Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/01/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Pascal, I think you are judging wrongly here. I bet you anything you want that if any other manufacturer organised such a spectacular national tour and negociated a similar partnership with the magazine, it would get it. That Canon tour was a great marketing idea, reminiscent of the conference and demo tours all big brands (including Leica) used to organise in the triumphant days of amateur photography. Again, accepting advertisement from a manufacturer does not imply dishonesty in the journalist's work. The same goes for most such events: it is not because Nike sponsors a soccer championship that the referee, paid by the championship league, will try to signal a penalty against the team who uses Adidas. If the Economist sponsorizes a conference, does it mean that the Economist will adopt the rhetorics of the speakers in its columns ? Or vice-versa ? The same here: it is not because the CdI team supports a good idea promoted by Canon that this will translate in the columns of the magazine by jimmied tests or unethical comments. Their support for the event did not at any point include any comment on the quality of the gear presented by the organizer. I find it was a great idea, unfortunately it did not include Belgium, and that the magazine did well to sponsor it. Also, it is not because Canon pays 10 pages of ads (is accepting such a large number of pages not showing a 'hint of favoritism'? ) in every issue of the magazine that the EOS3 gets a biased treatment. Seems like the contrary, from what I've been reading in the 2 latest issues ;-) Seems to me like Canon are real smart and know how to invest their advertisemnt budget... That magazine and its team have up to now a fantastic track record of honesty and competence. It will need confirmed facts of blatant incompetency, cheating or manipulation for me to withdraw my confidence in their probity as journalists. Alan Pascal wrote: > > On 16-01-1999 12:07 Dominique PELLISSIER wrote: > > >The strength of CI is there : owned by an independent group, with 100,000 > >subscribers and 500,000 readers, they can resist to pressures from > >announcers.They have credibility. > > Well, while CDI looks very credible, one has to take the fact into > account that they choose to accompany Canon during the Canon tour in > major French cities at the end of last year (showing off the latest Canon > gear, among which the EOS 3). > CDI was giving different practical courses at the Canon booth (of course, > all people -regardless of their gear- could attend, but still...). > I realize they offered some explanation to their readers about this, but > I still believe they shouldn't have done so as they may be giving more > than a hint of favoritism in accompanying Canon (the first time CDI ever > did such thing).