www.thegunzone.com/gunwriter.html

I hope I linked this right.

Anyway I ran across this article on a somewhat unrelated search. I found it both scary and hilarious. Maybe I have a weird sense of humor but I laughed hard reading it. Maybe you'll enjoy it too.

unbelievable.....if I'm an exec with XYZ gun company, I'm personally testing the gun before the gun writer gets it!!!

People should be fired over this stuff!

Good article.

I think most gun company executives know that no magazine will print a completely negative review. There is to much money involved for either the magazine or the gun companyto worry about anything. Yea I know thats a bad attitude but it seems like anywhere theres money lately there is also a fix in. DW

This article is like ten years old

Gun manufacturing management has it's share of morons that are just businessmen and are not involved with the product. At least that is a whopping assumption of mine.
Firearms being durable as they are, are a trap for management that produces shoddy quality. One poor shooting botched up rifle maybe thought to be a normal product of the company. So it gets traded, and traded and traded. It is possible that a poor rifle could make a bad name for a company for 50 years going though many owners.

quote:

I think most gun company executives know that no magazine will print a completely negative review.

Years ago I read an article about some new Winchester. The writer described a piece of garbage with it's poor accuracy and misfires and poor finish....but at the end of his writing said he was sure these items would be addressed before production.....The product to my knowlege was nver released.

I'd make a horrible writer as I'd tell it like I saw it! The customer will find out soon enough!

sweet,

I gotta agree with vapo (again! - ).

The article is sorta dated but I can imagine; nevertheless still a current topic. Although it's pretty obvious in the article the Writer has an Axe to grind with one particular manufacturer.

Certainly if I was responsible for providing the media with test samples I'd personally ensure they recieved a sterling example of my product.

I don't subscribe to "Test Review" trade journalism because that's exactly what it has evolved into; a monthly regurgitation of "What's New", how "Cool" it is and why you can't possibly live without the newest Widget.....

I just read an advertisement in a trade magazine that claimed a Scope manufacturer's quality & quality controls are so much superior to other's since their product has undergone countless quality controls and is tested & re-tested for superior reliability. Pictured twice is a 2.5-10x24 Compact NXS scope with apprpopriate nomenclature on it although the advertisement clearly states "2.5-10-42 Compact NXS". If their quality control is so superior, why can't they manage to get the copy in a simple advertisement correct? How embarrassing.

I take all of it in with a good dose of cynism although I have to admit I've read often enough where a writer clearly voiced a quality control complaint or had to wait for a "Test Sample" to be replaced. Fair enough.

It does make a huge difference here on the opposite side of the Pond when a "Remchester" or "Winington" product is ordered & received and then has quality control issues; you're one Dealer, International Distributor, International Shipping and Cutoms away from customer satisfaction for sure. A major pain.

A gun writer's integrity gets tested every time he's asked to review a new product.
Some pass the test, others do not.
Ultimately, it's me, the consumer who nakes the decision to buy however.

Don

the bad reviews are written by the gun writers that recieve a gun to test and a letter saying they have to return the gun when the testing is done!........

I've written a few articles and I have one ironclad rule: The Editor better not change anything except spelling and grammar! Sure, most editors are frustrated writers and just love to put their mark on someone else's stuff, but if they alter mine then they don't get another article submission from me, ever, and they also get a lot of bad-mouthing from me (for whatever that's worth, G).

Also, they better be pretty damned sure of their corrections for my spelling and grammar since I'm significantly more qualified in the proper use of the English language than almost all of them.

In my experience about half of the gun editors I know are moderately competent at editing but few if any can make a living at writing, and several appear to be completely incompetent! Actually at least one of them uses only his 'spell-check' function to proof-read his product, and of course as a result it appears that he's both illiterate and also ignorant of his subject. I pointed out to him and his readers that proof-reading is required for accuracy, and that a basic grammar-&-usage proof-read could be easily done by any literate 10th-grader, and so why wasn't he doing it? His response was that proof-reading took too much time and wasn't necessary since the readers knew what was meant anyway.

Needless to say, I don't read that mag anymore and don't trust any info it contains, at all, ever.
Regards, Joe

That article shows why the information in GUN TESTS is so suspect. They only evaluate ONE SAMPLE of a given product. Look what can happen to that one item.............

quote:

Originally posted by El Deguello:
That article shows why the information in GUN TESTS is so suspect. They only evaluate ONE SAMPLE of a given product. Look what can happen to that one item.............

I was under the impression that that one sample was purchased off the open market and not submitted by the manufacturer.

I've always thoughtthe info at gun tests was better info that most gun writers for that reason.....except for the prejudices often shown by the writing staff at gun tests..

As for me.....the best gun writing is found right here by ordinary guys that give their personal impressions.....see the article on the new M-70 on medium bores.....

While not professionals, they tell it the way they see it without payment.....and folks here aren't hesitant to do so....and there's room for dissent too.....

I;ll take AR over the gun rags anytime!

One of my old favorite gun magazines has an editor that make my skin crawl. I have been subscribing tot he magazine for about 35 years or more, way long than his tenure at the magazine. If the editor is not changed soon I am going to cancel my subscription.
Under his tenure I think the magazine has gone down hill. One of his recent columns was an article that he contributed called GIGO - Garbage In Garbage Out.
He included a rant about internet forms information that he felt was garbage, just as I feel about his article.
I have never responded to a magazine editor in my life but I sent him an email suggesting that GIGO would be a good name for his column.

quote:

I have never responded to a magazine editor in my life but I sent him an email suggesting that GIGO would be a good name for his column.

The internet is replacing a lot of the formerly printed media. I no longer subscribe to any of it and haven't since I first got the internet in the '90s

I think he was merely feeling the pinch and tried to secure his printed media income. Can't blame him for that but then one can't blame anyone looking to read hundreds of differing accounts on the internet by "unpaid" publishers.

There are many (dozens) of posters here that I can easily believe after reading their posts a few times.....and it don't take long to figure them out.

Most gun writers never met a gun they didn't like, especially if it came from a major advertiser.

http://www.thegunzone.com/gunwriter.html

quote:

The 'Popular' View of the Gunzine Game… some doggerel from Clark Magnuson:
Those that write the gun rag pages
Make it up, but pose as sages
Those who think that it's all true
Pay the bills to print more poo

Even worse are the reviews
Pay for adds is pay'n dues
If per chance you didn't pay
It ain't so good what we will say

I wrote that poem on that web page in 2 minutes, and now if I Google my own name, the first thing that pops up is a bad poem that copies the form of "Those who write on ****house walls, roll their **** in little balls..."

quote:

Originally posted by Gerry:
Certainly if I was responsible for providing the media with test samples I'd personally ensure they recieved a sterling example of my product.

This is how the company I work for does things. When a new product is ready for testing only a hand picked perfect product is given out. This is even when all the "BUGS" have still not been worked out for full production.

This is why I won't buy a new product that just came out....

It makes me wonder if guns the writers get are proofed at the factory before they get them. Also how many for what ever reason blow up at the factory when they proof them. If the "hybrid" pistol had been proofed it would have blown at the factory and not in his face! They also put his life at risk a second time by not proofing!

I agree this is dated, but you won't get this kind of stuff from current writers either I suspect, so this is about the only way you'll know of it.