Journalistic Credibility???

[noddy]

Like any profession there are good ones and bad ones....

Just finished skimming through a copy of 4x4 Australia (April edition) and noted that Ron Moon was reviewing a camp trailer (Cub Supermatic Drover 007). Overall the review was indifferent to the flip top camper.

I turn over a couple of pages and there is Ron, proclaiming on a full page ad, "...that for my money nothing beats Tvan"

There was no disclosure in the review that Ron endorses another competing product. Why did the editor get Ron to do the review, when he knew that he was endorsing a competing product? Why not get another staff member to do the review and avoid the conflict of interest?

You start looking through these publications and low and behold, these guys are endorsing everything that moves. Tents, cruise controls, swags...

You cannot be a reviewer and an endorser without your cred taking a pounding.

It seems to me, that at times the 4WD industry is very small world whereby key individuals will not let journalistic standards get in the way of good business.

[DiscoTDI]

The title says it all :wink:

[fernockulated]

:roll:tis one of many reasons why i dont buy the overpriced glossy advertorials that they try to pawn of as magazines,normally just flick thru ,look at the pretty pics ,avoiding all the thoughts and ideas of paid journo's who are generally biased one way or the other and to hell with the rest,be it tojo,****an or rover(when only the best will do!!!)most times it aint brain surgery to pick a biased report shortly after starting in to it :roll:

[disco95]

You know why I read mags :?:
Probably not, want me to tell you :?:
Probably not :roll: but I will anyway 8)
I love the travel bits, I really enjoy reading about the places they go, especially the ones that involve locking the centre and not just traveling dirt roads.
If it wasn't for that I probably really wouldn't buy them, as much as I read the rest of the mag, it's the travel stories that I alway read more than once.

[noddy]

Everyone has biases...even journos, but normally you have your own standards and if they are not good enough, an editor who will prevent those biases from becoming too apparent or jeopardising the credibility of the publication.

I have read many articles before and thought they lacked 'balance' or were somewhat unfair, but never have a seen a piece of such poor journalism where conflicts have been so apparent. :evil:

[one_iota]

Originally posted by Noddy
Everyone has biases...even journos, but normally you have your own standards and if they are not good enough, an editor who will prevent those biases from becoming too apparent or jeopardising the credibility of the publication.

I have read many articles before and thought they lacked 'balance' or were somewhat unfair, but never have a seen a piece of such poor journalism where conflicts have been so apparent. :evil:

I buy 4wd magazines for the centerfold...... so that saves me a lot of money. :roll: :wink:

Having opinions is like an anus everyone has one but being paid to have one involves the taking on of responsibility and learning something about ethics.

That's why this place works well (not a proctology forum) as opinions can be expressed and providing facts are also delivered with the opinion we can make up our own minds.

[wardy1]

Hmmm.. Ethics.... Conflict of Interest..... Editorial Control.......
Are we REALLY talking about 4wd Monthly??? https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

[gruntfuttock]

When I saw the title of this thread I thought it was a joke :oops:


I thought everyone new that journalists are not born........they're just the after-birth https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ https://www.aulro.com/afvb/



I tend to just read the date on the top of the cover; and then check it https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

[Steinzy]

the above sums up my thoughts :roll:

[FenianEel]

Journalistic Integrity is a contradiction in terms, like

Government intelligence
Womens Lib
and ....the
Pedestrian Council

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

I don't think I've ever seen an unbiased review, or one you couldn't pick holes in, in any 4WD mag.

[DiscoTDI]

Originally posted by gruntfuttock
When I saw the title of this thread I thought it was a joke :oops:


I thought everyone new that journalists are not born........they're just the after-birth https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ https://www.aulro.com/afvb/



I tend to just read the date on the top of the cover; and then check it https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

Careful there are a few reporters on this site that share our faith https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

[Greylandy]

I don't see a problem with Ron Moon doing a review on another camper .. dare I say every product review in these magazines are done by a bloke who will have a preconceived opinion or preference, either for a different product or the one being reviewed.

4WD Monthly always gets Nick Manell to help in their 4WDOTY and he is the biggest bloody Nissan fan in the world. Like IO said .. if you are being paid for your opinions there is a certain integrity that goes with it but in only Ron Moon will know if the review he did reflects a true overview of the product or biased for the TVAN. Thing is .. you and I won't know so it's up to us to see for ourselves.

[incisor]

generalisations are dangerous and do nothing to show off your own IQ IMHO.

like any other form of life on earth, there are good and bad ones...

lumping them all in one bundle only detracts from the merits of the good ones.

why is it that this is (in general) a growing trend?

[gruntfuttock]

If my comments have offended anyone, please accept my apologies. :oops: :oops:

They stem form a very bad incident that left me with a very very cynical view of journalists in general.

Even the apology that was printed by the paper was spiked and they got the facts wrong from the first story they printed.

Yes there are some good ones out there, only I seem to fall on the duds.

But then again, if I check 500 movements, the first one I pick will be faulty. So basicly I think that if it was raining virgins I would be locked in the toilet with a ......

Once again, if my comments have offended anyone, please accept my apologies.

I have never had any positive contact with jounalists and until I do I most likely will remain cynical.

[noddy]

There are some exceptional pieces of journalism, as there are excellent examples of other trades/professions which should also be highlighted.

It is grossly unfair to tarnish all journalists over the quality of work of some of their peers.

My issue is that 4x4 Australia professess to be an indpenedent mag, providing unbiased journalism and reviews. They have a responsibility to their readers (many of whom go and spend considerable sums of their 'hard-earned' based upon their reviews) to be unbiased and uphold the basic standards of journalism. You cannot be a reviewer and also an endorser.

As with any profession, good journalists should not hold back in ridding their profession of those who do not hold the same ethics and standards.

Just my 2cents.... https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

[cewilson]

I will agree that some articles are quite dificult to believe. But I do however believe that someone like Ron Moon would give very careful consideration to any article he wrote about a camper van. Being that he does endorse a competitors product, you would have to think that he writes his articles very carefully.

That and Ron Moon would have to be one of the most recognised writers of modern times in four wheel driving magazine/circles. I would be most suprised if he would write an article deliberately biased due to his sponsor!

Cheers
Chris

[Juz]

HI everybody,
I guess it comes down to professionalism.
If the journo is doing his job properly, what he owns/endorses should not affect what he thinks of something else. I have read Ron's comments on other camper trailers in the past, like the Tambo and he couldn't talk highly enough of the price/features etc.

cheers,
Juz https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

[Ace]

As some of the others have said the testers have their mind made up in advance. 4wdoty os probably the worst. As Henry said about Nick Mannell, how many times did Nissan win it until the D3 gave them no choice but to award it 4wdoty because it was simply a better car.

I get all 3 mags, mainly for the trips etc, but some of the product reviews are interesting but in the end i would never use their reviews as my sole reasoning for buying a product. matt

[UncleHo]

That's why I buy the English Landrover Mags https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ L R Monthly and L R Enthusiast, ALL LANDROVER https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

[JamesH]

In some industries where the "pool" is small conflicts of interest are bound to occur and cannot be avoided and I don't think it automatically means you ignore the articles.

As Noddy said the appropriate thing to do would have have been for Mr Moon to declare his interest in the text - but he should be granted the trust to do his job properly.

I have read wine reviews where a selection of winemakers did a blind tasting of the various wines made by that group. They all rated the wines and spoke about them - clearly they would have known their own wines (and their friends wines probably) but they were able to take off their brand hat and put on the hat of people with a genuine regard for their own industry.

As long as everything is declared and upfront it's fine.

[Deano4x4]

Gee fellas,

Do you all have such poor view of journos?

As well as the travel yarns in 4X4 Australia, which some of you seem to enjoy so much, we strive to bring you the most unbiased and fair vehicle and product tests that we can.

Some of the biggest advertisers in 4X4 Australia have copped an editorial beating from the magazine over the past few years. We didn't hold back when we reported the weakness of the LandCruiser 100 Series front end. We got up Nissan for its weak fifth gear in Patrol and its unreliable 3.0TD engine. We've certainly pointed out plenty of Land Rover shortcomings in the past few years.

In fact, we've had a number of advertisers pull their ads from 4X4 Australia because we published negative things about their products.

I have known Ron Moon for more than 10 years and I can assure you that he "tells it how it is". Ron is incredibly enthusiastic about the 4X4 industry in Australia but, if he thinks a product is poor, that's how he reports it.

All reviews in 4X4 Australia are editorial - not advertising. Advertisers have no say in the outcome of any vehicle or product tests that we publish.

Dean Mellor - Editor, 4X4 Australia
Ex-army Series III

[incisor]

:wink:

i know some excellent ones and some not so good hacks.


welcome to aulro ..... how did you find out about this little kafuffle?

[stevo68]

Hey All,

Interesting thread and interesting points of view. Personally I buy most of the mags, cause I just love to sit down and have a good read on places people go, product reviews anything landy of course etc etc. Whilst only being new into the 4WD world, I would make an assumption that credibility goes along way. In another forum :roll: , it was made mention that these " 4WD of the year" had no value, moreso when a D3 was voted as best 4by. My arguement was that it had won across not only the majors here in Oz but overseas as well.

The generic response was that it was "journalists" who made the decision. Correct me if I am wrong but I would have to say that in the majority, it would be people who aren't journalists ( and of course some who are) but can string a sentence together and have the experience in the field, hence why they are in a "judging" position. For sure there are probably some in any field that have a bias of some sort, therefore like anything it is up to the end consumer to make the final call.

So anyone know when any of the new mags are coming out, Im getting withdrawals :wink:

Regards

Stevo

P.S. Love 4X4 Australia https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ so does that mean I can get a free subby??

[Farnarkle]

Journalists - have to report to their Editors - and Editors have to report to the General Manager who reports to the Board of Directors who report to the Shareholders and that means bottom line ($$$$$$). Notice how an editor was quick to go to the defence of his product when he thought the veracity (read bottom line) was threatened. Of course there's bias in any form of media and anyone is off with the fairies if they believe that magazines are published (or any other form of media for that matter) for the common good. What the discerning reader has to do is sort out the facts (if any) from the b/s thats published and read with a "jaundiced eye". Even the pretty pictures can be "Adjusted" to reinforce a story.

[DiscoMick]

In Moonie's defence he does actually OWN a TVan and it appears often in his articles and books being towed behind his Nissan, so he's not just a paid voice but an actual user.
He obviously likes the TVan the most, so he has his views and can compare other campers with the TVan.
Personally, I think the TVan is claustrophobic, but everyone has their own opinion.
I think it's a bit rough to accuse him of lacking credibility just because he endorses a product he owns and uses, and is less enthusiastic about another product.
He owns a Nissan Patrol, but that doesn't stop him reviewing Toyotas or Landies.
Can you read betwene the lines in his camper review and see why he is less enthusiastic about it? It hasn't reached Bangkok yet so I haven't seen the mag.

Disclaimer: I'm also a journo, but I don't work in 4WD and have never met Ron Moon.

[Bytemrk]

I agree that at times when reading some of our 4x4 mags... you can easily think that Journalistic and Credibility are mutually exclusive groups...

Sorry Dean :oops: :oops:

BUT as others have said there are some good ones - and I think you will find that Ron Moon will have been pretty fair on this.

A year or so he did an article on Tambo trailers - he was VERY positive about their quality and price - he had a small critisism about the kitchens. I own a Tambo and he was absolutely spot on....

So I agree with the sentiment that Journos need to be VERY careful of conflicts of interest between ther advertisers and their reponsibility to their readers. But I think this example may be a bit harsh...

Mark

[Deano4x4]

Fellas,

I've said what I wanted to say and will try not to get into further debate on this subject. If you like the mag, buy it. If you don't...

On another topic, I found about this debate via my Sub Editor who owns a 2003 Discovery Td5. He reckons this website is tops!

I'm also a bit of a Landy fanatic. I currently own a 1978 ex-army Series III (with the dodgy 2.6-litre Rover petrol six). Previously, I had a SWB IIA (2.25-litre petrol four).

If I've got it right, there should be a pick of my Landy with this posting.

Dean

[stevo68]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>If I've got it right, there should be a pick of my Landy with this posting.
[/b][/quote] Nah, try again :wink: ,

Regards

Stevo

[Ace]

Hi Dean, welcome to the forum.

I know you dont want to go into any debates, which is fair enough. I think as Land Rover owners we often cop alot of unecessary crap and often, even if only a passing remark some journos seem to thrown in the odd cheap shot about land rovers in any article regadless of relevance or not.

And for us out here in reader land it is sometimes seen that some mags might favour certain products regardless of whether they do or not. Matt

[Timmo]

Nothing worse than listening to Eddie McGuire commentate on a collingwood game, no bias there.

My low view of journalists comes from every time there is any sort of aeroplane incident, no matter how minor we see headlines like "Horror Death Flight", and interviews with the most idiotic passenger who "heard a huge bang, then we just dropped, I'd never been so scared in my life. We thought we were going to die". Never a fact about what actually happened to be seen. :roll:

I like 4x4 Monthly though....


https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

[FenianEel]

Originally posted by Timmo
Nothing worse than listening to Eddie McGuire commentate on a collingwood game, no bias there.

My low view of journalists comes from every time there is any sort of aeroplane incident, no matter how minor we see headlines like "Horror Death Flight", and interviews with the most idiotic passenger who "heard a huge bang, then we just dropped, I'd never been so scared in my life. We thought we were going to die". Never a fact about what actually happened to be seen. :roll:

I like 4x4 Monthly though....


https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

I like 4x4 Mthly as well, it is one of the mags I buy. I love the LR mags, and buy too many of them, but content to advertising ratio is ridiculous!

In regards to headlines....
Unfortunately, despite all the headlines and sensationalism, and everyhting else - people still buy that paper, watch that news etc. Look at so called nightly commercial current affairs shows, that's not objective, nor is it current affairs, nor is truly representative of the facts, but they rate their kahunas off!

People - they're the worst & so stupid.
Not like me - Homo Superious!! https://www.aulro.com/afvb/



it's everybody thats nuts - I'm fine :twisted:

[Quiggers]

Journalist here and editor in chief when it suits.

There are some real dodgy dudes in the fourth estate, you often see them on the telly.

But there are some excellent people doing the job properly.

I don't think Eddie is a journo, tho'. But he's now running Channel 9!

Crikey, is it me or have I noticed an increase in AFL players masquerading as commentators?

Cheers, GQ

[Redback]

Originally posted by incisor
generalisations are dangerous and do nothing to show off your own IQ IMHO.

like any other form of life on earth, there are good and bad ones...

lumping them all in one bundle only detracts from the merits of the good ones.

why is it that this is (in general) a growing trend?

My thoughts excactly :!:

And Ace i think it's been a long time since Nissan won 4WDOTY.

[disco95]

I'd agree Baz, Nissan needs to do something new to win 4WDOTY, they've been selling the same car for how many years now?

[wardy1]

Dean it's nice to see you here, even better knowing that there are some of you in 4WD monthly land who are fans of the marque.
Accepting that you believe Mr Moon is unbiased, why not make sure that his write ups are balanced by perhaps doing an 'off road camper of the year' with multiple judges as you do in 4wdoty.
This is a rapidly growing sector of the market...probably close in growth to the 4wd market itself. I think it justifies some proper, unbiased and importantly, unquestionable analysis.

Wow.... did I just say all that? :oops:

[rick130]

Originally posted by disco95
I'd agree Baz, Nissan needs to do something new to win 4WDOTY, they've been selling the same car for how many years now?

be a little careful, how long has the Defender been around ?? https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

Most of the Patrolophiles on the various boards are a bit like Defender owners "please don't change it" ie. don't go IFS, etc

[CraigE]

Since Ron Moon has stepped aside as editor of 4x4 Australia the magazine has turned to utter crap. It is just one big ad and endorsement for Toymota. I used to think Rons opinion was good and unbiased and once upon a time it was. There is too much journalism based on sponsorship and looking after friends such as Toymota, ARB etc even though there are better products. Generally I will try and read between the lines to get a decent revue. 4X4 Monthly is my pick of the magazines although they can be biased. They seem to be coming around to the virtues of Land Rover lately though.
I am sorry if this offends some but jounalism and integrity do not go hand in hand. All journos have been corrupted in some form and offer some sort of bias in their reporting. After all it is their job to sell magazines, papers, tv shows etc.
From what I have seen journos will not let the truth get in the way of a good story. Nearly every story that I have seen published that I have some knowledge in has some mistakes and additional information from non existent or unreliable sources. It is shamefull to see peoples words twisted to suit anothers agenda. Too often facts are not verified.

[Steinzy]

Originally posted by CraigE
Since Ron Moon has stepped aside as editor of 4x4 Australia the magazine has turned to utter crap. It is just one big ad and endorsement for Toymota. I used to think Rons opinion was good and unbiased and once upon a time it was. There is too much journalism based on sponsorship and looking after friends such as Toymota, ARB etc even though there are better products. Generally I will try and read between the lines to get a decent revue. 4X4 Monthly is my pick of the magazines although they can be biased. They seem to be coming around to the virtues of Land Rover lately though.
I am sorry if this offends some but jounalism and integrity do not go hand in hand. All journos have been corrupted in some form and offer some sort of bias in their reporting. After all it is their job to sell magazines, papers, tv shows etc.
From what I have seen journos will not let the truth get in the way of a good story. Nearly every story that I have seen published that I have some knowledge in has some mistakes and additional information from non existent or unreliable sources. It is shamefull to see peoples words twisted to suit anothers agenda. Too often facts are not verified.

I agree

and I have also noticed that 4x4 Monthly has started to favor land rovers a little more

[Juz]

As far as I can tell, all the 4X4 mags have taken more notice and appreciation of Landies.
4X4 Australia used a Defender 130 across the Madigan, and a Defender in the Gulf to Gulf yarn and the Editor seemed pretty impressed.
Ads don't govern editorial.
cheers,
Juz

[DiscoMick]

I just wish they'd stop resorting to the "Landies are unreliable" line in every article. Its like they feel they can't write about a Landy without including that comment as a kind of reflex. Its crap of course. Does every Nissan article say 3.0 litre diesel engines blow up or Toyota front IFS breaks? No, of course not. They should stop perpetuating the same myth about Landies.

[Ace]

Originally posted by Redback+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Redback)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-incisor
generalisations are dangerous and do nothing to show off your own IQ IMHO.

like any other form of life on earth, there are good and bad ones...

lumping them all in one bundle only detracts from the merits of the good ones.

why is it that this is (in general) a growing trend?

My thoughts excactly :!:

And Ace i think it's been a long time since Nissan won 4WDOTY.[/b][/quote]

It hasnt been that long, the Patrol hasnt long since won the 4wd Monthly one, i cant remember what year, but it has been after 2000, i think they took it out 2yrs in a row. Simply because it has live axles and was tough i think was the reasoning. It hasnt won anything else. Matt

[DiscoMick]

The Patrol is a dinosaur tottering on the brink of extinction. https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

[disco95]

Originally posted by rick130+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(rick130)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-disco95
I'd agree Baz, Nissan needs to do something new to win 4WDOTY, they've been selling the same car for how many years now?

be a little careful, how long has the Defender been around ?? https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

Most of the Patrolophiles on the various boards are a bit like Defender owners "please don't change it" ie. don't go IFS, etc[/b][/quote]

I think the Defender is a diferent kettle of fish, but then as you say perhaps the patrol owners feel the same way.
The Defender has never really been built as a vehicle for the masses that pushes the boundries of technology. Just a good honest hard worker.
I don't think that the Defender has ever been built with the thought of winning any award, just the idea of building the toughest off roader off the shelf.
To be honest if I wasn't a Landy man my next choice would be a Patrol.

[incisor]

I have to say i worry about some of you people.

An editor of a major 4wd mag in AU takes the time to say hello in a polite manner and have a look around and acknowledge you exist.

and whats he cop, sigh...

what ever happened to common curtesy?

surely you can get a point across without being offensive.

[VladTepes]

Originally posted by incisor
generalisations are dangerous and do nothing to show off your own IQ IMHO.

like any other form of life on earth, there are good and bad ones...

lumping them all in one bundle only detracts from the merits of the good ones.

why is it that this is (in general) a growing trend?

You're just sick of being stereotyped as a "computer nerd" https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

[incisor]

got some of your gloves handy?

[Juz]

Hi Incisor,
It's good to see a bit of sanity back into the debate.
Everybody has their opinion, but like you said getting it across sensibly and inoffensively should still be possible.
Juz

[Utemad]

I must admit that when I read an article written by the same person who then advertises the winning product I start to wonder.

However I have a few years of 4x4 Australia in my cupboard and I remember one article fondly. It was a comparison of the (petrol ???) dual cab utes on the market at the time (1997). They stated that the Nissan Navara was a waste of the Earth's natural resources https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ https://www.aulro.com/afvb/
From memory this was back when they used to have the Pathfinder Treks series too. I bet Nissan wasn't too pleased about that review.

As for Ron Moon owning a T-Van though....did he pay for it? Is it payment for his endorsements?

I don't buy any magazines these days. I get all the up to date info I need from internet forums and my 4wd club.

One thing I never understand though is why do Nissan keep sponsoring ACA and 9 news when they are constantly getting bagged by those same shows for their fuel guzzling kiddy killers?

[rmp]

Guys, I think some of you need to consider your replies before posting.

Firstly there is no "4X4 Monthly" nor "4WD Australia". The two magazines are "4X4 Australia" and "4WD Monthly". But you should be reading Overlander anyway :-)

Secondly, as Inc pointed out, Dean (editor of 4X4 Australia) took the time to come here and post. I'm sure he doesn't mind negative feedback, constructive criticism and debate, but if who would want to stay around to be insulted? Would you be that rude around a campfire?

The fact of the matter is that any time any journo makes a call someone will accuse them of bias, bribery or worse because they disagree. Right now many people are calling Overlander and 4X4 LR-biased because of the D3/RRS awards. Not here though, for some reason. But it was here I recall a particuarly abusive post about a Defender/Troopy comparo 4X4 did a while back and I wouldn't have blamed the journalist had he considered a libel action. As I said, most journos welcome mature feedback of any kind but there's no need for childish behaviour.

As with every profession of course there are some bad apples, but that doesn't follow that every journo is a bribe-grabbing mercenary, and am I the only one to find the post containing the line "...and too often facts are not verified" amusing?

[CraigE]

Well,
I got told I should tone my post down. I did not think my post was hugely offensive, just my opinion. If the editor of a certain magazine takes it personal, then he needs to get a life. Maybe he should take on board some of the comments and have alook at the direction the magazine is taking. Most of us would agree that as this is a public forum we have the right to say what we think as long as it is not a personal attack. If a journo can not take criticism for stories they have written then they are in the wrong business. It is not uncommon to find incorrect data in stories and generally you do not find us threatening legal action. At the end of the day this is a Land Rover site and if the LandRoverphobe's are insulted by it, then so be it.
I have shown my disagreement in the direction some magazines are taking by just not buying them. If they were to return to unbiased reporting, I would most definately consider buying them again. If I do not find a magazine relevant or worthwhile I will not buy it and I will say why.
In the past I have even contributed to this mag.
I am just sick of reading about how good the 100 series is when in fact it is no better and quite often worse than most other 4x4s. Just ask some owners.
I know mags have to make money using advertising, but when you read a story from a journo praisng one product over all others and then turn the page to see them publically endosing the product on a nother page, that just is not right.
If this has seriously upset some people, I have one thing to say,
Get a life and go to another more amenable forum.

[CraigE]

Deanno,
Thanks for taking the time to visit the forum and put your point of view across. Debate is what brings change and you need to know what the 4x4 community is saying. Anything I have said is not meant as a personal attack and I hope you do not take it that way, even though it may be hard not to. Your magazine just does not cater to my interests anymore, so hence I do not buy it, that simple. All magazines have some bias to an extent. I am just sick of people bagging LR in comparison to other 4x4s when in fact there is not much difference. Most anti LR comments come from people who have little long time experience with them. All 4x4s have their bad points and good points. I have owned 4 of the 5 major players and every time LR gives the best overall package for the price.
Once again thanks for the input.
Cheers
Craig E
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ https://www.aulro.com/afvb/
Oh and by the way, just because I may disagree with you does not mean I do not respect your opinion or right to that opinion. I would sit around a campfire and debate the vitues of certain products with you, like i do with all my friends (LR, Toyota, Nissan, Ford etc etc owners). At the end of the day it is about the lifestyle.

[DiscoMick]

Craig E, I respect your opinions, even share some of them and like nothing more than a good chat about such things. But I still think the criticism of Ron Moon was a little unfair, for the reasons I stated previously, particularly that Moon actually owns and uses the product he endorses, so he's not just a paid mouthpiece but is an actual user.

Like you, I have been very pleased to see the magazines recognise the virtues of the D3 and other LR products recently, so that's a good sign. I guess the mags would say LR just hadn't kept up to the pace with the D2, but that's not true now.

I still get cranky when I see that reflexive snide comment in mags about LR reliability. Its just crap.

[CraigE]

DiscoMick,
Im sorry if I gave the wrong impression. I was not having a shot at Ron. I have the upmost respect for Ron and most of the other journo's opinion's in both mags. He has now left the editorial realm so is free to endorse whatever product he likes. It is a bit hard to stomach either a regular contributing journo or editorial staff doing a comparisson on one page and endorsing the winning product on another. The product may be the best but it is not an ideal scenario. Leave the ads out while a comparisson has taken place.
My main focus was that a certain magazine seemed to be heading in a direction and political oppinion I did not agree with so was a waste of time buying. There are numerous mags I do not buy as the are not relevant to my taste. As for these big companies and their ads and sponsorship, I am not naive and this type of association is neccessary for the good of the industry. At the end of the day comparissons should be as unbiased as possible as there are a lot of small players out there that have an as good as or better product than some of the big boys.
There will always be some bias in any reporting due to human nature, but journo's need to try and bring a balanced view not their or their employers agendas to the forefront. I just got sick of the constant ToyoNissan praising when not much else was looked at. Owning LRs opened up my eyes a bit and when a review was done on a LR there was quite often a snipe in there. I switched to 4WDMonthly as it was more balanced, plus all the goodies that come with renewing subs. 4X4 Australia would only give the goodies if you were a new subscriber not renewing (a subs department problem).
Initially I was buying both mags and to start with thought 4WD Monthly was below par, but grew into a better read. For a while I was buying UK LR magazines only as they were relevant but had no Aussie content.
I will even make a concerted effort to have alook at the latest 4X4 Australia to see if it is to my taste again.
More second hand or average owner 4x4 comparrisons in both would be great. New cars only really apply to a minority.
At the end of the day some people like apples, some like oranges and that is just the way it is. It does not mean I hate orange eaters.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

[blitz]

Hell if you think 4X4 mags are bad have any of you read any boating mags lately


Ah ha ha
just joking well sort of, what I mean is you will **** this sort of thing in any magazine on any topic it is up to us the consumer to read between the lines and make up our own opinion

Cheers Blythe

[Disco_Drivin_Dude]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>As for Ron Moon owning a T-Van though....did he pay for it? Is it payment for his endorsements? [/b][/quote]

This statment is where all this confict of interest arises. While I'm all for anyone endorsing a product if they honestly believe in the product. In my mind, if someone wants to maintain credibility, the product they endorse had better be up to scratch or said credibility is shot to ribbons.

But just because someone "owns" and "uses" a product that he/she endorses, does not mean they can not be unbiased in opinions. But that someone does and should know in advance, puts his neck on the line when reviewing competitors products due a confict of interest.

Whether this confict of interest is just perceived, or completely justified is hard to tell sometimes.

Never a more true a statement was made as "Money makes the world go around"

At the same time, just because someone "owns" and "uses" a product that he/she endorses does not mean they paid for that product out of their own pockets. A lot of endorsement deals include the product as part of the payment for the endorsement.

Who here thinks Peter Brock pays for the Holdens he runs around in? Hard to imagine Peter ever being quoted as saying "Ford was a better product than Holden".

Not while ever they are paying his bills.

Anyways thats my rant on the topic!

[cewilson]

Originally posted by rmp
Guys, I think some of you need to consider your replies before posting.

Firstly there is no "4X4 Monthly" nor "4WD Australia". The two magazines are "4X4 Australia" and "4WD Monthly". But you should be reading Overlander anyway :-)

Secondly, as Inc pointed out, Dean (editor of 4X4 Australia) took the time to come here and post. I'm sure he doesn't mind negative feedback, constructive criticism and debate, but if who would want to stay around to be insulted? Would you be that rude around a campfire?

The fact of the matter is that any time any journo makes a call someone will accuse them of bias, bribery or worse because they disagree. Right now many people are calling Overlander and 4X4 LR-biased because of the D3/RRS awards. Not here though, for some reason. But it was here I recall a particuarly abusive post about a Defender/Troopy comparo 4X4 did a while back and I wouldn't have blamed the journalist had he considered a libel action. As I said, most journos welcome mature feedback of any kind but there's no need for childish behaviour.

As with every profession of course there are some bad apples, but that doesn't follow that every journo is a bribe-grabbing mercenary, and am I the only one to find the post containing the line "...and too often facts are not verified" amusing?


I totally agree with what you said there Robert.

What the guys have to realise, is that most jounalists in this field are avid four wheel drivers like us. They do own their own four wheel drives, they do take the family out camping etc. The difference is their job. I half suspect some sort of jealousy - I know I am!

However, in Robert's case he drives a Defender. So if he goes and does a comparison say between a Cruiser, Patrol and LandRover - does that mean he is biased? Does that mean he should have to put in the article that he owns a LandRover?

I don't think so. I think it comes down to him being an honest person - and you have to have some sort of faith or belief that this is the case. If you can't believe that, then reading and/or buyng magazines probably isn't a good idea!

I sometimes think that the generalisations about items I read here, are exactly the same as the generalisations we all hate about LandRovers. :wink:

[noddy]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>However, in Robert's case he drives a Defender. So if he goes and does a comparison say between a Cruiser, Patrol and LandRover - does that mean he is biased? Does that mean he should have to put in the article that he owns a LandRover?
[/b][/quote]


No.

BUT, if he is 'endorsing' a product in a paid advertisment for a rival product to the one he is reviewing, I would say that he or the publication should disclose this to the reader.

We are all human, so we all have biases. You can never escape that, but my point is when it becomes 'commercial' as in a paid advertisment, then the reading public has the right to know there may be a conflict of interest.

[rmp]

Originally posted by cewilson
However, in Robert's case he drives a Defender. So if he goes and does a comparison say between a Cruiser, Patrol and LandRover - does that mean he is biased? Does that mean he should have to put in the article that he owns a LandRover?


Funnily enough I did that exact comparo a while ago -- and did state I ended up buying the Defender!

I did an 11-car comparo which went to press earlier in the year and I didn't state I'm a Landrover owner, because firstly that didn't matter and secondly it's not as if that's a secret to regular Overlander readers. My previous 4WD was a Mitsu, and the next may not be a Landrover.

I think biases are often more towards types of vehicle than specific manufacturers. For example I make no secret of the fact that I look at 4WDs with a view to fun driving, offroad capability and the ability to lug a heavy load over rough terrain.

Endorsements; agree that those should be disclosed, as should any conflict of interest (eg XYZ travelled to ABC as a guest of XXX).

[CraigE]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Who here thinks Peter Brock pays for the Holdens he runs around in? Hard to imagine Peter ever being quoted as saying "Ford was a better product than Holden". [/b][/quote]

Funny, that I had a conversation with Brocky some years ago when he was racing for Furd. He said to me then he was not happy in a Ford and preffered Holdens and did want to get back on board one. A couple of Furd fans were a bit stunned.

[Juz]

I have also found the anti-LR claims amusing in regards to 4X4 Aust.
4X4 has used Landies as long-termers a lot over the years, including a TD5 MY03 model that, among other things, did a heavy-duty trip with heaps of modified Cruisers and Patrols.

The Disco did the trip in standard form and the vehicle had no dramas whatsoever. Its performance made me buy one, in fact!

Niggly things in vehicles get mentioned in articles, regardless of marque. Ron Moon even devoted a "Footloose" column to manufacturers' woes - not just LR's perceived reliability problems, but Nissan's Patrol was mentioned, as was the Toyota LC100 Series.

In terms of the journo stuff, like I said before - the word is professionalism and the examples given throughout this discussion prove the point.

cheers,
Juz

[VladTepes]

In the interests of credibility, and because of the following comment, I do solemnly declare that I own a Land Rover.





<span style="color:red"><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%">
Land Cruisers Suck !</span></span>



See, it DOES work.