UKC

So you might think I'm obsessive but after last months rant:
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=49576 I'm going to have to do it again.

This months gear review in Climber: what a complete and utter bloody waste of space again. Jez Portman was the culprit this time, and he normally writes perfectly sensible reviews - but three full pages on 'fashion' clothing made by outdoor companies. What is the eeffin' point?!? Top quote was something like "Prana makes a women's jean jacket, which is exactly what it says it is." Cheers Jez. I feel enlightened now. Basically the review could have been done in a sentence or two:

"Outdoor companies now make clothing that looks better than lycra did. Some works well for climbing, some doesn't."

I actually sat down yesterday, divided the cover price of the magazine by the number of pages, then multiplied that figure by the number of pointless pages in the gear review. So to the editor of Climber - can I have 12p back please?

Or they could have just taken another three full page adverts and offset the cover price with that revenue, as the review was basically nothing besides an 'advertorial'.

The article before was an excellent look at crevasse rescue, and what gear you need for it, by Bruce Goodlad. Clear, specially taken photos illustrating it. Jim Perrin was on top form bemoaning modern himalayan climbing. Ian Parnell's 'Beyond the Alps' section was as excellent as usual, hinting at the intriguing possibility of doing a two week trip to Alaska and getting some superb looking climbing done. There was a full page picture of the lovely Dalvinder Sodhi doing something very gnarly looking. The front cover picture was excellent - a little person amongst a lot of beautiful rock. So amongst all of that, "why oh why" can't they do a useful gear review? "Cotton can be a good fabric to wear in hot weather." Come on!!! I ask you? Do you think your audience lives in Northern Greenland?

In reply to TobyA:

The excellent crevasse article cost 24p a page so you got Jez's fashion tips for free.

In reply to TobyA:

Toby, dude, dontchya know that climbing is a "lifestyle choice" and us cats gotta have the right gear for the boozer, man! Groovy chicks dig it!

Or some shite like that...

Andy 'super uncouloir' Myles

In reply to TobyA:

Toby, it might not just be the advertising revenue that they fear losing.

A lot of companies, particularly American, will jump at the chance to send legal writs out if they suspect anything to be even remotely critical of their company. We have had some dealings recently which has woken me up to this. Basically their attitude is that any criticism is regarded as slander and shouldn't be allowed and sadly they probably have the legislation to back this idea up; they certainly have the money and will to test it, which is often all that is needed to win these cases. If that means stifling debate by not allowing anything that is remotely controversial then they are happy.

With gear reviews, I suspect that the mag editors just can't take the risk of a court case and hence play on the safe side. In those circumstances, I agree with you that gear reviews should actually appear as gear lists instead. They would then serve some purpose and could take up a lot less space.

Alan

In reply to TobyA:
Your just getting back at clothes wearers coz you're a nudist.

In reply to TobyA:

i don't have the magazine, but if this is the cover:
http://www.climber.co.uk/magazine/thismonth.asp

Then i agree that it's superb.

That's the first time in ages there's been a big inspiring photo on the cover of a UK magazine, rather than some cut-down close up where you can read the logos and nothing else.

Bernard, if you are lurking, then good on you.

In reply to Alan James, ROCKFAX:

If that's the case it might be a better approach to refuse to review gear from manufacturers who are not prepared to allow critical reviews- it would certainly give the magazine more credibility, and the absence of the manufacturers product from a review would in itself say something.

In reply to Alan James, ROCKFAX:

And it should be perfectly clear that that is what they are.

Vertical mag used to do this really well. It was basically a shop window.

The magazines over here have really dumbed down recently......a bit like some guidebooks.

Maybe something to do with money.

M

In reply to jam:

Interesting idea, but I doubt if the reviews actually have that degree of clout. There are usually many notable absences anyway.

Also, having sold advertising myself, it is very much a buyer's market out there. They can pretty much dictate terms. Losing a big advertising account can be really bad news for these mags.

Alan

In reply to Alan James, ROCKFAX: I'm sure it would be most unwise for you to give us the details but I'd love to hear them!

It seems such a ridiculous attitude and horribly hard to prove legally as well, but I guess more people are scared of the cost than off the outcome. If I say, "jacket X isn't as good as jacket Y for iceclimbing because..." how could that possibly be slander!?

I was rereading an old High on the loo last night, and in one of Andy K's articles he reviewed 4 very similar pairs of gloves and came out by saying that so and so pair was the best because the leather wrapped around the finger tips and they were 10 quid less than the others. Thats a really useful review - and how could it be slanderous to mention the cost and the design. If you say "all brand X stuff is rubbish" then fair enough, but with the above example the judge would have to be on drugs to think it was somehow unfair.

C'mon then - name and shame the buggers! - who exactly are these American companies? - I have an intense dislike of corporate bullyism* and suggest the guilty parties are 'blacklisted' !

*McDonalds once tried to close down a Scottish Fish 'n' Chip shop of the same name

In reply to TobyA:
Surely Climber is controlled by UK libel laws? As such, any potential US lawsuit would fall flat, as long as the review wasn't deliberately malicious. Or am I missing something?

In reply to Mick - Rockfax USA:
"The magazines over here have really dumbed down recently......a bit like some guidebooks. "

Self criticism Mick? Shurely shome mishtake

Bob

In reply to Alan James, ROCKFAX:
Also, having sold advertising myself, it is very much a buyer's market out there. They can pretty much dictate terms. Losing a big advertising account can be really bad news for these mags.

Absolutely. But I write for a trade mag that is (unlike Climber) entirely dependent on ads - no subs at all. But even in a flat market we wouldn't stoop to vendor-driven copy. The first priority must be the readers, surely?
Having said that, we'll probably be out of jobs soon - wishing we hadn't occupied the moral high ground for so long!

In reply to Simon Roberts:

I don't know how that works. The Internet is a funny thing and it is available in the US so is the content of all the web sites, so US law probably has a lot to say about it. What that really means I don't know, but I am not keen to be the one who has to find out.

In reply to Bob:


Slightly. You do have to sometimes bow to the changing demographic of climbers.

There is less self-reliance I think than the past and you have to be aware of this.

M

In reply to TobyA:


Here's a suggestion: don't buy climbing magazines.

I haven't bought one in about 10 years and I still seem to be able to climb okay.

Be brave: kick that habit, man!

In reply to Anonymous:

I said above, I really enjoyed the rest of the magazine. Even reading about sport climbing in Clywd which is clearly way to hard for me. I don't want to kick the habit, I just want useful gear reviews.

In reply to Mick - Rockfax USA:

"changing demographic of climbers" psycho-babble for "thick" perhaps

The danger is when "less self-reliance" turns to "hand holding" and you wonder why they bother.

Bob (who likes a bit of mystery now and again)

In reply to TobyA:


Fair enough.

If you want to do something about it, why not write to the editor involved rather than this forum?

In reply to Bob:


As regards guidebooks Supertopo comes in for some stick as being too prescriptive and hand holding.

Some believe that there is an over-reliance on the topo at the expense of route finding skills especially as regards alpine routes.

I've just got criticised for being too detailed in my maps and approach descriptions to the base of the Mount Whitneys east face.

Mick

In reply to Anonymous:


Cos' I like a rant?

Actually its more because I'm interested in knowing if other Climber readers agree with me, or if anyone actually finds these reviews useful or interesting.

As this is probably the busiest UK climbing website, I suspect that they have a check in from time to time. Also they don't have a letters pages anymore, so its not like anyone else will hear of your concerns if you do write to them.

In reply to TobyA:

Totally agree. Climber is currently my favourite mag but I really couldn't believe my eyes when I saw a review of a denim jacket.

In reply to Tyler: Maybe we should start a petition. No more denim jacket reviews!

In reply to TobyA:

My point was that they didn't do it properly, they should have compared it with other denim jakets, given figures for weight (wet and dry) and tear strength. It was very shoddy and amatureish. Next month should be better as I've sent in a review of evening shoes. It'll come as no surprise to you that Manolo Blakin sling backs and Jimmy Choo kitten mules come out on top in that review.

In reply to Tyler:

are the slingbacks coming with 5-10 rubber now?

In reply to TobyA:


Ha! That's fair enough, too!

In reply to Tyler: It lucky that I watch "Sex and the City" cos otherwise I would have had no idea what you were talking about! Watch more television kids, its educational.

In reply to Tyler:

Choo kit is ok for high-society stuff where the weight savings really matter due to the rarified atmosphere, but for typical Scottish conditions (i.e. pish and vomit all over the floor), I'd really recommend some of the fast-drying new synthetics or old-school workhorses like the Clarks Commando.

Andy

In reply to TobyA:

Here, here to TobyA. I raised this exact same topic a week or so ago, and it was pointed out that I'd raised it before. But like you, I believe it needs to be raised.
Another criticism of Climber's gear reviews is that there's too little generic advice, like using kit, what to look for for different uses, etc. High Magazine's equipment sections are so much better.
On the libel point, it really shouldn't be a problem. In fact, I'd be amazed if it was.
Most of the standard libel defences easily cover kit reviews. The most obvious one, if you're interested, is "justification". That's to say, if something is factually true, you can say it.
The other key defence is "fair comment". This means you can give your opinion on things. But you have to beware the comment is "just comment". You can't say "in my opinion the manufacturer says the rope is much weaker than the manufacturer says it is" and defend yourself that you're just commenting.
Anyway, libel almost certainly ain't the issue here...

In reply to Lightweight:

Apart from the obviously ridiculous what shorts to buy ? kind of reviews, It never ceases to amaze me that price doesn't feature in the overall assesment of gear. Is an Arc Tryx (sp) anorak at £400 really 10x better than a Regatta jacket for most applications ? Or a TNF logo infested tent 10x better than a Millets tent ?

In reply to GrahamD:


Price and label. When was the last time you saw a Peter Storm fleece reviewed, or a TOG 24 pair of gloves, or some other manufacturer who doesn't cut it as leading edge. I suspect the advertising issue has something to do with it.