.
And finally- just like whatever your job is, there are some who do it better than others. If you don't like what you see, find another mag or stick to the Internet where you'll get in-depth descriptions of guns, clear photos illustrating features, explanations of how those features help or hinder, exact data on shooting results with several loads, full info on new products, industry insider background, and commentary by people who put their real faces & names out there for everybody to see.
The gunmags ain't perfect. Neither are gun forums, by any means. Either take the time & trouble to learn what you're spouting off about, or continue to post the usual bi-monthly drivel.
Denis
I could equally ask if forum readers are morons. But, since I know they're not (the greatest majority, anyway), I won't.
You guys never forgot & left something home when you walked out the door to go to work? Yes, contrary to the lack of thought that went into much of this thread- it IS work. It's a job.
Big frickin frackin flippin deal if somebody forgot something on the way to a T&E session.
How many of you load up the following when you go to the range:
One to four guns.
Four to six loads for EACH gun.
Portable shooting table.
Resin patio chair.
Spotting scope.
Chronograph.
Tripod used for spotting scope & chrono screens.
Portable target stand base.
Portable target backer.
Targets.
Notebook for test results (notes on each load for each gun).
Log book for miles driven (tax purposes).
Pens.
Water.
Lunch.
Jacket (if cold weather).
Gloves (if REALLY cold weather).
Hat (to avoid sunstroke).
Earmuffs.
Earplugs.
Shooting glasses.
Container for empty brass.
Rifle rest.
Pistol rest.
Sandbag.
Toolbox.
Toilet paper.
First aid kit.
Cellphone.
With one or two exceptions, depending on heat & whether I'm doing my stuff in the old quarry or doing rifles at a state range with built-in shooting benches & target stands, that's my work kit. Each & every time I go to work.
Over the years I've forgotten things like the chair, part of the ammo, my notebook, and even the gun I was going out to test.
People do, and you forget things, too.
At the moment, it's a 35-mile round trip in one direction for rifles, 35-mile round trip in the opposite direction for handguns.
Once I get there, I run with what I brung. I budget time & other expenses for any given article. I don't get paid for mileage, I don't get paid for gas. I get paid a flat rate if I take three days on an article or three months.
If I find I've left part of my ammo behind, I go with what I did remember. I don't have the time to go back home for it.
It happens. It is neither incomprehensible nor particularly rare.
There's a lotta crap to load up each time, and after many years of loading up the truck on the way out & unloading again at the end of a long day shooting, I got so tired of it that I have an old Blazer permanently loaded & locked with the standard stuff that goes each time, to save energy on my part AND to reduce the chances that I may forget something.
Weather? Really?
You think we have the luxury of waiting around for perfectly calm, warm, and bright sunny days?
Get real.
I've shot in 17-degree weather & 107-degree weather. I prefer not to. It ain't fun.
Weather's a genuine factor in shooting for results, as opposed to just "Hey, hold my beer while I blow off a few more rounds."
Wind can push me off the target. It can blow the target over. It can divert bullets from point of aim.
Rain shuts me down. Snow does the same. I can shoot through both, but they get the targets soaked & it's hard to either measure groups or write down the results.
Sometimes we can wait for a "better" day, instead of the "best" day, but often we have to take a chance, hope for the best, and then have to pack it in before we're able to finish what we'd planned.
I've had it happen, weather can be quite unpredictable. This is, after all, an open air activity.
Saying "The weather report looked shaky, but I had the day planned, I took a chance, I had a deadline, I got rained out halfway through, but here's what I WAS able to get for you", is a mortal sin?
We are people, pretty much sorta mostly like many of you.
We do the best we can with the system we have to work with.
Sometimes things just don't go according to schedule.
If this never happens in your life, you live in a different universe than I do.
Skans,
You, in particular, live in an alternate reality.
Nowdays I'm lucky if I can talk an editor into 2000 words. The standard piece used to be 2500-3000.
There's no room for half of what you want. Writers don't determine space allocations; editors, publishers, ad execs, and art designers have infinitely more say over how much room there is for a given article than the guy who writes it.
Space is expensive & hotly competed for. There are budgets for each mag issue that an editor has to juggle.
Tour a factory? You paying for the plane ride & hotel? I'm not.
What kinda money do you think we make? Hint: An average article for a freelancer not on staff isn't a helluva lot more'n half a grand.
And most of us are freelancers.
Out of which I have to pay expenses, and unless a company's footing the bill (which leads to great cries of indignation over undue influence, bought & paid for writer accusations, fraud, murder, rape, and stealing popsicles from babies insinuations), I can't afford to spend a couple thousand to produce an article that doesn't sell for half that much.
Torture test?
Been there, done that, most people are not impressed when I wear the T-Shirt.
Expensive, time-consuming, showy, and most don't reflect much reality at all.
10,000-round test sessions are long, boring, and EXPENSIVE! SOMEBODY has to pay for that ammo, and I guarantee it won't be me.
Drive a half-track over a pistol, drop it from a chopper, leave it on the ocean floor for six months? You rent the half-track, you hire the chopper, and you float the boat, call me.
I got a mortgage, I got a family, I got bills to pay, and I'll say it again: THIS IS A JOB!
That implies MAKING MONEY from it.
You don't get rich writing for gunmags.
And finally- just like whatever your job is, there are some who do it better than others. If you don't like what you see, find another mag or stick to the Internet where you'll get in-depth descriptions of guns, clear photos illustrating features, explanations of how those features help or hinder, exact data on shooting results with several loads, full info on new products, industry insider background, and commentary by people who put their real faces & names out there for everybody to see.
The gunmags ain't perfect. Neither are gun forums, by any means. Either take the time & trouble to learn what you're spouting off about, or continue to post the usual bi-monthly drivel.
Denis
My point is that most reviews in gun magazines of new guns leave out the most important things many of us want to know:
1. What is the gun made of - am I paying for MIM, Investment Cast, Forged, carbon fiber, or injection molded parts? Is there anything special about the springs used, magazine capacity, the recoil system, extractor, ejector, design. YES, it matters! It only takes a sentence or two to describe what the various major components of a gun is made of: "Z-A5 has a nicely finished, investment cast frame with hammer forged slide and barrel, and MIM small parts." Or, just include this data in a specifications block - less words.
2. Background on where the gun was made and how it was produced is also important to me. If a known gun writer can't go to the factory, it seems that at the very least the writer could contact the company and tell them "hey, I'm going to be reviewing your Z-5A pistol for ABC Guns Weekly - how can I go about getting specific information on the components, your plant and where its made? How accessible and helpful is customer support? Maybe they give it to you, maybe they don't. If the manufacture's rep is uncooperative, impossible to reach, won't get back with you - then include that in your article - THIS IS IMPORTANT INFORMATION!
3. An accurate assessment of fit and finish, compared to other comparably priced guns, is information that I desperately want...but find that I have to dig through internet gun forums to hopefully find.
4. Accuracy. I suppose some people really care about accuracy. Ok, I get it, you have to do some accuracy testing. However, accuracy is largely a function of the person shooting the gun. Some expert shooter telling me they can shoot 1" groups at 50 feet just tells me that the person shooting the pistol is really good with that gun. Unless it's a gun designed for competition or professionally worked on, I expect reasonable accuracy, that's all. Now, if this is some $2,000++ high end pistol being reviewed, then I would expect a little more on accuracy.
5. Support for the firearm. Can a person purchase factory replacement parts? Is the gun supported in the aftermarket (e.g. Hennings support of Tanfoglio products)
How fast the bullet leaves the muzzle - not something I really care about. If I were concerned about that type of data, I'd research articles on hand loading or ballistic differences between different types of factory ammo.
One of the main reasons I stopped reading gun magazines (I used to spend a good chunk of change on them) was because I'm simply not getting the information I want. Some of the information I desperately want can only be obtained through research and good contacts with company reps or people intricately familiar with how the particular firearm is made. Other information I want can only be achieved through torture testing. I get it, perhaps its not cost efficient to do all of this. Regardless, I do love to read about torture tests - fun, entertaining and I think they do say something about the gun.
I'm not the one who called gun writers "dolts". Nor, do I fault someone for leaving something non-critical behind wen testing a gun. My gripe has more to do with important information that almost never gets reported.
1. What is the gun made of - am I paying for MIM, Investment Cast, Forged, carbon fiber, or injection molded parts? Is there anything special about the springs used, magazine capacity, the recoil system, extractor, ejector, design. YES, it matters! It only takes a sentence or two to describe what the various major components of a gun is made of: "Z-A5 has a nicely finished, investment cast frame with hammer forged slide and barrel, and MIM small parts." Or, just include this data in a specifications block - less words.
2. Background on where the gun was made and how it was produced is also important to me. If a known gun writer can't go to the factory, it seems that at the very least the writer could contact the company and tell them "hey, I'm going to be reviewing your Z-5A pistol for ABC Guns Weekly - how can I go about getting specific information on the components, your plant and where its made? How accessible and helpful is customer support? Maybe they give it to you, maybe they don't. If the manufacture's rep is uncooperative, impossible to reach, won't get back with you - then include that in your article - THIS IS IMPORTANT INFORMATION!
3. An accurate assessment of fit and finish, compared to other comparably priced guns, is information that I desperately want...but find that I have to dig through internet gun forums to hopefully find.
4. Accuracy. I suppose some people really care about accuracy. Ok, I get it, you have to do some accuracy testing. However, accuracy is largely a function of the person shooting the gun. Some expert shooter telling me they can shoot 1" groups at 50 feet just tells me that the person shooting the pistol is really good with that gun. Unless it's a gun designed for competition or professionally worked on, I expect reasonable accuracy, that's all. Now, if this is some $2,000++ high end pistol being reviewed, then I would expect a little more on accuracy.
5. Support for the firearm. Can a person purchase factory replacement parts? Is the gun supported in the aftermarket (e.g. Hennings support of Tanfoglio products)
How fast the bullet leaves the muzzle - not something I really care about. If I were concerned about that type of data, I'd research articles on hand loading or ballistic differences between different types of factory ammo.
One of the main reasons I stopped reading gun magazines (I used to spend a good chunk of change on them) was because I'm simply not getting the information I want. Some of the information I desperately want can only be obtained through research and good contacts with company reps or people intricately familiar with how the particular firearm is made. Other information I want can only be achieved through torture testing. I get it, perhaps its not cost efficient to do all of this. Regardless, I do love to read about torture tests - fun, entertaining and I think they do say something about the gun.
I'm not the one who called gun writers "dolts". Nor, do I fault someone for leaving something non-critical behind wen testing a gun. My gripe has more to do with important information that almost never gets reported.
Last edited:
Dpris, do you have to load all that everyday, or just when you write an article?
if you have to load it everyday why not leave some of it already loaded? if you do not load it everyday, why not leave some of loaded?
jacket and gloves for cold or a hat for heat seems you would wear those anyway shooting or not if the weather calls for it. all the generic rage gear seems easy enough since it used no matter what youre shooting.... i.e. ear muff, chronograph, shooting glasses, spotting scope et cetera.....
im only guessing when I say I think gun article writers do articles as a side job, not their primary.
if you have to load it everyday why not leave some of it already loaded? if you do not load it everyday, why not leave some of loaded?
jacket and gloves for cold or a hat for heat seems you would wear those anyway shooting or not if the weather calls for it. all the generic rage gear seems easy enough since it used no matter what youre shooting.... i.e. ear muff, chronograph, shooting glasses, spotting scope et cetera.....
im only guessing when I say I think gun article writers do articles as a side job, not their primary.
Evan Thomas
Inactive
You missed this, in a long post.JERRYS said:
Dpris said:
Skans,
See above.
Jerry,
I do leave most of it loaded in the old Blazer, as I said.
My point was to say that there's a bunch more stuff to remember on a typical T&E day than just tossing a gun & a couple boxes of ammo in the car & heading to the range to play.
And you're right- unless it's somebody on staff as a full-time job, most of us freelancers do have another income source.
I couldn't possibly exist on what I make from the gunmags, and I'm averaging three submissions a month, rain or shine. Some months four or five.
In my case, it makes up roughly 50% of my income, and I'm one of the fairly active ones.
People who think as Skans does that we should be visiting factories, or taking a gun on safari, running one through a two-week carbine course in another state, making the IDPA circuit, or chasing grizzlies in Alaska for a week, simply have no clue.
Unless it's one of those activities that the writer was already going to participate in, and he decided to take the gun along to be able to write about it, the other two options are to have the publishing company foot the bill for a staffer, or to have a product manufacturer pay the costs.
I don't do Africa on my own, have no interest in a two-week carbine class anywhere at my stage of life, I don't compete in IDPA, and Alaska can be almost as expensive as Africa.
In other words, I'm saying all those ideas are time-consuming & either eat too far into the profit margin or obliterate it completely. If I'm not already doing an event for my own enjoyment that I can take a product sample on, it's too cost prohibitive to arrange one. And it ain't hardly possible to stack up a dozen rifles waiting for the local hunting season each year to kill something with each one, either.
I don't know any freelance gunwriter whose only income derives from the gunmags.
People seem to think we make loads of money off them.
Not even close.
Denis
See above.
Jerry,
I do leave most of it loaded in the old Blazer, as I said.
My point was to say that there's a bunch more stuff to remember on a typical T&E day than just tossing a gun & a couple boxes of ammo in the car & heading to the range to play.
And you're right- unless it's somebody on staff as a full-time job, most of us freelancers do have another income source.
I couldn't possibly exist on what I make from the gunmags, and I'm averaging three submissions a month, rain or shine. Some months four or five.
In my case, it makes up roughly 50% of my income, and I'm one of the fairly active ones.
People who think as Skans does that we should be visiting factories, or taking a gun on safari, running one through a two-week carbine course in another state, making the IDPA circuit, or chasing grizzlies in Alaska for a week, simply have no clue.
Unless it's one of those activities that the writer was already going to participate in, and he decided to take the gun along to be able to write about it, the other two options are to have the publishing company foot the bill for a staffer, or to have a product manufacturer pay the costs.
I don't do Africa on my own, have no interest in a two-week carbine class anywhere at my stage of life, I don't compete in IDPA, and Alaska can be almost as expensive as Africa.
In other words, I'm saying all those ideas are time-consuming & either eat too far into the profit margin or obliterate it completely. If I'm not already doing an event for my own enjoyment that I can take a product sample on, it's too cost prohibitive to arrange one. And it ain't hardly possible to stack up a dozen rifles waiting for the local hunting season each year to kill something with each one, either.
I don't know any freelance gunwriter whose only income derives from the gunmags.
People seem to think we make loads of money off them.
Not even close.
Denis
Last edited:
Dpris, id like to be a gun magazine writer, I think its a great second income.
as a cop I don't have much time for extra things in my life due to my dept. being understaffed....
if I ever hit the lotto you can bet youd see me on youtube with free video gun reviews, or, if I ever got in a better position in my current field id type out a few for submission to see if I could get paid once in a while for the work....
I used to subscribe to combat handguns long ago. ive followed Rick Miller's column is just about every publication he was in for over 20 years....he and Roscoe Benson, and Brian Dover seemed to have a good time practicing realistic scenarios. his was more of a everyday man's tactics instead of a gun review.
I envy the guys who do this as a second income. I feel sorry for the guys who do this as their only or primary income.
Vanya, I did miss that caption, thanks for pointing out for me. I stand corrected.
as a cop I don't have much time for extra things in my life due to my dept. being understaffed....
if I ever hit the lotto you can bet youd see me on youtube with free video gun reviews, or, if I ever got in a better position in my current field id type out a few for submission to see if I could get paid once in a while for the work....
I used to subscribe to combat handguns long ago. ive followed Rick Miller's column is just about every publication he was in for over 20 years....he and Roscoe Benson, and Brian Dover seemed to have a good time practicing realistic scenarios. his was more of a everyday man's tactics instead of a gun review.
I envy the guys who do this as a second income. I feel sorry for the guys who do this as their only or primary income.
Vanya, I did miss that caption, thanks for pointing out for me. I stand corrected.
I would be very interested in reading gun articles along the lines that Skans layed out but what he wants is very similar to Consumer Reports. Too bad we don't have a Consumer Reports for guns.
JERRYS, Stephen A. Camp was a cop who did gun articles on his own website. I think he did it rather well also. Its unfortunate he died after he retired. http://hipowersandhandguns.com/
JERRYS, Stephen A. Camp was a cop who did gun articles on his own website. I think he did it rather well also. Its unfortunate he died after he retired. http://hipowersandhandguns.com/
candr44, I was a member on Mr. Camp's forum. He held an extremely informative everyday man review of things. that is what i'd like to do. if a person wants to know the machining process and if the steel came from Buffalo or Pittsburgh I say let them research it. I'd focus on the practical applications of the gun and its field performance.
Dpris, i'm in school full time as well as working at an understaffed agency. days off are occasionally taken away to cover 12 hour shifts. once I graduate I will be looking elsewhere so I can have a life. that is when I will start logging my range time for fun and review....
thanks for the input.
Dpris, i'm in school full time as well as working at an understaffed agency. days off are occasionally taken away to cover 12 hour shifts. once I graduate I will be looking elsewhere so I can have a life. that is when I will start logging my range time for fun and review....
thanks for the input.
It really breeds a high degree of cynicism, and it took time to realize that the whole reason Gun Magazines exist is to push product. Articles are commissioned to increase sales. Multiple articles in multiple magazines are part of planned sales campaigns. The articles are there to raise awareness of the new product and get people to run screaming to the gunstore to buy.
To me, it is insulting to read these rush articles, something that was rushed simply to meet a deadline, lacking key details, lacking a through examination of the reliability and function of the firearm being tested. If it is not definitive, then why put it out at a national level? I recall in the early 80’s Jan Libourel article on the Bren 10. The article is glowing, the gun fantastic, a major breakthrough , etc, etc, etc. And it all based on a 200 round test. Certainly not enough shooting to justify the hosannas’. Certainly not enough rounds down range to show that the Bren 10 was an unreliable, underdeveloped firearm. He may have had malfunctions, but such things are not mentioned. When gun writers don’t put the actual group size, or the group size is based on “combat shooting”, that is, rapid fire at five feet, the writers are hiding an inaccurate firearm. You just can’t trust what is in commercial print because it is not objective or unbiased. In print articles have to keep the advertiser happy or ads will be pulled.
And that is why editor's are dolts. The advertisers are in charge, not the editor.
To me, it is insulting to read these rush articles, something that was rushed simply to meet a deadline, lacking key details, lacking a through examination of the reliability and function of the firearm being tested. If it is not definitive, then why put it out at a national level? I recall in the early 80’s Jan Libourel article on the Bren 10. The article is glowing, the gun fantastic, a major breakthrough , etc, etc, etc. And it all based on a 200 round test. Certainly not enough shooting to justify the hosannas’. Certainly not enough rounds down range to show that the Bren 10 was an unreliable, underdeveloped firearm. He may have had malfunctions, but such things are not mentioned. When gun writers don’t put the actual group size, or the group size is based on “combat shooting”, that is, rapid fire at five feet, the writers are hiding an inaccurate firearm. You just can’t trust what is in commercial print because it is not objective or unbiased. In print articles have to keep the advertiser happy or ads will be pulled.
And that is why editor's are dolts. The advertisers are in charge, not the editor.
Evan Thomas
Inactive
Given the economics of publishing print magazines in the internet age, advertising is the only thing that keeps gun magazines in business -- or most other magazines, for that matter.
True, the entire print industry is in decline, the newspaper in my town stopped the afternoon edition and now the morning paper only comes three days per week. When a gun magazine subscription is only $10.00 a year, is the magazine informational or an infomercial?
The pressures of keeping advertisers happy really changed the character of gun magazines. Just review the vintage copies of “Guns Magazine” http://gunsmagazine.com/classic-guns-magazine-editions/. Today’s articles are focused like a laser beam on product endorsements. Pushing product was not neglected in the old days but there are actually articles on improving marksmanship, and other topics that were interesting without being crassly commercial.
I believe the pressures of putting out positive press within the time lines of a concerted advertizing campaign by a product manufacturer, is why we see these slip shod, hasty, ill constructed articles.
I wonder when the articles will be reduced to glossy full page pictures of scantly clad women shooting the latest firearms? They don't pay models all that much, and the content, what content?
- Status