jaapv Posted September 14, 2009 Share #121 Posted September 14, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think John has the most sensible take on this whole thing; not surprising, given his profession. My guess is we will hear very little about this affair from the persons involved after this weekend. I would say: Point made and taken. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 14, 2009 Posted September 14, 2009 Hi jaapv, Take a look here The Sour Grapes Duo. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
euston Posted September 14, 2009 Share #122 Posted September 14, 2009 I have no opinion as to the rights and wrongs of this dispute and I shall be renewing my subscription to Sean Reid’s excellent and trustworthy review site. It must be saddening for Leica, however, that the launch of the M9 is being soured by a rerun of a 3 year-old issue which the company must have hoped was now behind it. I don’t suspect spoiler tactics by a rival but, if Leica did have any direct competitors in its field, that is what might come to mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
batmobile Posted September 14, 2009 Share #123 Posted September 14, 2009 I rather hope Sean lets sleeping dogs lie. It obviously irritated him, but he should realise that it has no bearing on how his reviews will be read. They are transparent and evidence based. This issue is more likely to do harm than the original issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 14, 2009 Share #124 Posted September 14, 2009 ...Someone who spends a fair amount of time reviewing products needs to develop a thicker skin... ... I know there are a lot of attorneys that post in this forum and I am one of them. I can also say that I don't see any basis for a law suit against TOP... Agree. You're still a young publisher, Sean . Believe this old one, your best defence lies in the quality of your work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
majid Posted September 14, 2009 Share #125 Posted September 14, 2009 I agree with Howard French's comment. It could have been worded better - it's clear his target is Michael Reichmann, not Sean Reid, and he should have made it clear the reviewers he accuses of deliberately misleading their audience are not necessarily the same who went on the M9 trip to Solms (if you parse his words very carefully, you will see he is not saying that, although they could also be construed as innuendo to that effect). He is a professional journalist, not just a blogger (he covered the Africa beat, a thankless one if there is one, and now China). The New York Times, whatever its faults (Wen-Ho Lee, Judith Miller, Jayson Blair, slow disclosure of Abu Ghraib and NSA warrantless wiretaps until forced by Seymour Hersch and USA Today respectively), they have a very strict policy about financial donations. NYT journalists would not be allowed to accept an expenses-paid invitation to tour the Leica factory. In this he is asserting a difference between journalistic standards and blogger standards (note, standards are not the same as ethics). Whether he has read Sean's review or not is immaterial to this complaint about the process and the potential for manipulation. Since he is not a camera reviewer, he cannot reasonably be accused of sour grapes - he is not competing with Sean or the others for page views. That accusation could be made of Erwin Puts, but that's another matter altogether. For the record, I have 100% trust in Phil Askey's ethics and judgment, and no trust whatsoever in Reichmann's, even though I don't think Reichmann is venal (he comes from a wealthy family, much like Cartier-Bresson in his time, but there are other ways to influence than monetary). It would seem I trust Sean (from what I have heard of him) since I plonked down for a subscription on Saturday, despite my hatred of Adobe Flash. I don't think Mike Johnston owed anyone an apology, least of all to Reichmann. In fact it is Reichmann who owes his audience an apology for suppressing his knowledge of the IR issue, and I said so myself at the time in my own indictment of the M8. This does not have a bearing on his M9 review, but once bitten, twice shy, as in my understanding of French's comment, this is also what he intended to say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coup de foudre Posted September 14, 2009 Share #126 Posted September 14, 2009 Last night I was doing a little research for a project and watched a movie called 'All about Eve' (1950). This morning I woke up and read on the TOP that Sean Reed is suing Michael Johnston for publishing comments written by other people. Talk about killing the messenger. Are Howard French and Erwin Puts next on the list, since they are the actual authors of the comments deemed so offensive? I think I'm having a flashback to last nights movie. Fasten your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy night! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted September 14, 2009 Share #127 Posted September 14, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) All of this shows how misguided was the marketing campaign conducted by Leica.They gave out tens of prototypes of M9 to testers, but only four (as I understand) reviewers were invited for the factory tour and given a test ride of the finished product. That must have caused accusations of favoritism. The invitation should have been out to all the meaningful photo press, not limited to rangefinder (ie. Leica) boffins. Whether the invited accepted the free room and board would have been his/her choice. All of them can afford the air ticket for sure, if only from frequent fliers miles. The accidental and totally innocent victim of that is Sean Reid. We, his subscribers, know very well that his reviews are of highest standards of integrity. Unfortunately the couple of hundred of us (?) is not a significant enough number. Sean made a mistake trying to counter what he felt as an attack on his integrity by publicizing the case here. This is a losing war because the vast majority do not know his writings. The biggest mistake is however the lawsuit (if true). The mainstream press will concentrate on "Reviewers like Leica--too much?" type of headlines. And how much were the free lunches. The one who started this mess, Leica AG, should step in now and avert the looming disaster. And the involved gentlemen would better spend their time giving photo workshops to underpriviledged kids than in court. Sean for his part might consider opening up his site for a limited time for everybody to see the evidence. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan States Posted September 14, 2009 Share #128 Posted September 14, 2009 I'd say they did a great job at this launch. We are still talking about it. The product is very popular and all the mud slinging is between people writing about cameras not the people who bought them. It's been one of the best orchestrated roll outs I've ever seen, especially considering the relatively small budget under which they operate. Best wishes Dan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 14, 2009 Share #129 Posted September 14, 2009 All of this shows how misguided was the marketing campaign conducted by Leica.They gave out tens of prototypes of M9 to testers, but only four (as I understand) reviewers were invited for the factory tour and given a test ride of the finished product. Exactly how many of those testers were actually camera review writers? I would suggest four. From where I am standing it was a very well organized marketing campaign, which reaps its reward in an unexpected (but hoped-for I suppose) high number of interested customers. That there would be a personal conflict between a few gurus could hardly have been foreseen. I would suggest that those interested in this affair simply take out a subscription to Sean's site - after all you are saving a multiple of that fee by not buying IR filters- and judge the quality of his reviews. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted September 14, 2009 Share #130 Posted September 14, 2009 Fasten your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy night! We could do a remake. Howard French could play Addison DeWitt, Sean can be Margo and Puts would play Eve Harrington. Michael Johnston can play Bill Samson and Reichmann could be Miss Caswell, originally played by a very young Marilyn Monroe. Of course all of the men playing woman will probably have to wear a wig. Girdles will probably be in order for those on the special camera reviewer junket diet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vivek Iyer Posted September 14, 2009 Share #131 Posted September 14, 2009 How not to upstage Seal was this episode's result. They will be back with a different plot. Hopefully, they will be a bit more creative next time around. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 14, 2009 Share #132 Posted September 14, 2009 Fasten your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy night! Maybe not. Threads on Sean's decision to sue Mike Johnston have been closed down on a couple of other forums. I'd expect this one to follow suit before too long. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted September 14, 2009 Share #133 Posted September 14, 2009 Given the nature of some of the latest postings I would think that it's time to close this thread as well. —Mitch/Potomac, MD Scratching the Surface© Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 14, 2009 Share #134 Posted September 14, 2009 Given the nature of some of the latest postings I would think that it's time to close this thread as well. Threads should only be closed as a last resort IMHO. Unless they breach what Andreas or a mod feel to be legal, or bad taste boundaries they should be allowed to stay open - again IMHO. If a thread is no longer interesting, people will stop posting to it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graeme_hutton Posted September 14, 2009 Share #135 Posted September 14, 2009 Threads should only be closed as a last resort IMHO. Unless they breach what Andreas or a mod feel to be legal, or bad taste boundaries they should be allowed to stay open - again IMHO. If a thread is no longer interesting, people will stop posting to it................. Yup..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graeme_hutton Posted September 14, 2009 Share #136 Posted September 14, 2009 .......Damn!...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted September 14, 2009 Share #137 Posted September 14, 2009 Jeez this place is a lot like high school sometimes. Photography forums in general. The internet period. It's a camera! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Cristophe Posted September 14, 2009 Share #138 Posted September 14, 2009 I actually think this issue is inportant to reflect upon. a reviewer should/must be independent, no matter how good or bad his/her reviews are. If rewieing a product after having been wined and dined by the manufacturer one breeches the neccesities of any reviewer, wether, cars, cameras, electronics etc. etc. And I am aware that these tactices happen a lot, and all over different product groups. A good reviewer should go to these meeting but.. pay for his/her own bills, then a reviewer becomes 100% credible. I know Reids reviews as well, actually I have a abbonement on them, I like them, I think personally he is a standup guy... but... but! taking part of these manufacturer sponsored trips will cause other people to question the actual reviewer, and in my perception .... rightfully so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted September 14, 2009 Share #139 Posted September 14, 2009 All of this shows how misguided was the marketing campaign conducted by Leica.They gave out tens of prototypes of M9 to testers, but only four (as I understand) reviewers were invited for the factory tour and given a test ride of the finished product. That must have caused accusations of favoritism. The invitation should have been out to all the meaningful photo press, not limited to rangefinder (ie. Leica) boffins.Whether the invited accepted the free room and board would have been his/her choice. All of them can afford the air ticket for sure, if only from frequent fliers miles. The accidental and totally innocent victim of that is Sean Reid. We, his subscribers, know very well that his reviews are of highest standards of integrity. Unfortunately the couple of hundred of us (?) is not a significant enough number. Sean made a mistake trying to counter what he felt as an attack on his integrity by publicizing the case here. This is a losing war because the vast majority do not know his writings. The biggest mistake is however the lawsuit (if true). The mainstream press will concentrate on "Reviewers like Leica--too much?" type of headlines. And how much were the free lunches. The one who started this mess, Leica AG, should step in now and avert the looming disaster. And the involved gentlemen would better spend their time giving photo workshops to underpriviledged kids than in court. Sean for his part might consider opening up his site for a limited time for everybody to see the evidence. you're so clueless.. who in the world want to test rangefinder? for most people it is antique, outdated thing. Please to try think much more before writing something Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 14, 2009 Share #140 Posted September 14, 2009 you're so clueless.. who in the world want to test rangefinder? for most people it is antique, outdated thing. Most of the mainstream press I imagine. Certainly I'd expect Amateur Photographer in the UK and Reponses Photo and Chasseur d'Image in France to have multi page reviews. I can't imagine it being ignored by the German photographic press either. Maybe nugat isn't so 'clueless' after all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.