In a message dated 97-08-14 19:38:47 EDT, you write:
> Youve got to be kidding me! When was the last time a fan publication was
> sued for a bad review? [let alone offered one?]
Well, I've never heard of any lawsuits, but I've had to endure litterally
hours of phone calls from advertisers who didn't like reviews, or lack
thereof. Videos, too. Say anything less then perfect about a Greg Scholl
video and you'll get a call from him -- that's an hour of your day down the
tubes -- or a long letter explaining how many miles of driving were required
to produce whatever. Jim Kerr of DPA/LTA books is worse; he'll threaten to
pull his ads in a minute, and he'll bug and pressure and nag you until you
print something nice. Scholl kept his ads out of Railfan for more than a
year thanks to his lack of pleasure with my lack of pleasure with one or more
of his tapes. Others will come to mind after I click send, of course.
A bit about bad reviews: A review is essentially a report of findings.
Okay, so a product is bad. The reviewers job is to identify the bad or
lacking areas as well as the good areas, and give an overall impression of
the product, so that the reader can form an opinion on purchasing the
product. Pointing out an error is part of a good review. Saying something
Sucks is editorializing that doesn't tell the reader what is lacking, and it
tells the reader that the reader should think it sucks, too. And the
reviewer better be right, as the lost revenue from an incorrect statement of
fact is something a lawyer may actually pursue from a deep-pocketed
publisher. No one can be sued for a opinion (keep that in mind when writing
reviews, boys). And if a reviewer keeps offering random claims of "suck,"
the reviewer's credibility starts to suck, too. The toughest part of writing
a review is writing something that a reader will read. How many of you read
just the last paragraph? Both in the retail and business press, I've often
felt the only people who read the entire review are the advertisers.
Mike Clayton of Pentrex and Al Westerfield (models) are about the best about
bad reviews -- "don't care what you say, as long as it's true!" And while it
was tough to really pan a Pentrex tape as they were always technically
terrific (most hardcore viewers would feel the content was thin; non hardcore
viewers think the content was fine), I did beat up on them a couple of times.
I recall saying that the narration on Steam Across America was unacceptable;
it contained way too many errors -- from then on Pentrex scripts got much
more research, which is good. On the Steamtown Grand Opening tape I said
that the Pentrex shooter arrived a day late and left two days early -- that
the tape didn't tell the complete story. That shooter is no longer with
them, though his departure was likely unrelated. I also wrote that a Pletts
Express tape had several un-level scenes; a fine first tape, but use the
library case to prop up one side of your television set. Brad Pletts didn't
like that, but he produced nothing but level-looking tapes after that. Brad
didn't hold a grudge, either, and I used to call on him for news photos for
Railfan (remember the new KB&S Alco paint sheme?), which parlayed into more
exposure for Pletts each time his byline appeared on a news photo, especially
one that related to a video. Goodheart, too -- each photo credit was a small
ad.
A good marketer can take a bad review and parlay it into good press; read,
more exposure. I always felt that Tom Kelcec writes about the best reviews
around. He says what's on the tape or in the book and describes the quality
with a light humorous style, and they're fun to read. What might be fun
reading are reviews of the often-published reviewers.
The NRHS Bulletin and Flimsies! would publish candid reviews, and I always
liked to read 'em. I would love to know about some of the feedback they got
from some of the most vocal producers and publishers. Bruce Kelly and I used
to kid around in the R&R offices while watching some pretty terrible tapes.
Reamus and Railhead, we'd call ourselves, hitting the fast forward on the
remote -- "this sucks, Reamus." We often talked about using fast forward
arrows for a rating system -- black arrows meant no fast fowarding was
required, and a 10% tone meant that we wore the arrows off the fast forward
button.
Well, I don't know where I was going this this, and I'm not sure
where it went. I hope no one reviews this note for its literary content and
grammar.
All the best, ....Mike Del Vecchio (at 2:07 a.m.)
--> SPORRS: Serious Photographers of Railroad Related Subjects
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
Content-Length: 735
