How gun magazines write articles
Heh:
Instruction From The Editor To The Journalist:
Frangible Arms just bought a four page color ad in our next issue. They sent us their latest offering, the CQB MK-V Tactical Destroyer. I told Fred to take it out to the range to test. He’ll have the data for you tomorrow.
Feedback From Technician Fred:
The pistol is a crude copy of the World War II Japanese Nambu type 14 pistol, except it’s made from unfinished zinc castings. The grips are pressed cardboard. The barrel is unrifled pipe. There are file marks all over the gun, inside and out.
Only 10 rounds of 8mm ammunition were supplied. Based on previous experience with a genuine Nambu, I set up a target two feet down range. I managed to cram four rounds in the magazine and one in the chamber. I taped the magazine in place, bolted the pistol into a machine rest, got behind a barricade, and pulled the trigger with 20 feet of 550 cord. I was unable to measure the trigger pull because my fish scale tops out at 32 pounds. On the third try, the pistol fired. From outline of the holes, I think the barrel, frame, magazine, trigger and recoil spring blew through the target. The remaining parts scattered over the landscape.
I sent the machine rest back to the factory to see if they can fix it, and we need to replace the shooting bench for the nice people who own the range. I’ll be off for the rest of the day. My ears are still ringing. I need a drink.
Article Produced By The Journalist:
The CQB MK-V Tactical Destroyer is arguably the deadliest pistol in the world. Based on a combat proven military design, but constructed almost entirely of space age alloy, it features a remarkable barrel design engineered to produce a cone of fire, a feature much valued by Special Forces world wide. The Destroyer shows clear evidence of extensive hand fitting. The weapon disassembles rapidly without tools. At a reasonable combat distance, I put five holes in the target faster than I would have thought possible. This is the pistol to have if you want to end a gunfight at all costs. The gun is a keeper, and I find myself unable to send it back.
March 2nd, 2010 at 10:32 am
It is funny.
However it’s also amusing in that they think there’s some “Technician Fred” guy and that the “Journalist” is in the employ of the magazine.
The average poster on internet gun forums knows even less about the gunwriting business than they do about how an FFL works or about guns themselves.
Frank James, Caleb, Kathy Jackson, Oleg, Rob Pincus… you could ask them how it works. 😉
March 2nd, 2010 at 11:20 am
If you think this is a parody, then you need to go read some of the original gun press on the disasterous Colt 2000 pistol.
March 2nd, 2010 at 11:37 am
“A Nambu reproduction? I’ll take two!” sez the gun nut guy reading the article.
March 2nd, 2010 at 12:01 pm
Evan Marshall, who at one time wrote for Combat Handguns, once told me that being a gun writer was the worlds second oldest profession. He said the only reason it wasn’t the first was that prositiutes got there first. He said they were expected to write positive articles about advertisers products.
March 2nd, 2010 at 1:06 pm
At least when it comes to the Colt All American 2000 I plead NOT GUILTY. I killed that article because there was some similarity between what happened and the mentioned satire…
All The Best,
Frank W. James
March 2nd, 2010 at 2:49 pm
I thought the most disasterous coincidence was just a few months ago, when right after the Ft. hood shooting, Combat Handguns had an article on the FiveSeven which raised points on how effective that particular pistol round was at killing.
March 2nd, 2010 at 5:24 pm
Having served as a writer for various types of magazines before settling into adulthood I can verify the pull is always there to coat the article. Thankfully the military taught me not to coat anything.
Hilarious stuff Uncle.
March 2nd, 2010 at 5:33 pm
Same thing with general-aviation, and 4×4 mags…Not quite so bad with sailing or backpacking mags (Yet). It seems that the writers all have a template, they just put the specific name in and the article writes itself..
March 2nd, 2010 at 5:42 pm
Gunblast just not writing about firearms they can’t say enough good about sounding better yet?
March 2nd, 2010 at 6:28 pm
More truth than poetry there. Gunwriters never meet a gun they don’t like if the manufacturers advertise in their magazine. One exception; Gun Tests Magazine. They pay full retail for the guns they review and tell it like it is. Oh, and they accept no advertising from manufacturers.
March 2nd, 2010 at 6:46 pm
I’ve written a bunch of articles over the years for SWAT. Denny Hansen is the editor over there and he’s let me be totally honest and has never edited anything negative that I’ve said about a gun. I’ve written a couple of reviews that were pretty negative, including one where the product broke, and I included all of the details.
I also know Louis Awerbuck’s articles have lost them some advertisers, but they told the truth anyway.
March 2nd, 2010 at 7:15 pm
+1 for the Gun Test Magazine. No mfg advertising. Paying for a gun gives a little extra perspective. Ok, a lot. I don’t agree with their every review, but at least I don’t have to spend as much time looking for the unwritten negatives.
March 2nd, 2010 at 9:47 pm
Every once in awhile, I swear Denny lets something into SWAT that would normally never see the light of day purely so people can see one of his writers gank a gun company in public.
The most recent example I recall was the piece Erick Gelhaus did on the Guncrafter .50 GI conversion for Glocks. It was not kind, but it was honest.
March 2nd, 2010 at 11:11 pm
That is the nice thing about Kathy Jackson being my editor – the pieces I write are pieces I actually believe in, so I’m not reviewing the TactiHammer 2000x Death Ray.
March 3rd, 2010 at 4:31 am
I must be the only sonofabitch here who isn’t an IT maven or gun writer. Of course, I could just be the only sonofabitch here.
March 3rd, 2010 at 8:35 am
They also tend to ignore offerings by company’s with smaller advertising budgets. Gun writers almost never even heard of the Kel-Tec P3AT but as soon as Ruger copied it and opened their checkbook, suddenly the LCP was the greatest thing to happen to CCW since Shall Issue.
March 3rd, 2010 at 12:04 pm
Any pressure Concealed Carry Magazine writers might feel to puff advertisers’ products comes from the writers themselves and whatever contacts they’ve developed on their own with the companies. It sure as shooting doesn’t come from me, or from our publisher Tim Schmidt. We want honest reviews.
SWAT magazine is also admirably free of pressure from the editorial side. Lots of respect due there.
Sadly, many others do put that kind of pressure on their writers, and will occasionally pay kill fees for articles written by reviewers who won’t say a product is good when it in fact sucked.
March 3rd, 2010 at 6:40 pm
I no longer write for the magazine that started me out in the business, because my new editor wanted to exert too much control over my articles.
I have had articles rejected that were too critical and one where the company interfered with its publication. I agree that SWAT is straight up and Denny Hansen responds quickly to any questions I have or pitches I make.
One manufacturer contacted me and objected to my criticism of their magazines. I told him that I was just reporting what the agency told me.
There is a lot of pressure by mfgs. on editors for good ink. What I hate is when a mfg. ignores your requests after repeated attempts to set up a gun loan. And Ruger would not send me a gun unless I agreed to buy it first.
March 5th, 2010 at 12:36 am
Well Duh, Bob! Every Ruger I ever saw was HEEAAVVYYY. They were just trying to recoup some of their shipping costs. Bill Ruger was an Ok guy, but if his guns couldn’t be used as boat anchors for aircraft carriers he thought they were too fragile.