| Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
November 25, 2008 - 7:54am
#1
how about a political zone??
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 StereophileAVTech Media Americas Inc., USA
All rights reserved
Probably not a bad idea.
Better idea if it will keep the Stereophile writers from making silly and ill informed comments in areas where they are no more educated then the average reader.
My problem with political commentary in the magazine is that it takes up space better served by audio reporting and it invites letters on politics, letters that get printed taking up space that should be devoted to audio.
Does a single reader really care what an audio writer thinks about politics? Do we subscribe to hear such pontification and drivil?
Nope...I find it very annoying. I can and have written and had published more coherent political commentary. If I want politics, I will read magazines and commentary devoted to the issue witten by folk with views that are based on more than personal opinion or the politically correct trend of the day from our cocktail party revolutionairies.
Leave the politics for those who do that for a living and write about what you know and the readers pay for...audio.
I also do not want any poilitcal comments in this forum. It is not the forum for it. If I could just for once hear a liberal say they were wrong or that they made a mistake I might feel differently. Oh wait, I did find one...
http://www.ldsmag.com/ideas/081017light.html
This same information was available off Investor's business Daily's web site as well, but now they want your credit card information. I guess it still is all about the money!
When you see the U.N. as part of the bailout plan don't say you weren't warned. It is coming.
I am glad a certain party won the election as now they can clean up the mess they started. It is now time to shut up and lead! Period! The worst part is the Supreme Court turned it's back on potential major voter fraud. That scares me more than anything else. When you can't even count on honesty in the Supreme Court to at least review an issue of great importance...
When the main stream media become truthful, I dare say again, I might have some hope this this country. Until then...
Hey no comments about the U.N. please. My lovely wife has been working at U.N. Headquarters in NYC for close to 30 years and so the U.N. has been very, very good me and mine. If any of my fellow forum members are ever in NYC and would like a behind the scenes tour of the U.N. just drop me a PM and we'll see what can be arranged. All it will cost you is lunch in the Delegate's Lounge.
Not a "political zone," strictly, but a place where all topics can be discussed: The Open Bar.
That's a heck of political/ideological way to say you don't want any political comments in this forum!
I am so tired of the liberal slant that as Popeye said, "I can't stanzzit no more". That was the first time I have ever said anything political on this forum. It made me so ill I had to respond. If you want the government to legislate approval of your behavior to take away your guilt I will have no part of it.
Go read the article I linked you to. If you dare!
You will not see me post here again. Truth has left the building.
With all due respect, Jim, I'm sure many other people will likewise complain about the "ultra-right" posts on this very same thread and proclaim, just like you, but on the other side: "truth has left the building." It's the same polemics on both sides, and it seems that if you left this forum for mainly that awkward reason, well, that'd be sad & I'd encourage you to reconsider.
Well, Jim, I don't believe that's entirely true. You've made your feelings known on several occasions, in particular, the last time you left the forum. (I admit the remarks against your views were over the top at that time and even your wife took a blow that was wholy undeserved.) As with this departure you pretty much took a swipe at those you find offensive just before the door hit you on the way out. It's true, you have a peculiar way of avoiding political conflict.
Now that I've surely peeved you off to the point of not seeing straight, why don't you take a deep breath and relax. We live in a hyper-partisan world, there's virtually nowhere you can go where you are not confronted in some way by politics - either yours or the other guy's. I can't walk into a McDonalds in most of this city without seeing Fox News on the freshly installed LCD TV's supplied for the customer's "entertainment". The managers have apparently been instructed not to change the channel even at the request of a customer. Too many of the restaurants have a 24/7 news channel of some variety tuned in 24/7. Whether I agree or disagree with Fox News, MSNBC, Pat Robertson, etc. is beside the point. To spend your time ranting and raising your blood pressure over the "liberal media" or "Faux News" is a waste of time and energy. If it honestly disturbs you that much just to hear the opposition's views expressed, Jim, you need to get a grip.
There are far too many places conservatives can go to find their views expressed with no dissenting voices within sight or earshot. There are how many channels of Christian talk radio and TV? Not Jewish talk radio or Muslim or Hindu talk radio. Christian talk radio and TV. Jesus! Broadcasting how many hours a day?
Fair is fair, is it not?
Oh.
No, it's not.
Conservatives are against the Fair Speech Amendment just as Liberals are trying to shut down talk radio. Hmmph!
What a world, eh?!
Jim, did anyone force you to come to this thread? Did anyone hold a gun to your head and compel you for fear of death to read ST's political rhetoric? Jim, my boy, just like the rest of us, you opened this door and walked on in. What were you expecting? Rush? Sean? Savage? Didn't you read the flashing sign above the door? This ain't RNC headquarters.
Jim, you have options. In Dallas here we have Mark Davis, he sits in for Rush every now and again. IMO he's a Rush wannabe and a genuine conservative d***head. We have four stations that play conservative talk radio 24/7. Guess what? I don't listen. Oh, I do sometimes because they're so damn funny and you have to know what your enemy is up to. I get the impression right now they're deep into discreditting Obama even before he's inaugurated. Is that right? I ask you Jim because I assume you want to listen to that hokum and I don't.
See? I don't want to hear or read it so I only engage it when I have a small desire for something different. I have a choice. We all have choices. Don't go to places that run Fox News 24/7 or go and don't pay attention. It's all entertainment. If I don't want to watch American Idol, I don't have to. If I don't care to read the conservative letters to the editor in the Dallas Morning News, I don't. I don't get myself worked up and storm out of the building.
I have a chocie and I exercise that choice. That, Jim, is what makes America great. You don't have to listen to the other guy when you're not in the mood. But sometimes, the other guy might have something to say - believe it or not. Turning your back and walking away won't make him or her go away.
So, Jim, I suspect you are a man of convictions and you haven't read any of this because you're a hundred miles away from this forum by now. If not and you have seen some of this, take your time and think about this. You do not have to read the threads that offend you. You can choose not to. But if you choose to visit those threads, you have no real sensible way to complain. You can't stop other opinions from existing just by walking away from them. Everyone gets their say, Jim, you just get to choose when you'll be listening.
You did it before, guy, come on back and spend your time in the actual few audio threads that exist here. Ignore the rest, it won't kill you and we aren't the devil incarnate. Really.
But should a magazine devoted to audio waste space on issues not audio? Should the magazine fill the letters page with political comment sparked by writers silly political views?
Nope.
Why not? It's their magazine, they get to choose what goes in it. You just get to choose what you'll read. Like I said, who holds the gun to your head and forces you to read those words?
What? You don't read them? Then why are you complaining?
Oh, you do read them, but they offend you?
I'm beginning to see the problem as it exists.
If Stereophile ran comments about how poorly the automotive industry builds products, would you complain? Oh, wait, I think they've done that. OK, if Stereophile ran comments about the lousy condition of the world's economy, would you complain about that? Oh, wait, ...
OK, try this. If Stereophile ran an article about an audio club in West L.A. and you lived Cincinatti, would you complain? If they ran an article about a godawful expensive piece of equipment you'll never be able to hear or afford, would you complain?
You would?! There you go, that's your problem, you don't understand the world is not made just for you. Did your mother tell you everyone would want to know just what you wanted and then do that just to please you and you'd wake up to a lolipop on your pillow every morning? I doubt it.
When I come to an article that doesn't interest me, I don't read it. When I find a writer tedious, I skip over their writing. Doing that I probably don't read about four pages out of every 135 page issue. If you don't read the political commentary that you find so distasteful, you'll skip, what? ... maybe four sentences out of a 135 page issue. What percentage of the magazine are you not reading like that? Let's see, 135 pages divided by the number of words on a page, times the number of letters that spell "Bush", over the ...
Look, you figure it up and whatever it is, 0.0001% or so, let John know at the end of the year and ask for a refund of your subscription price for that percentage that you just couldn't bring yourself to read. I'll even go to bat for you and we'll get JA to pay for his dastardly indiscretions.
Or, maybe we could lobby John to print all the Liberal commentary in Red Diaper-Doper Baby red ink so it would be easier to spot? You tell me, we'll work something out. 0.00001% red ink can't be that difficult, can it?
Or, better yet, you get over yourself and realize other people have opinions that aren't exactly like yours and you can't get away from those people no matter how hard you try.
"I won't tolerate it."
Why?
"Because."
Why?
"I'm tired of it."
Why?
"Because."
Just pass it by, it won't reach out and bite you.
Now, please, don't respond once again with, "Should the magazine fill the letters page with political comment sparked by writers silly political views?" Please, don't, because that's just plain silly and repetitive. I ignore those people with silly political views, you should too, all 0.00001% of them.
I agree. While Jim and I hold opposed views on many matters, I have very much valued Jim's contributions to this forum and we share a love for many kinds of music. The forum is richer for his presence.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Let's be clear here. The editorial in question was about high end audio's contribution to global warming, and the responsibility we all share for the future of the planet and our survival thereon. To my way of thinking, that is a human statement, not a "political" one.
Every action, including the manufacture of audio, has consequences both seen and unforeseen. You may or may not like the subject of the editorial. You may choose to reject the overwhelming scientific evidence that global warming is an accelerating phenomenon that is posing increasing threats to our well-being. But to declare that audio and music exist in a world apart, unrelated to everything else on the planet, is not only ridiculous, but patently wrong.
Throughout history, music has addressed the human condition, and the betterment thereof. There is no sensible reason on heaven and earth why writing that concerns itself with the reproduction of music, and the clear communication of music's deepest truth, should not do the same.
jason victor serinus
Oh, man.
I promise to be good here.
Jim, don't leave. I have yet to hear a liberal or a conservative admit error, so that should be a wash, eh?
No, just like a stock holder, the subscribers are the owners of the product. We pay for it. It is a foolish business who could care less for their steady customers.
Read this months issue...5 of 8 letters are on this issue. It has nothing at all to do with Audio excellence and all to do with audio reviewers ego. I do not pay to hear them say silly things about politcs but briliant things about audio.
Those four sentences generate pages of letters and those letters have nothing to do with audio and everything to do with a reviewers ego...not audio ego (as demonstrated in MF's tantrum on another thread and its reaction) but political ego, as if anyone really desires to know what the reviewer of an amp thinks about his government.
News flash...many, many of us don't.
Is it possible that you agree with the drivil being presented? I could care less about the views of the reviewers on this issue. I pay for an AUDIO magazine...not a laymans political forum...I can go to a hundred forums to hear folk no wiser than I pontificate on issues they simply do not understand. I come here to see what these experts have to say about the latest audio.
(edited to have at least a few words spelled correctly)
Let me be absolutely clear...Global Warming is a pop religion with serious political roots. It is as much about power as it is science. Some folk believe, others don't. I do not subscribe to read abut the pop religion du jour, a reviewers political beliefs, or simpe sniping at things not audio...
Surprisingly...I read audio magazines to find insight in audio. I read politica magazines for politics and religious ones for religion and the tabloids for the trend of the moment, like Global Warming...please
I keep repeating the same point about letters over and over because no one has addressed it. Do you subscribe to read other readers views on politics? If so...for God's sake...why?
So what if global climate change isn't a real threat? What if we are just getting worked up by nothing? The fact of the matter is, we really have no way of knowing what kind of impact man is doing, and has done to the planet. There certainly are a lot of doom and gloom scenarios that have come up over the last few years. It's fear of the unknown that has caused us to step back take a look at what we've done and now figuring out a way we can live a healthier coexistence with our planet. I guess I don't really see that as a bad thing even if it is using fear as a motivator.
I don't know about you but I see a disconnect here. You pay for audio reviews but you're concerned about the letters page. Are the letters all that important to your understanding of audio? It's another one of those things that I don't read half the letters because they have nothing to interest me. Did'ja ever think of skipping these letters that upset you? Why don't we up that % of what you shouldn't read to maybe, something like 0.0002%. You've already spilled more pixels complaining about the letters than I think there are letters that offend you. I don't get it. Tell you what, next issue, just rip those letters pages out of the nagazine - "If thine letters offend thee, pluck them out!" Just yank 'em all out of the magazine 'cause sure as shootin' somethin's gonna offend someone who's this concerned about the letters page.
I'm making a guess here but I suspect if JA feels a subject is in need of a letter, it gets a letter. But most of the letters aren't educating me in the ways of audio and the ones that do, I bet John lets through anyway.
Actually, there probably are stockholders in the parent company that owns Stereophile so you are still a customer, not a stock holder.
However, you don't seem to be understanding my point, I think you are not understanding me purposely. If you understood me, your point would not be so valid and you wouldn't keep repeating the same worn out ol' saw.
You have a choice. Buy Stereophile or don't buy Stereophile.
Stereophile is not printed just for your benefit. You seem to think you are the only paying customer who matters. I can't think of a single business that pleases every single one of their customers. They should all try but generally it comes down to finally saying you can't please this individual and that individual. So you make a choice, just like you get to make a choice. And it still comes down to 0.0002% of the magazine that upsets you. Man, that's finding short hairs on the butt of a flea.
That's what bothers you, isn't it? I might be one of them damn commie liberals. Well, I ain't tellin'.
You know what? I read your last post and all I see is "Because". "Because" this and "Because" that. Don't you have some other argument for what you say and think other than "Because"? If you don't, "Because" just don't cut it.
Say something new.
I agree with JIMV about keeping the magazine as a whole politically neutral, but the letters section is about allowing the readers to voice their opinions and is a place where the editors can freely respond. I don't think it should be censored and stripped free of anything that could be considered "controversial". Like what was previously stated, if it doesn't jibe with your views you don't have to agree and you don't have to read it.
It is NOT audio...Would you be fascinated by articles about Audio that spoke instead of travels on the Amazon, the construction of interstate highways, or the prevelence of Pine trees above 10,000 feet in Northern California? All might be fascinating issues but none are about audio.
You are speaking of both politics and pop religion. Both are fascinating in their own place but have nothing at all to do with audio excellence.
For every fellow who believes Green in Audio has some real effect on the environment you will find one who could care less, maybe more than one...perhaps most. In contrast, I would bet each and every person subscribing to this audio magazine has an interest in ... Audio.
Look at this forum...it is an audio forum but the threads with the most play are political....
This insistence that reviewers have a right or responsibility to spout about politics or its close cousin, Global Warming, is driving more and more ink into those realms. If the magazine wants to encourage such off topic blather, the least they could do is add pages to insure we do not lose space for, call me a fool here...audio coverage in an audio magazine.
I was a subscriber in the old Listener magazine and was constantly offended by the political pontification passing as audio commentary. I was so pissed I twice wrote counter points, neither of which was, of course printed. The magazine went under. Perhaps enough folk were offended by the political slant to stop buying. I don't know but it was a blight on an otherwise good magazine.
Reviewers should determine what they are, writers on audio excellence or want to be political commentators. If the later, they should try their luck at The Nation or National Review. They could leave audio reviewing to folk who write for folk interested n Audio.
The letters page contains a lot of audio information, just not when they are complaining, as does this thread, about political comments.
Is the magazine an Audiophile magazine or a Political one...simple question really and judging by the letters posted, one that bothers a lot of other folk.
I have never posted my political opinion...YOU must see a leftist slant. I never mentioned it. If you see it, it perhaps is there. I could care less which political side the writer has. I am offended at having to read ANY political bias in a magazine dedicated to audio. What if TV Guide suddenly went all Fascist, or Home and Garden Commie...would that improve either? Would it have anything at all to do with those magazines mission in life?
My issue is simple and it is not mine alone. Read those letters. For every one person who bothers to write there are a score who are also offended. Is it the business of the magazine to offend readers about stuff that has nothng at all to do with audio? Are they simply inserting political lines as a playground kiddie throws out profanity in an effort to appear chic, cool or with it?
Political commentary is not their job nor is offending a good bit of their readership.
I have made my point. If you like seeing all that ink and all those pages of half baked political and religious silliness, go for it.
You know my, and a lot of others view on the issue. I have made my point. Feel free to ignor it.
That I agree with
A wonderful site for non political , scientific discussion of anthropogenic climate forcings (popularly misnamed global warming) is
climatesci.org
Climate scientists from around the world post on this site. It can take just a little bit of effort to learn the language but it is worth it.
I'm not sure how I'm supposed to respond to your comment. It's obvious that you are inflexible in your views and a very obstinate person to boot. You're someone who's ego feels threatened when someone of an opposing viewpoint expresses it. After you made your point that you obviously have no interest in the environment I responded with a mean spirited and childish response that I deleted because I don't wish to pick a fight with someone who doesn't seem to want to engage in an open conversation like gentlemen, where viewpoints can be expressed without personal retribution.
Whoa, whoa, whoa! You're gonna stroke out here, guy. You see slants and I see nothing that can't be ignored. You see the liberals comin' for you and I see a new administration taking the reins. Out with the old and not so good and in with the new and hopefully better - as if it could get much worse. If you aren't concerned with the politics of the matter, you have to admit Bush is at 20% approval and that ain't good. This guy's been a screw up in just about every way, ya'know, unless you're in the 20% who think this country is doing damn swell and then you and I have nothing, I repeat, nothing, to talk about. 'Cause you see pancakes and syrup and I see three day old garbage.
Our country - your's and mine, our's - is in a hell of a fix. The guys that we put in charge don't act like they're in charge. They either have or are in the process of socializing just about everything in this country except the working man and woman. They're handing out hundreds of billions of dollars to the same people who stole from us and they won't tell us who is getting what. Your grandkids are going to pay for this for decades to come and if you can explain to them why this happened, you're doing way better than I am. I can't explain it to myself!
We've socialized the farmer, the banker, the railroads, the parks, the highways, the electrical grid, the automobile industry, the oil companies, the drug companies, lawyers and judges and on and on and on. We have been giving money that we don't have to people we haven't liked and they don't like us for the past forty years and in the process they've taken everything from the worker to give to the CEO's and the oil producers and pharmacuetical executives. We're bankrupt. We owe our future to the Japanese, Chinese and Saudi's. The US dollar has been in the toilet for years. We are selling our future - yours and mine - for 1% prime rate and a 1.37 exchange on the Euro. This fool that's been in charge for the last eight years has robbed us of everything we ever had and now wants more before he'll go away.
That's not conservative or liberal, that's 80% of America saying that. We're screwed! Our kids are screwed! Our grandkids are screwed! And whether you want to believe it or not, the guy you elected did the most damage. I didn't hear this sort of cryin' and whinin' when the Republicans were riding high and turning out the lights on the Democrat's meetings.
So what changed?
People got fed up. That's what changed.
Look, there are less than 60 days left to Bush's ride. Then we start picking on a Democrat. Are you going to complain if Stereophile doesn't make political statements then? That would prove their leanings, right? Are you getting geared up for the Democrats and nothing gets said? Wow! That would be something, eh? Stereophile says nothing! Damn Liberal media!
So why don't you do this, admit you were part of the problem by voting for a screw up President. Even if you didn't vote for him on election day you stood by and did nothing while letting him destroy the US of A. That's accessory to grand larceny.
Then realize this guy is robbing us and our grandkids of everything we have - and then some - to give to his rich friends. Consider you may not be able to pay for a subscription to Stereophile if things get much worse.
And then think to yourself, "I'm sitting on a hifi forum complaining about a couple of items in the letters section."
This is worth all this effort? This is not just the short hairs on the butt of a flea? This is not a tremendous waste of time when there are far more important things to concern yourself with? The letters section of Stereophile is just not that important when you look at all the other stuff we are facing? The world economy is on the brink of disaster, international conflicts are bubbling up in every spot on the planet, hundreds of people are starving and have no means of support - in our own - yours and my - country that used to be the greatest place on the face of the Earth - till George got hold of it.
And you want to complain about a few letters in Stereophile.
Why?
"Because."
Get some perspective here, guy.
I understand that you buy Stereophile to read about audio, and not politics. But I don't understand your point about the letters. When I see that five of eight letters are addressed to Jason's essay, it makes me feel that our readers care about the topic and therefore Jason's piece was worth publishing.
I fight about politics and pop religions on the appropriate political and pop religion forums, not here. I recommend you try those sources for such debate.
Here is where I argue about topics like cable changes and the 'speriority' of vinyl, both issues with a lot of room for disagreement and that are suitable for an audio magazine. I am also using the data I can get from the digital and computer forums to make buying and try out decisions, again why I read audio magazines.
Folk are reading a lot more into my position than is there. I buy Stereophile to read about the latest audio news and guidance as well as reviews of audio gear. My complaint is very simple and has two facets. I have no desire to read a reviewers political positions and I am offended that letters space is filled with the response to such reviewer comment and not audio exchanges.
Simple and to the point. Until and unless smeone can explain to me why insulting readers with conflicting political views makes a better audio magazine, I will hold my views on the issue. (I lump the pop reliion of global warming as a political subject as the folk discussing it are generally not scientists knowledgable in the field but pseudo scientists who simply repeat points made by others. I contend the entire issue is simply too complicated and crosses too many fields for anyone I am likely to enconter on a political ,or audio, forum to realy understand)
Politics...I could care less for anyones opinion on those issues in an Audio magazine. They do not improve the magazine and do serve to piss off folk. How is that good for the magazine?
Respectfully, you misread the letters. I care about $5 trillion in new spending promised for the economy over the last year when our total government revenues are under $2.4 trillion a year this year. That does not mean I want to read about the issue in Stereophile. My reading of those letters highlighted the comments reminding folk that the magazine is an audio one and the topic was sort of a waste of space.
Gary Pessia - "then a few needless, gratuitious jabs at Geln Campbell....Gravity sucks and so does your magazine"
A satisfied reader if I have ever seen one
Bob Vinyard - "I'd say that the last place I want to hear abut global warming is in your magazine...I don't turn to Stereophile for environmental or political interest"
Another fellow echoing my point.
Russ Schaeffer - "Although I admire Mr. Serinus' stance on the importance of being green, it is not what I want to read in an audio publication..."
Laurence Schenbeck liked the politics but wrote nothng in over 200 words about audio at all, just the politics of the green issue.
Agim Perolli also seemed to like the idea BUT again used perhaps 500 words to talk about Global Warming and not about audio quality.
Did the issue in question being written about not speak of audio? It only generated two letters on that topic
Again, how does writing of politics in an audio magazine and the resulting often angry response in any way improve the magazine. Is pissing off a good bit of the readership on off topic issues really improving the magazine? If so, how?
Why?
"Because."
Simple and to the point, until and unless you can explain why you cannot ignore that 0.0002% of the magaizne you find so offensive, explain why you keep repeating the same thing?
If Stereophile has "conflicting" poltical views - though you say you aren't concerned with politics, how's that work again? - why don't you read something other than Stereophile? Do you read every single word of Stereophile? All the record reviews that don't interest you, all the News and Views that don't interest you, all the meetings of the various audio clubs across the country? All the technical data? Are you not already selective in what you read in Stereophile?
Are you not really already choosing what you'll read and what you'll skip? If so, why does that 0.0002% get you so worked up that you can only repeat and repeat, "Because"?
It really doesn't matter, does it? You've made up your mind and nothing - nothing - anyone says will even penetrate your thinking. Then there must be other issues that Stereophile deals with that aren't in agreement with how you see the world and what you believe. Why choose the comments on global warming? They are a legimitate topic for a magazine that centers on products that consume electricity. To say they are not is to simply buy into the dumbing down of the public that has gone on for the last eight years. Say it isn't so and everyone who hates your political party - but you don't care about poloitics, just those politics that offend you - will blindly follow along. We can't discuss it because only scientists can discuss it? Then we can't discuss cables and vinyl because only scientists should know the answer to those questions. Stereophile should only print data and not subjective opinions. The "Measurements" section should be the entire magazine.
How do you suppose anything gets resolved if no one is allowed to discuss it with the information they have available? Do you turly think we should just shut up about the things that are of interest and do impinge on our life? Do we just keep consuming and consuming until nothing is left and then one day ask why no one warned us? To suggest we only spout what we've been fed is hypocritical and downright ignorant - see, you've successfully been dumbed down. Well, I don't want to go there.
Maybe you feel this is above your pay grade but I don't think it's beyond my attention span. I'm curious even if you are not. The magazine is catering to the desires and interests of an apparently large group of its readers, readers who are fed up with the dumbing down of everything and want as much information about as many topics as they can find, not less of everything until we wake up one day being told what to do and what to think, what to read and how to respond. Stereophile is appealing to a core of its audience. If you are not in that portion of Stereophile's readership who desires information pertinent to the hobby, then skip to the section of the magazine that does interest you and let me read what I want to know. Or read something else. Surely you don't read every audio magazine in publication and on line. You choose what you read, do the same here. But do not attempt to restrict my ability to access information I find useful and interesting. You don't get to determine what I get to read! I do! And I get to skip what doesn't interest me, you should do the same.
There is a substantial group of the populace who are fed up and we want to know why this has been allowed to happen and what is being done to rectify the situation. If that "situation" doesn't fit in to your frame of interest, skip to the next topic. Do not demand that I cannot have access to the information!
This dumbing down has occurred because those of us who have been offended by the answers we've not been provided have instead been told to shut up and behave. That's a "Because" answer.
So, here it is plain and simple once again. Skip the stuff that doesn't interest you. People do it all the damn day. I suspect you do it but you can't let this one topic go. You're talking about a small % of the entire output of Stereophile. Skip over it if it upsets you. It is your task as a responsible adult to choose how you respond to what you confront in day to day life. Someone cuts you off in traffic, it's your job to decide whether you let it go or chase the SOB down and shoot him. Which would you choose to do? Likewise, throwing a hissy over the letters section of a magazine is not an appropriate response for an adult. You just want what you want and to hell with the rest of us. Thank you very much for your kind consideration of my feelings.
I find the topic of the environment and how we care for it to be directly related to how the audio community proceeds in a time of historic crisis. "Historic crisis", got it? Heard those words lately? Or do you just ignore those words "because"? Skip over the letters that you dislike and read the ones you find of interst. It's such a simple task any moron could do it. Ignore them just as you ignore the other driver. It's the adult thing to do. Spending this much time saying the same thing over and over is not the adult thing to do.
The magazine is not your's to control. What's your's to control is how you choose to react to what you encounter.
Why?
"Because."
Now, saying the same thing over again isn't going to change anything, is it?
You write in another post:
Having taken the decision to publish something that some readers might regard as "political" (though I believe the issue of climate change is actually non-partisan), I feel I am obliged to publish a fair selection of the letters I receive in response. From what you state, my having done so annoys you. But then in the post to which I am responding you write:
So you are annoyed that Listener _didn't_ publish your letter of complaint but you are also annoyed that Stereophile _does_ publish such letters of complaint? Clarification would be appreciated.
No. Sadly, Listener was bought by a publishing company that then decided it wanted to change Listener from Art Dudley's vision (which was what they had purchased) to the vision of a group VP with no experience in audio publishing. In the end, rather than continue fighting City Hall, Art felt he had to resign and without Art, of course, they no longer had a magazine.
On the other hand, as I had always promised Art a role at Stereophile if ever he left Listener, I was pleased to be able to make good on that promise.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
I am not annoyed that the magazine publishes such letters. I am annoyed that the magazine published reviews and comment that generates such letters, not a subtle difference.
If the magazine believes the audio world is best served by making gratutitous and insulting political throw away lines in reviews or jumping on the hot social/quasi religious trend of the moment as in Global Warming fine but I submit a large number of your readers, as evidenced by the letters you receive, do not believe being insulted by such throw away lines is really necessary to enjoy our hobby or that they need audiophile help in dealing with the global warming hype.
I have been reminded I am being pendantic (no make that boring and repetitive)on this issue so I would like to leave it but that does not mean that the magazines policy on the issue is right or even in its best interest.
I agree, JIMV, keep the political nonsense out of the magazine.
There are magazines devoted to politics with staff writers that are political experts, who have chosen the political field as a career. leave the political posturing to them....
Politicalphile? Globalwarmingphile? leftwingphile?? doesnt have quite the same ring as STEREOphile.
Gee, what a surprise that you are in favor of stifling opinions you don't like.
You don't have to read it if you don't like it.
Gee, after all that, I feel as though you have paid no attention whatsoever.
Ahem ... I found the article informative, timely, applicable to our hobby and even occasionally humorous.
Am I understanding you correctly that you did not?
I mean this is turning into udp's I-IV-V routine again. You've made the same point already how many times?
True, I could never grace a dozen calls of "Because" with the honor of being "pedantic". But don't let anyone think you're going to stop just becaue you have nothing else to say. This is war!!! Never give up. Never let down! Never ... Oh, hell, what was it McCain used to recite?
"Drill, baby, drill"? No, that was what's her name. Never mind McCain became repetitive too.
And let me just say that Art Dudley, Mike Fremer and Sam Tellig were another reason I re-upped my subscription this year. That Lowther Horn DIY project / review was absolutely poop-my-pants funny! Giving names to those tempermental screws in the enclosure was precious!!!
Forgive me for not taking you at your word, but you have complained long and loud in this thread about the fact that I chose to publish so many letters in response to Jason's essay on going green. If you are not annoyed by my doing so, then why would you devote so much energy to discussing my publication of these letters rather than letters about audio?
I can only go by what you write.
In the main, the comments to which you refer are hardly gratuitous or throwaway. As has been pointed out, neither audio nor music exists in a cultural vacuum. Jason's essay was apt, I felt, given that the optimal way of achieving high-end sound, in the opinion of many including myself, is to use relatively insensitive speakers driven by a tube amplifier or a solid-state amplifier heavily biased into class-A. This is a profligately wasteful use of electricity, yet so far, "greener" approaches such as class-D amplifiers do not approach the same level of sonic attainment. In addition, I felt his refernece to the RoHS levels that are now proliferating on audio gear very necessary. For Stereophile to ignore such issues is inappropriate, I feel.
Similarly, we cannot ignore the financial policies of the Bush administration, because they have both impoverished the middle class (who buys most of the gear high-end manufacturers make) and raised the prices of imported gear to the point that many familiar brandnames are going to disappear in the next 12 months.
As I said "throwaway" is a mischaracterisation on your part: Jason's essay was a serious piece, as was my "As We See It" last March, in which I mentioned the fears of audio retailers concerning the impact of the Bush fiscal policies: www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/308awsi. In addition, as the large number of letters I received, of which I only had space to publish a representative selection, ran around 60% against and 40% for, I feel this reinforced my feeling that the subject was ripe for examination in the magazine.
I thought the letters I received in response raised some excellent points, in particular Agim Perolli's suggestion that we investigate publishing the carbon footprint of everything we review.
Your opinion, and I certainly respect your right to express it. But with equal respect, I disagree.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Fortunately, if people are canceling their subscriptions, for whatever reason, they are being replaced by a slightly larger number of new subscribers, as Stereophile's circulation has increased a little 2007-2008. :-)
But I have to admit to some puzzlement in that given how little of the magazine's content concerns peripheral matters, why for some readers does that outweigh everything else of value that we publish? Given that Stereophile's writers cover a broad spectrum of political and audio beliefs, I think it unlikely for any reader to be able to agree with or be interested in _everything_ we publish. And I don't expect them to.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Why...is the number of folk pissed off indicative of audio interest?
If you feel that it is the business of an audio magazine to inject its writers political views into reviews and the editorial stance of the paper, you have the right. Just note the fallout...many folk are at the lest upset by such a stance and have notes as much.
Politics has nothing to do with audio but a LOT to do with ego and trendiness. As I amd many others are ot members of the cocktai party revolutionary class, we decry the diversion from audio to leftist politics.
Again, you can go where you desire, but remeber, pissing of 47% of the country and perhaps an equal number of readers might not be in the interst of the hobby or the magazines long term health.
Readers of all sorts do not like being insulted in print...call us foolish.
That 0.0002% can be a real bugaboo when you just don't want to hear or read or think about an opposing viewpoint.
Is anyone preparing a "Farewell George/Hello Barack" piece? Just thinking about that makes me get goosebumps and I bet it does some other folk too, though not for the same reason.
Wrong.
I assume that's because you are of the rightist persuasion?
You really should stop to take a breath to do a spell check. And you're being repetitive again. "Repetitive again"? Isn't that something like an oxymoron?
Ahem ... I found the article informative, timely, applicable to our hobby and even occasionally humorous.
You were insulted because you were foolish enough not to skip ahead.
Does this mean you are finally finished or is there another "Because" left in you?
I didn't say it was. I felt that the subject was ripe for coverage, and given that 40% of the respondents agreed with Jason, I feel I was right. Perhaps next time I publish something on the subject, perhaps when we start to include Agim Perolli's carbon footprint in our reviews, the proportion might have inverted from 60/40 against to 60/40 for?
With respect, this hardly ever happens. Such comments occur in "As We See It" essays and the occasional column. And they are _rare_. And again, give that climate change is a subject where, in the main, people on both left and right wings seem to agree, I hardly feel that it is "political" per se. See the points I raised in my previous posting that you snipped from your reply.
Of course they have the right. And I am allowing such people space both in the print magazine - something you have objected to in this thread - and on this forum to make their arguments. I just don't believe there are as many people who agree with you as you appear to think.
I am certainly not saying you or any other reader is "foolish." But why is my publishing a viewpoint that opposes yours equivalent to my "insulting you in print"? I am sincerely puzzled by your stance. As I said, Stereophile covers a wide range of opinion and positions. Even _I_ don't agree with everything that is published. But I respect my writers' viewpoints and I commit to publishing them because I believe they have something relevant to say.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
JA, I think you've extended your good will and patience enough. We all know this talk won't get anywhere with some of these folks. It's like masturbation for them, going on this way. If they don't want to read Sterephile, then that's that, which is perfectly within their rights, but I don't see why there has to be such a wringing-of-hands about it. Leave 'em be and go catch your turkey!
They are still members of our community, Selfdivider, which is why I want to know where they are coming from.
Fortunately it was frozen, so couldn't put up much of a fight :-) .The problem now is keeping it away from our 3 cats while it thaws.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
As you note...60% of the response to the editorial and a good number of the posts here are opposed. My point was and is, why insult a large segment of your readership? What is gained? How does audio gain? What does it have to do with audio excellence?
I contend it has no value aside from pissing people off and letting the folk who make snide politcal comments feel in some way cool, in sync, or important. Trendy if you will,
Read the letters. Read the posts. Folk do not write in angry or cancel their subscriptions or plead for a cessation of politics for fun. They/we/I do not need snide remarks from reviewers about our political beliefs. If You had a half dozen reviewers who slammed Obama, Clinton or any of that evil cabal once or twice an issue to balance out the 100% leftist political comments we now get, you could at least claim balance but you don't.
What you have is an ink mill in which employees who are so inclined can slam the political beliefs of 47% of the population with impunity and glee. That 47% then gets to send in letters asking for some relief from the nonsense, you get to select what to publish and ignore them entirely.
This serves no audio purpose...none. Why do it.
It is as valid as letting a few reviewers slam catholics, jews or muslims every issue and then pretendng that publishing irate letters from the slammed makes it all well.
It does not. It does not raise audio issues. It does not promote audio discourse. It does not unite the country or community of audiophiles. It makes individual reviewers feel smug and smarter than their readers in their POLITICAL views. What do you believe the readers gain from such political comment? Are we wiser, more informed of audio trends and science, more attned to music? No, we are simply pissed off and the magazine ignores the response...
As you note today the letter content is against this wandering. As you also note, you seem to hope continuing such political comment will shift the letters from strongly trendng against to in favor. That will occur when it become clear to readers that our views are of no consequence so we stop writing.
Again, how does that serve the purpose of producing a great audio magazine?
For God's sake read your mail. Folk are sending a signal and you are like the Republican Congress over the last few years ignoring their public. We all saw the result. When the overwhelming majority of the ;etters you receive on an issue ask you to change a prceedure, loudly, do they not deserve the respect of serious consideration and not to be simply dismissed as cranks who disagree with the magazines political leaning.
That is working great for the NY Times, whose stock has been recently downgraded to junk bond status.
Listen to your readers. Grant them the respect you expect from them for your writers and all will be happy.
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm....Pancakes.(drool)
Because political debate is as sensitive as race or religious debate today. If you used the "N" word once in a review I guarantee that single word and not the 100,000 or so others in the magazine for that month would be the one and only issue for the folk offended. If you had a single sentence of anti-semetic content you would be buried in folk pissed beyond belief. Why do you believe in todays world that throwing silly political taunts and slams at conservative politicians and entertainers is in any way less offensive? Is it because your folk do not see any offense. Would you allow regular writers to insult the true believers of our new anointed one, as I am, in print? Could a reviewer call the Dixie Twits idiots for their politcs and then damn their music not for quality but for the singers politics, as they did to a certain country singer?
As it is YOU get to define what is offensive and then dismiss all comment that does not meet the criteria of those making the slams as not offensive or important. Being bombarded with letters on the issue does not seem to matter.
I do agree this is a dead issue. Nothing I say or do and nothing the folk who agree with me say or do will change the position of the magazine so...we should simply agree to disagree and leave the subject.
I would prefer to talk about audio.
Herr Mao,
it isnt "good will" to discuss concerns with subscribers...it isnt some grand favor, it is expected that he would... he helms the magazine , after all..
"masturbation"?? I dont see the correlation...dont bother explaining.
,
the only folks that are wringing hands are the folks that are whining about people addressing concerns(you, vigne for example.)
if you are cool with all of stereophile..that is ok, but hows about letting those that do have concerns voice them?
this is America is it not? the forum was set up as a liason between the readers and the staff,partly, was it not?? would you rather have a bunch of kiss asses running around saying "oohhoohh stereophile is so great and perfect i just love it yadda yadda..."?
the world doesnt work that way.
Pages