I saw this over on Glock Talk and thought it was interesting:

How Gun Magazines Write Articles

Instruction From The Editor To The Journalist:
Frangible Arms just bought a four page color ad in our next issue. They
sent us their latest offering, the CQB MK-V Tactical Destroyer. I told
Fred to take it out to the range to test. He'll have the data for you
tomorrow.


Feedback From Technician Fred:
The pistol is a crude copy of the World War II Japanese Nambu type 14
pistol, except it's made from unfinished zinc castings. The grips are
pressed cardboard. The barrel is unrifled pipe. There are file marks all
over the gun, inside and out.

Only 10 rounds of 8mm ammunition were supplied. Based on previous
experience with a genuine Nambu, I set up a target two feet down range.
I managed to cram four rounds in the magazine and one in the chamber. I
taped the magazine in place, bolted the pistol into a machine rest, got
behind a barricade, and pulled the trigger with 20 feet of 550 cord. I
was unable to measure the trigger pull because my fish scale tops out at
32 pounds. On the third try, the pistol fired. From outline of the
holes, I think the barrel, frame, magazine, trigger and recoil spring
blew through the target. The remaining parts scattered over the
landscape.

I sent the machine rest back to the factory to see if they can fix it,
and we need to replace the shooting bench for the nice people who own
the range. I'll be off for the rest of the day. My ears are still
ringing. I need a drink.

Article Produced By The Journalist:
The CQB MK-V Tactical Destroyer is arguably the deadliest pistol in the
world. Based on a combat proven military design, but constructed almost
entirely of space age alloy, it features a remarkable barrel design
engineered to produce a cone of fire, a feature much valued by Special
Forces world wide. The Destroyer shows clear evidence of extensive hand
fitting. The weapon disassembles rapidly without tools. At a reasonable
combat distance, I put five holes in the target faster than I would have
thought possible. This is the pistol to have if you want to end a
gunfight at all costs. The gun is a keeper, and I find myself unable to
send it back "

The thread was about the NRA making the Taurus their Handgun of the Year.

Peter.

We've known for years that gun rags are just advertizing, you can't believe what they print. EVER.

quote:

Originally posted by butchloc:

X2

X3

What they said.


Steve E.........

Maybe I have missed some, but have yet to read a gun review where the writer did not fall in love with whatever piece of crap came his/her way.

This is a double speak theory like the one used in Washington.

How many people here read these rags?

several years ago I got talked into doing a couple "ghost reviews" for a gun magazine. The rifle was superior to this one is one respect; it did not disassemble itself upon firing.

I did not recognize the article which had been rewritten by a staff member too busy (or too smart) to touch the rifle himself.

It's like some of your inlaws... Ya gotta love 'em. But you don't have to like them or believe a word they say, OR loan them money.

Rich

There is one very easy way to judge how "independent" any test article is...check to see how close to an ad for the item being tested the article is.

If the ad is within three pages of the article, it is a very firm indicator that the article is bullshit mixed in with some outright lying.

If the article is well separated from the ads it still doesn't mean the article is 100% on the up & up, but there's a chance of it. As recent as the early 1980s editorial ethics required that magazine layouts not place ads in proximity to any articals about the same items. Layout editors ( compositors) who violated that were considered to be advertising whores. There were violaters even then but at least not the majority.

Now it has evolved to where some magazines require the name, address, and contact info for every product mentioned in ANY article be included right inside the article. Even soliciting on the street corner under a street light by a 23-year old blonde in a micro-mini skirt, a halter-top and stilhetto heels at 12:30 a.m. in the dead of winter is less obvious than that.

Back in the '20s, '30s and '40s one saw a lot of articles which were genuine evaluations...then with the invention of national airlines the "free hunts" began for gun writers and things have gone to hell in a handbasket ever since.

Today some writers actually demand "freebies" from the gun or gun equipment makers before they will write an article that their magazine is going to pay them for anyway.

I know of one for sure whose editor told me personally the writer was fired for it, but as I wouldn't be surprised if he also liked to sue folks even for telling the truth, I won't mention his name or that of his former editor or magazine.

quote:

O
Article Produced By The Journalist:
The CQB MK-V Tactical Destroyer is arguably the deadliest pistol in the
world. Based on a combat proven military design, but constructed almost
entirely of space age alloy, it features a remarkable barrel design
engineered to produce a cone of fire, a feature much valued by Special
Forces world wide. The Destroyer shows clear evidence of extensive hand
fitting. The weapon disassembles rapidly without tools. At a reasonable
combat distance, I put five holes in the target faster than I would have
thought possible. This is the pistol to have if you want to end a
gunfight at all costs. The gun is a keeper, and I find myself unable to
send it back "

A short poem I once read about this subject:

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

You know that a gun isn't accurate when the writer says.
I did not have time to go to the range. But informal shooting I was able to hit the few rocks I was shooting at.