News - PC World Magazine's last-ever printed issue is on sale now

[Spreadie]

I'm no racing snake myself but, if you work up a sweat turning the pages of a book, perhaps you shouldn't be lying in the sun?

[chuckskull]

Saracen summed it up well, that kind of behaviour is a career/company killer. Even if you don't trust peoples motives, trust their greed, the economics just don't add up.

The closest I've ever seen to it is companies refusing to provide further review samples after a critical review, there was a bit of spate of it 10, maybe 15 years ago, but reviewers just wrote articles about why they weren't doing a review instead. That knocked it on the head right quick. As that kind of article is many many times more damaging than any bad review.

As for PC world, end of an era for sure but really the only this that's changing is the delivery method. Just as vellum and parchment gave way to paper, paper gives way to E-ink and LEDs. I'm sure in 50-500 years there'll be an obituary for the digital version as we move onto direct neural downloads or whatever. Also worth remembering that these advances democratise distribution. Someone in their bedroom could never have competed with PC world back in the day, now they can go toe to toe at the drop of a blog and fight it out the market which will always benefit comsumers. Of course I don't know HEXUS internal workings but with the best will in the world I'd bet being able to break into the market and enjoy the success it has, could never of happened in an already saturated print market. At minimum it would have been orders of magnitude more difficult and expensive and I know it wasn't easy to start with.

I suppose PC world can take the fact that you had to use a 6 year old photo to portray a shelf full of IT mags as a compliment, fair play for holding out.

[NecronomicoN]

Sorry to chop up your post, but it's kinda drawn out, and I fear quoting the entire thing in one go.

I hope that gives you a little insight, based on the personal experiences of one insider.

It does lend insight. I've never been 'inside' the industry. And revelations are welcome.

First, I understand the suspicion. I can add some perspective to that though, certainly in relation to the computer press.

So, first point. In relation to who they are going to appease, what on earth makes you think the pressures are any different online to in print, or with a video review compared to static.

Either those pressures exist, or they don't, and video or static, print or online, makes no difference.

Can a video unaccompanied by a text body really be called a review? You specify it as a separate being, but I just can't. I'm not willing to abandon tradition so entirely. I will suggest that video review sites, gaining popularity en masse, are enjoying more attention from hardware manufacturers than 'static' or print.

I won't accuse anyone of outright lying in a review. There would have to be an infallible truth for that. I will, however, accuse people of inventing creative ways of putting negative results, into positive contexts, and thereby limiting the damage done to their relationships. Manipulation. Word-bending is a big part of word-smithing.

As for "basement reviewers" (independents I guess), how they obtained the review sample weighs heavily on their credibility with me. I'm much more likely to trust someone who put his own money on the line, rather than someone who won an item, or was otherwise imparted the item without cost.

Second, I've worked for a large proportion of the UK computer press, for more than 20 years, and for some foreign press too, though much less so. That includes thousands of articles, reviews, opinions, interviews and so on. And, all as a freelancer.

Not once in all that time has ANY pressure been put on me by anybody to bias a review. I've never had a single conversation, on anything, in any publication, with anyone on the advertising side. Not even once, in 20+ years.

The only thing I'm addressing are reviews. Articles are a study of a thing and its implication. An opinion is exactly that. Interviews are an eye through a window. I was under the impression that advertisers (in this context, also the manufacturer) only spoke to the EIC. And the EIC spoke to you. Depending on how large the publication is, it might be the managing editor instead.

Nor has any editor ever suggested I bias a review, or even so much as hinted at whether they expected a good or bad review. Again, not even once.

Nor has any editor or sub-editor ever changed the tone or conclusion of a review. And I can tell you that for something going out with my name on it, they'd bleeping well better not change the tone or conclusion, or I'd scream bloody murder over it. Editing for length? Well, if I don't submit to the word'count, yeah okay, but I always do (within a small and pre-agreed margin). Editing for typos, grammar, style and standards consistency, etc, again, okay. But changing my opinion, when I've tested the product and my name is on the article? Not okay, not in a million years.

My ability to get ongoing work depends entirely on my reputation, and that reason alone means I'll never bias a review, and I'll get noisy as hell if an editor ever does it, because it's not just their reputation on the line, but my livelihood if my name is on the article.

So, whose interest do they have at heart, reader or advertiser? IMHO, that's easy. Neither. It's their own best interest, and no way is that served by printed biased reviews, because you're putting short-term reward up against, long-term reputational damage if you do that, and, in my experience, no major computer publisher is stupid enough to do it. Because if you do, it won't be long before you get caught, and at that point, your reputation is wrecked.

You have been quite lucky. Not that I'm saying this goes on much. Couple of questions about your reviews though, if you would?

As a freelancer, you're paid piecemeal? Have you ever had an editor decline to print a review you've written? Do you work on the hardware, or software side of things? How was the review sample obtained? How do publications make contact with you, about doing a piece?

Ha. Sounding like an interview.

[Saracen]

Sorry to chop up your post, but it's kinda drawn out, and I fear quoting the entire thing in one go.

....

Not a problem. I'll answer it chopped up too, partly 'cos I'm nursing a stinking headache and don't know how long I'll last, and partly because cut, edit and paste on this tablet is a pain.

....

You have been quite lucky. Not that I'm saying this goes on much. Couple of questions about your reviews though, if you would?

As a freelancer, you're paid piecemeal? Have you ever had an editor decline to print a review you've written? Do you work on the hardware, or software side of things? How was the review sample obtained? How do publications make contact with you, about doing a piece?

Ha. Sounding like an interview.

Lucky? Maybe so, but without evidence that it goes on, it's hard to say how lucky I am.

Hardware or software? Both, and more. I've done interviews, strategy pieces, technical explanations and guides, answered readers letters, etc, on top of everything from 'quick' reviews of a single product to lab tests of a couple of dozen laser printers.

Paid piecemeal? Largely. But sometimes I get a commission to write a column for a period.

Editor declining a piece? Nope. Nit the way it works. I work to commission. If you instruct a garage to service your car, or a painter to decorate your house, what'll happen if you decline to pay? Odds are, you get sued.

So, either I approach an editor with a list of ideas, or they approach me with specific jobs. Very, VERY rarely, I get a call saying someone's dropped them in it and can I do 1000 words on something (that they haven't covered) by, say, tomorrow or day after. Those, I LOVE doing, because if you extract an editors nuts from the fire, you make a friend .... and the person that let themdown and stuck his nuts in the flames probably never gets another commission.

Anyway, we talk over those ideas, and I get told yes to some, no to others and given a wordcount, deadline and the section it's going in. From that point on, unless the work is either faulty or not delivered (neither has ever hapoened with me) I expect to get paid for it. But the ONLY grounds I'd accept from an editor for not using, or rather, not paying for work was that either I missed the deadline (and they can SOMETIMES) extend that, depending on why you missed it (like the review equipment being DOA), or because the work was not up to standard. But them just changing their mind, and not paying, oh hell, no. By then, I've done the work. A commission is a contract, and enforceable.

The ONLY times I've done work "on spec" was in the very early days, with no record I could refer to, when. I offered to do work with no commitment, other than "if you use it, you pay for it". I did that, IIRC, twice. Both were used, and paid for.

How do I get stuff to review? Sometimes I've bought it, if I was buying anyway. Usually, on loan, either from a press office at the manufacturer, or a PR company. It arrives by courier, and normally, a few weeks later, leaves by courier. Or hardware does, anyway.

As for "basement reviewers" (independents I guess), how they obtained the review sample weighs heavily on their credibility with me. I'm much more likely to trust someone who put his own money on the line, rather than someone who won an item, or was otherwise imparted the item without cost.

That might work for basement reviewers, but can't for professionals. Think about it. I mentioned a lab test on two dozen laser printers, and this was when they were, say, £1000-£1500 EACH. So, say, £30k.

If I added up just the value of hardware, never mind software, I've covered, it would run into millions at the very least. Probably tens of millions, over the years. For instance, I covered HP's first colour laser. That, IIRC, was about £5k on it's own. I've lost track of how many £1000+ large format inkjets I've done. I did a comparison in the early days of DSLR cameras, and the cheapest of them topped £3.5k. The Canon and Nikon were about £5k each, and that's with high-end lenses necessary to get the best out of those cameras. I remember taking three out on a test, and realising I was walking about with £30k of camera gear round my neck.

Not even big publishers can afford to buy everything, and if someone says they do, then they're either, erm, fibbing, or are Bill Gates, or are very small scale .... and without the contacts or credibility at press offices or PR companies.

So just perhaps, a "basement" reviewer can make a plus point of paying for everything, I'd suggest it actually points to both a very small scale operation, and a lack of contacts, and indeed, very likely a lack of experience with competitive products.

If you're looking to buy, say, a photo printer, do you want a "review" by someone that's used a handful, maybe over several years, or perhaps is comparing the "test" item with his previous model, the one his mate has and perhaps a machine or two at work. Or do you want someone that has tested dozens, that may have every current machine available to test, and has or has access to what can be quite expensive test gear?

More than a few times, I've had Canon, or Epson, or HP ship "one of each". So, if, say, HP rekease 4 models across the price range, I've got all four sitting side-by-side when I test, to compsre exactly what differences you get when you spend more. Oh, and by the way, very likely samples of all major paper types and quite possibly, two or three sets of cartridges, especially if the test includes an exhaustion test to see how many pages you get, with identical subject matter, out of the current offerings from each manufacturer. Just on cartridge costs alone, it would probably cost the basement reviewer a coupke of hundred pounds in consumables. So he's either got to be wealthy, or have a heck of an income stream coming from his reviews, one way or another, to be able to keep that up.

And paper, especially for A3 (or larger) printers? Paper isn't cheap, and they drink ink at larger sizes, but if you want timings for different settings, different paper types, etc, you either have to take manufacturers word for it, or test it yourself. I know which I prefer to trust, but it gets expensive doing it. For what I get paid, which by the way is based on commissioned word count, no way can I afford to spend £100 or whatever on ink, paper, etc.

Also, vear in mind, tbe easy bit is writing the review. The bit that nearly always takes the time, if done properly, is testing tbe product. What you see in print is the result of a LOT of testing of tbe product, and generally, a lot of head-scratching about how to get maximum content into a word count, and in prioritising what I found in order to work out what to not include.

And that, by tbe way, is the single biggest benefit of web reviews .... you aren't strictly limited to word cou t because pages don't have to be typeset for a printer in the same way. The upside is lattitude on word count, but the downside is, if you aren't careful, lack of discipline in writing. It's easy to be lazy.

And, by the way, in no small part, that's why I have a reputation round here for long posts. I've spent a large part of my working life carefully crafting maximum message into a fixed word count so that, here, not doing it is like breathing when you've just been released from a very tight straitjacket. It's relaxing to not have to bother.

[Saracen]

The only thing I'm addressing are reviews. Articles are a study of a thing and its implication. An opinion is exactly that. Interviews are an eye through a window. I was under the impression that advertisers (in this context, also the manufacturer) only spoke to the EIC. And the EIC spoke to you. Depending on how large the publication is, it might be the managing editor instead.

Oh, I talk to manufacturers all the time. It might be admin staff, more .ikely product or press managers, but sometimes it'll be MD/CEO.

What I don't do is talk, EVER, to the advertising teams at the publications. And discussions with manufacturers might be about product direct, strategy etc, or about the technical aspects of a product, and it might be by phone, or at a product launch, or their offices.

And sure, manufacturers want to put their product in the best light, so they push the benefits. Epson, for instance, will explain the benefits of piezo electric inkjet heads, while HP will explain the benefits of thermal. Ideally, reviewers will be familiar with the upside, and downside, of the alternatives, and who better to give you the upside than those that developed it, and who better to give the the downside than the competition?

Talking to the "manufacturer", at least in part, is being able to phone or email product or technical managers with questions, and if you do that, it sure as hell helps if you know them .... and they know you.

And one perhaps not immediately obvious benefit is being in receipt of NDA information, often weeks but sometimes months, even a year or more, in advance of product release. For instance, I had a demonstration of a colour Mac about a year ahead of release, and at that time, all development models were behind a code-locked door in their Californian HQ. I got to see it because of contacts, AND TRUST not to leak, while I was in San Francisco visiting Approach software about a forthcoming database product. Of course, your "basement" reviewer isn't going to get anywhere near Intel clean-rooms, or Japanese cartridge manufacture for Epson, or Lexmark's CEO, or Bill Gates, or .... the list is endless.

So "talking" to manufacturers is very important, and very useful (to journalist and reader alike). And even in that context, not once was any pressure exerted, or influence attempted, on any review, by anyone from the CEO through to that admin person I mentioned.

[Agent]

For me, I've moved my focus on what I want in a mag these days. Finding hardware reviews, both from users and "professionals" (keeping in mind what Saracen has said above) is easy.

What's not so easy is finding knowledgeable people with industry experience give their input and comments on news and events. Take for example your typical review site - look at some major headline. Now go and compare that to other sites.
In most cases there is very little deviation. They become almost copy and paste with minor modifications that consist of rewarding to make it 'original'. In the worst of cases, you can't even find the original source of the story from some of these sites. I really despise the 'reword a press release' a lot of sites have become.

I still buy PC Pro purely because of the articles. Some fantastic original work on a monthly basis that often makes me think about developments in a different way. Hopefully they never go out of print.

[teppic]

I wrote for the UK Personal Computer World from 2000 to when it shut down in 2009. It was really sad to see it go. When I started writing for it the average readership was enormous (something like 200k per month), and by the time it closed I think it was still 80k or so.

I think the magazines were good for continuity, and the columns really helped to encourage loyalty. I used to get emails from readers who said they got the magazine just for my column - not trying to sound big headed, it was a huge compliment.

As for the comments about writing bias with advertisers in printed media, in the whole time I wrote for them (or others), not in one single review was I ever given any guidance by the magazine or publisher about any direction it should go whatsoever, to favour anything in any direction, and the only contact I had with the companies that provided the products I reviewed was to get review copies or to answer simple questions I had. What I wrote was entirely my opinion, and it was printed as it was written (with very minor sub-editing, as ever).

[NecronomicoN]

Short on time at the moment, so a quick but relevant reply. First, thanks Saracen for the insight into your world. Second, when I mentioned "basement reviewers", I was referring to the non-affiliated amateur writer. An independent. Not to be confused with a freelancer, who is a professional. I felt much of last response dealt with the latter. I would not expect a professional to be given hardware as compensation for work. It's paid work.

In most cases there is very little deviation. They become almost copy and paste with minor modifications that consist of rewarding to make it 'original'. In the worst of cases, you can't even find the original source of the story from some of these sites. I really despise the 'reword a press release' a lot of sites have become.

I can liken that to a watercooling loop, where regardless of order, the temps average out. Everything written online gets repeated.

[Saracen]

Short on time at the moment, so a quick but relevant reply. First, thanks Saracen for the insight into your world. Second, when I mentioned "basement reviewers", I was referring to the non-affiliated amateur writer. An independent. Not to be confused with a freelancer, who is a professional. I felt much of last response dealt with the latter. I would not expect a professional to be given hardware as compensation for work. It's paid work.
.....

Indeed, I was talking about the world of the freelancer. It's what I was. I can't really comment on what you describe as an unaffiliated amateur, as their appearance in either print or "professional" online publucations seems to me to be, well, zero or pretty close to it. I wouldn't doubt that some started out that way and ended up as either freelance or staff, though.

I guess that sort of hobbyist, "amateur" has their place, though, and some I've come across really know their stuff too .... though it may be depth of knowledge in a narrow field.

As for where they get their review kit, and under what conditions, well, I'd share your concerns if it's "given" by the manufacturer in payment. For any review to have value, it really needs to be the honest opinion, and hopefully, that of someone that has some idea what they're talking about too.

I've said a lot about my experience of lack of advertising influence on me, and it's good to note a similar experience from teppic re: PCW, as that's one mag I never got around to working for (not least because for quite some time, Ziff Davis would've had a fit if they found out I was, as it was very mych a no-no).

One thing I did have cwuse to wonder about, thiugh only on occasion, was the competence of some "professional" writers. There were a number of occasions, though probably only a dozen or so, where I read someone else's review of something I'd covered with astonishment, because that review said it did or did not do something, and I knew for a certainty that that was incorrect.

I also came across a few examples of pre-production kit being "reviewed", often as a scoop, when it wasn't made clear it was pre-production. I also came across a few examples where that stunt bit back, as final production specs cganfed in some notable manner, leading to a fair few WTFs??? from angry readers.

Fortunately, such incidents were the exception, not the rule, at least among the better publications, but while everything wasn't always sweetness and light, the one thing I never came across, perhaps because I did work for "decent" publications, was that bias from advertising which, of course, NecronomicoN, was the original point of yours I started out by addressing.

[Saracen]

I wrote for the UK Personal Computer World from 2000 to when it shut down in 2009. It was really sad to see it go. When I started writing for it the average readership was enormous (something like 200k per month), and by the time it closed I think it was still 80k or so.
.....

And indeed, I was sad too, as I was one of those buying it, periodically, for about 20 years.

[teppic]

And indeed, I was sad too, as I was one of those buying it, periodically, for about 20 years.

Yep, it came completely out of the blue. As the readership was still comparable to other PC magazines I don't think any of us saw it coming, there was certainly no warning it might happen.

[NecronomicoN]

Indeed, I was talking about the world of the freelancer. It's what I was. I can't really comment on what you describe as an unaffiliated amateur, as their appearance in either print or "professional" online publucations seems to me to be, well, zero or pretty close to it.

Ever heard of a "Man on the Street" review? That's an amateur basement reviewer. Except when the review sample is provided by a manufacturer as compensation for the review, which betrays the very nature of "Man on the Street" reviewing. The internet enabled the basement reviewer.

[teppic]

Only professional freelance writers or staff writers are/were used in printed PC media, for the established titles at least. That's not to say they were always faultless, of course.

For gifts and so forth, any hardware I received that had any real value was requested to be returned after review. Software generally wasn't (since it's no cost to them in reality).