SR 556 Anyone??

[TAB]

Car, boat, gun... you name it rags.   Are pretty much all the same.

I remember a time when you could pick up any of these rags and actaully get good info, how to, decent product reviews,...

now days, they are just advertisements.  I understand that the advertisers pay the bills, but if you sell your creditablity...

[Overload]

the SR 556 IS on the cover of this months American Rifleman!  That is why I did not think of it for the "new gun" thread.  I had this magazine a week before the 'official' announcement.

Haz,
The gun announced this week was the Ruger SR-22, a variant of the Ruger 10/22.  The SR-556 was announced back at SHOT, I believe.

[Overload]

Michael, being in the media for so long, you know the answers to this.  However, since you asked...

1) If possible, keep editorial and advertising separate.
2) We understand that advertisers keep a show on the air.  Further, we understand that having that relationship has also opened doors with the companies.  Therefore, it's reasonable that it's easier to acquire product from those companies.  Easy is good when it comes to production.
3) Inversely, you may not be on the press list for some companies who don't advertise with you, making it harder to receive product from them, ergo less appearances in your mediums.
4) Some companies are hungrier, and/or more willing to work with press. (e.g. Masterpiece Arms recent contact)  Others, less so.

If a show is strictly pay for play, hopefully people notice and filter their information.  I hope even these sources don't lie, and that objective information they present is true.  They're a source of information, but not objective.

There's more I want to say, but I need to think on it.

Can I ask a stupid question here?

Ruger is an advertiser on my shows and website, which makes me "paid by Ruger." My good friend Jeff Quinn's website, GUNBLAST, has as one of its top advertisers Ruger, but he's not paid by Ruger. Mas writes for magazines who take ads from...Ruger...but he's an objective source. If a show that is strictly "pay for play" — that is, unless you buy an ad your product doesn't exist, period — an objective source of information? You notice a gun magazine has 3 full page ads from the company that made the gun on the cover...how objective would you rate that information.

How exactly does this work?

Michael "PUZZLED" B

[tombogan03884]

I don't think any of the reviewers "lie". What they have to do is spin "just as good as" in to "NEW and IMPROVED ! ".
For an example lets say Remington brings out a new bolt action rifle. Lets stipulate that it is just as good as any other bolt gun on the market (safe enough with Remington ). A professional writer, regardless of his particular expertise can't just say, " There's only so much you can do with bolt action rifles but this is as good as any other. " For one thing they have word count requirements, or space requirements so that Editors can allot space for articles and know how much they need to fill.
Besides, would you want to read that ?
So instead they have to focus on the fascinating camo (A fancy decal ) and the "Tactical" features.
A lot of the gun reviews that you read in run of the mill gun magazines have more interest in filling column inches than in selling an advertisers product.
Bare in mind that I have absolutely NO experience in this field, but I DO know that I have not been coming up with new posts for my blog because I don't want to keep saying the same things my few readers are seeing everywhere else.

[Overload]

tombogan03884,
 what I ment by lie, is if there are numbers, stats, shooting results, etc, that's they're accurate.  I don't want a gun listed smaller than it actually is, or how many shots it holds.  I want accurate chrono info, and even range report numbers; it's hard to fudge those as you do them every issue/article/show, so they can be compared to each other.


The only gun mags I get currently is Gun Reports, Front Sight (USPSA member) and American Rifleman (as an NRA member).  Gun Report has no advertizing, and they regularly give failing and poor reports to guns.  A R does have advertising, but I think they're big enough (backed by the NRA) not to be swayed by advertiser bias.  Front Sight has few product reports.

[Sponsor]

[Fatman]

Just  a quick heads up on the SSR556 sale going on at http://www.galleryofguns.com/Genie/Default.aspx. Sold by your local participating dealer through Davidson's - and currently offered for over $500 off MSRP until the end of September, I believe.

[Ksail101]

This is a more of a response to MB's post-

Mr. Bane for the last 3 years I have listened to every podcast (multiple times), watched just about every show, and am a frequent visitor to things you are a part of. I trust what you say about firearms to the point that I have never given the .40 a fare shot as a defensive caliber cause you dislike it so much. So by no means do I think you are like some others in the biz that are sponsor whores (cough... L. Vickers...Cough,cough). But at the same time when you are introducing the SR 556 to the public I highly doubt you are going to tell everyone that you really disliked this or that about it. Or this or that doesnt work like they say it is supposed to. Your thoughts about the firearm when you were talking about shooting a case of Hornady Taps was great and I took alot away from that. But I was looking for something that maybe you didnt want to talk about as it would be bad for your sponsor if you pointed it out. Maybe the trigger is terrible and feels like pressing your finger into playdough. So that is all I was looking for. As for going to another site to try and find a better point of view is not really the case. I find better information right here on the forum from a guy who has the product and used it, cause I know I am like many of those on this site. An average guy. So if he\she is having some sort of issue I will most likely have the same issue. Even some times you just being a professional shooter makes your opinion very different to mine. You have skills and abilities that I am no where near. Like when I hear Patrick Sweeney do a review on a 1911 and he says that he shoots a 3 inch group with such and such gun, I know in reality my group is going to be closer to 5 or even 6 inches. Or when he talks about the 1911 being the best gun in certain situations, I have to think about the fact that the 1911 is an experts weapon that takes a higher level or maintenance and ability to shoot it in the those certain situations better than say a Glock will perform for me. So dont take anything personal. Your reviews are beyond outstanding and I take your advice over many others. And I also thank you for taking the time to speak about a firearm that you find good or bad. Also if Ruger made a bad product I know that you being you would not have them as a sponsor. So that alone makes me comfortable in buying any one of their products. I dont see you having High Point as a sponsor and telling everyone that their new firearm is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Well thanks again man. Also I have been dreaming and requesting photos of your SW Gunsite built by Wayne Novak so anytime...