Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/01/14

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] rotten journalists ? (was: 50 1.4 Test Results)
From: Alan Ball <>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 07:12:56 +0100

Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter) wrote:
> Yes,
> That is true they do not want to offend the hand that feeds them, but
> magazines do not "jimmy" the charts....<snip>....

I would write "most" magazines: I'm sure there are cases of advertiser
pressure, lack of technology means or incompetence here and there. But
you are right in reacting to the a-priori rejection that seems dominant
in this list.

For the rest, one may, like Erwin, challenge test procedures and
criteria, but I find it very strange the way some of us reject test
articles as a whole by insinuating that the editors and labs are crooked
and/or incompetent and that their considerations are worthless as soon
as they are not sufficiently laudative for the revered L brand.

My point of view is that those articles (and the people who produce
them) should be considered with the same respect and confidence as
articles written by any journalist in other fields. Honesty, competence
and deontology are not absent from the scene of the specialised press.
So, dismissing those professionals or their work with low end innuendo
is an insult to the whole journalist profession (that includes
photojournalists ;-) ). Example of such innuendo : "maybe they're more
friendly to Leica now, because we see occasional Leica ads in magazines
these days".

Each of us should remain critical, cross examine test results, find
failures in concrete procedures (thanks Erwin!) or in precisely quoted
editorial logic but none of us should allow himself to post offending
categorical rejections of the work of mostly very dedicated journalists
and testers. The LUG is a good place to scrutinize those articles and
tests, and confront them to each other and to daily experience.