Bass Player Bias

[phatduckk]

being awesome might just be the best advertizing vehicle. i beleive (as do all of yuo good peeps) that no manufaturer can beat EBMMs quality, service and innovation! every single chance i get: every musician i meet, every single store i walk into i sing praises for the EBMM guitars, basses and for the Stainless Steal Super Slinkys (mental note go to store and order 10 sets tomorrow)

OH was the best weekend ever ... hell, ive been quoted saying that in some PR material and i meant it. rock n roll.

it really means a lot to me that Ive met a bunch of the people responsible for my fav. instruments ever! even cooler is trading forum posts and emails with the BIg man who's name happens to be on my fav bass. you just cant beat that ... you really, really cant

 

[strummer]

I don't advertise in the mags so I dont get coverage.

If the product sucks and they write about it they lose an advertiser.

If those statements are true, both advertisers and magazine have gotten it all wrong.
The magazine should cover instruments and players that are interesting to the readers, to maximize circulation and "re-read value".
The advertisers should advertise because they want to reach the readers, NOT as some kind of economical support for the magazine. I know, I know, advertising makes a lot of money for the magazine, but IF they look to please the advertisers by doing bland reviews and being selective in their coverage, they don't cater to the readers' best interests and so will, in time, lose readers.

I work with msgazine publishing, and our magazines are about home theater and home audio, and we have an agency booking the ads. For us this means we don't know who's advertising, and so we can't really care about it. Also, we have from time to time turned companys refusal to advertise by just keeping up our regular line of work.

We do not let the manufacturers see reviews beforehand either, not even to check facts. We pay our writers to deliver correct material, and as publishers we stand by our writing.

We do a lot of interviews, also without letting the (mostly actors and musicians) read beforehand. We don't do scandal writing, and the only major film maker in Sweden who does not appear to be letting us interview him any time soon is Ingemar Bergman. We keep trying, and he keeps ignoring us, but that's ok; he IS Ingemar bergman

On the subject of advertising or not, at least here in backwards Sweden, the most active advertisers are those with web communitys. There is certainly something to say for guerilla marketing in all forms, but I think it is still important to be seen in magazine ads.

just my 2c

The Edit: I agree that the "EBMM way" works wonderfully, and I am definitely not critizising your marketing strategies, BP. It's just that I remember a time when I, as a (somewhat younger) staff writer had to lock my computer every time I left my room, because the ad sellers kept trying to find out about review, test winners and the like. Also, someone tried to pull two companys from a test I was doing because they didn't advertise. I got real mad, yelling and threatening to quit, calmed down and explained my view of things, and three months later we had moved ad selling out of our company.

I am very proud of our publications, and our way of making magazines work. Maybe a little less short time money, but we make a magazine for the readers as best we know how, and the circulation numbers show we're doing at least something right.

 

[Colin]

I can tell you print media is not the only guilty party here. At the radio station I'm at, no calls get to air that are negative towards client products.

 

[Steve Dude Barr]

Check my profile to see where I get all my EBMM ad info...

 

[Colin]

what's an over 40 magazine?

 

[Big Poppa]

If those statements are true, both advertisers and magazine have gotten it all wrong.
The magazine should cover instruments and players that are interesting to the readers, to maximize circulation and "re-read value".
The advertisers should advertise because they want to reach the readers, NOT as some kind of economical support for the magazine. I know, I know, advertising makes a lot of money for the magazine, but IF they look to please the advertisers by doing bland reviews and being selective in their coverage, they don't cater to the readers' best interests and so will, in time, lose readers.

I work with msgazine publishing, and our magazines are about home theater and home audio, and we have an agency booking the ads. For us this means we don't know who's advertising, and so we can't really care about it. Also, we have from time to time turned companys refusal to advertise by just keeping up our regular line of work.

We do not let the manufacturers see reviews beforehand either, not even to check facts. We pay our writers to deliver correct material, and as publishers we stand by our writing.

We do a lot of interviews, also without letting the (mostly actors and musicians) read beforehand. We don't do scandal writing, and the only major film maker in Sweden who does not appear to be letting us interview him any time soon is Ingemar Bergman. We keep trying, and he keeps ignoring us, but that's ok; he IS Ingemar bergman

On the subject of advertising or not, at least here in backwards Sweden, the most active advertisers are those with web communitys. There is certainly something to say for guerilla marketing in all forms, but I think it is still important to be seen in magazine ads.

just my 2c

The Edit: I agree that the "EBMM way" works wonderfully, and I am definitely not critizising your marketing strategies, BP. It's just that I remember a time when I, as a (somewhat younger) staff writer had to lock my computer every time I left my room, because the ad sellers kept trying to find out about review, test winners and the like. Also, someone tried to pull two companys from a test I was doing because they didn't advertise. I got real mad, yelling and threatening to quit, calmed down and explained my view of things, and three months later we had moved ad selling out of our company.

I am very proud of our publications, and our way of making magazines work. Maybe a little less short time money, but we make a magazine for the readers as best we know how, and the circulation numbers show we're doing at least something right.

Great job with your standards. It is just my opinions regarding the music mags over here from my lifelong experience.

 

[strummer]

It is just my opinions regarding the music mags over here from my lifelong experience.

Unfortunately I am inclined to agree with you on the music mags, both in the US and here in Sweden.

Can I ask you if they are up front about it, telling you that your decision not to advertise makes sure you get the bare minimum coverage?

 

[Big Poppa]

Unfortunately I am inclined to agree with you on the music mags, both in the US and here in Sweden.

Can I ask you if they are up front about it, telling you that your decision not to advertise makes sure you get the bare minimum coverage?

Let me say that most of the writers are good people and so are the reps but it is still funny to watch the posturing....
They are believe that they are the Woodward and Berstein of our industry. They are one paragraph short of a pulitzer prize. Get em bombed and they will probably come clean.

 

[Golem]

Guys

......American print media ....... are an endangered species. Most of the time by the time you get your magazines you have already read it on the internet.
I don't advertise in the mags so I dont get coverage. They give me reviews because its too hard to ignore Music Man and they dont want to piss me off due to the the string ads in the guitar mags.
..........

No argument with the Sterling stating the obvious. I do disagree with the original 'charge' of 'media bias'. I would reserve 'media bias' to such things as political [includes economic] bias in a supposedly public information source, such as a news paper or online news publisher. Since Bass Player mag is not in that genre, since they are really an ad rag anyway, this is not 'media bias' in the normal sense.

If you read a newspaper, while you ought to be realistic enuf to be aware there is congenital bias in any for-profit enterprise, you ought to expect "reasonably" balanced content [minimized bias]. If you read an ad rag, you ought to be realistic enuf to know you're reading an ad rag, and that advertisers get perks and non-advertisers get the birdie. That's not media bias, that's the ad biz. Bass Player is not news media, it's strictly ad biz.

 

[strummer]

Let me say that most of the writers are good people and so are the reps but it is still funny to watch the posturing....
They are believe that they are the Woodward and Berstein of our industry. They are one paragraph short of a pulitzer prize. Get em bombed and they will probably come clean.

Every year I go to Vegas for the CES, and If I miss one single manufacturer in my report, my mail box fills up so fast it makes me want to cry.
Same thing if we do a group test. Say a manufacturer have just released a hot receiver, and we're doing a big shoot out in that price category. If they can't fill the orders they sometimes ignore our requset for a test sample. Nowadays that sends us to a store to buy said receiver, because explaining to our readers what happened is just too much pain.
Now, with the regular news coverage there is a bit of difference, because we actually depend on the manufacturers and importers to keep us updated with press releases. Some of htem are very good at it, especially those who have a guerilla marketing strategy. Some others are not so brilliant in that department, and that will make them less visible in the news section.

On another note, I find that many of our hard core readers (my very own knuckle heads) appreciate reading about stuff in our rag even though they have known about it for a month via the internet.