bjm":gy2ejx3y said:
I'd also like to see some impartial reviews (where they haven't been loaned the tools by the manufacturer)
Hi bjm
This is a common point of view put forward by many people who think that reviewers are in hoc to the manufacturers. We say it time and time again, but it seems we are yet to be believed, that reviewers DO write impartial reviews, and they are not always on things provided by the manufacturer or retailer. Often they are, yes, but not always. I have written reviews for things I've bought at full retail price before now.
Even things I've written reviews for where I've been loaned or, occasionally given, have rarely been without criticism. You see, we are human, and we have a conscience. Why on earth would I, or any of my jounalist colleagues, say "This is good" when inside we are thinking "This is not good" Is it so the the manufacturer of the nos-so-good item is so pleased that they send me more sot-so-good tools to use in my workshop? And am I really supposed to spend my hard-earned cash to buy all the new tools on the market, just to find out how good they are so that readers don't waste their money? What do I then do with the duff stuff?
Testing tools takes time, and journalism is not a well-paid profession. I have better things to do with my time than fabricate some review and destroy my own credibility. If I say something is good it is because it is good, not because my integrity has been bought off.
What you don't see are the tests that say "this is rubbish, don't buy it". I agree that it would be helpful to readers, but it doesn't make for a good read! When I'm critical I just keep my mouth shut (yes, I know that sounds far-fetched, but I can do it if forced). I've been sent things to review which just gather dust, even though I'd like to stay on good terms with the manufacturer. I can think of one product where I really do rate the manufacturer generally, but not for this particular product.
When we "media types" as I was recently, and not kindly, called, get together, this subject often crops up. A group of us went to Festool in Germany in April, which is why there is a flurry of Festool publicity in recent mags. It was 4 days of my time, no-one paid me for going and no-one has paid me to write about it. I've written, honestly, about some aspects of the trip, and if any of it gets published in the future, I will receive some financial remuneration. If it doesn't I won't.
As it happened, I enjoyed the trip even though it was knackering. I also made a useful contact who wants to publish some of my work abroad, so for me it was worth going.
I write this to say, yes again, that those of us who put our hearts and souls into producing material, month after month, for the benefit of the woodworking community, and for a very modest return (regardless of whether you are a jobbing journalist or an Editor-in-Chief) find it very frustrating - and occasionally offensive - when people imply that we are not writing the truth, simply because we have not paid for the item we are reviewing.
If I say something is good it is because I think it is good, OK?
Cheers
an exasperated, but not, at this stage anyway, offended,
Steve
