In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
Seriously Mick I think you have a flawed perspective. For starter a growing readership isn't the issue, it's how much it could have grown if you were doing things better.
A load of your mountain trips are work related and involve gear testing and product releases etc. That's great for you and nothing for any of us to criticise. Perhaps as a result you fail to distinguish between a recreational day out and a business one, for you the line is blurred? For the rest of us there is no such confusion and so we are sensitive to what
appears to be a conflict in loyalties, we don't work in that grey area for us it's black and white.
I expect advertisements to be somewhat manipulative of my time and accept that you have two customers the advertiser and the reader. You provide a service to both and this service can be skewed in favour of either party. I expect articles to be less manipulative of my time and more informative I feel that I am the primary customer in this situation and often choose to read articles in preference to advertisement features, I then resent an article which follows the form of an advert. In the media this is avoided by the inclusion of "advertisement features" where the nature of the article is transparent.
This isn't black and white, for example your recent excellent articles with DMM investigating carabiner failure and design etc. are brilliant an while DMM do gain exposure they bring so much expertise to the articles and provide such detail that for me it outweighs any commercial gain. When I read those articles my thoughts are not "didn't DMM get a lot of exposure and take a lot of my time" they are "what a lot of information, entertainment and detail I was given there". Ths fits the percieved contract in my mind when I choose to read an article other than an advert. Credit where it's due that stuff has been a high point in your site content. Your recent Enviro-Article by Es was also quite good - although I disagree with his methodology and rationale I felt the value of the questions he raised far outweighed any benefit through exposure - clearly article stuff rather than advertisement.
So why does this "Photo Essay" fail for me?
1. Initial perception - I expected a "Photo Essay" to be more of an article than an advert feature and was disappointed to find that it didn't deliver as an article at all.
2. Why didn't it deliver?
a) Content - Put simply there is practically none. In 3 paragraphs I learn the height location and range of Wildspitze, that it is accessible by cable car has a hut on it and that a lot of journalists visited recently on a product release. That you like coffee from an unusual tin and that a stove you bought boiled water at altitude. I think it's fair to say that this isn't entertainment or information that simply doesn't suit my tastes and I doubt there's a significant audience for this.
b) Objectivity - You start the article, after a brief meaningless introduction involving a list of places that you have been with no context or detail, with a thanks to "Ben Ashlin and Martine Melki-Neumüller at Adidas Eyewear for the invite" which is on one level merely polite, however having this as an opener is a mistake. Immediately your reader feels hijacked (unwillingly) into being part of your public gratitude and in this case have no reason to share it - unlike the situation above where they are also grateful to DMM for sharing the detail and expertise in the subsequent article. Put it as a footnote and or thank them directly (I expect you did).
c) Style - the remainder of your Photo Essay is really little more than a blog post with some average photo's (when compared with the best of the user submitted content on here). I am very selective with which blogs I read as are most people, millions post blogs nowadays most are uninteresting to all but their close friends. Please don't be offended by this it's a fine blog post as blog posts go, I just expect more from your front end pages.
3. Advertisement - You (quite obviously) mention the product associated wiith this launch trip, but don't review it in anyway or even provide details of it. Even if I accepted this as a advert it doesn't deliver in this respect - I am no more informed as to whether I want to buy the Terrax glasses or not by the end of the piece. Otherwise this is simply product name placement to little effect.
So this piece is neither one thing or another and pretty valueless. That not a capital crime, it's just that there's so much valueless copy that bombards our lives so we resent additional stuff and of course you've queered the pitch with the (mostly) preceeding quality on this site.
I hope future photo essayists will consider the value of their submission to their readers and that the UKC editors will screen content to keep up the quality. Or perhaps your vision for what a Photo Essay should be will differ from mine and I can simply select other parts of your site to my preference.
You do often seem over defensive and also seem to take criticism of your editorial content very poorly. As a commercial media provider your readers opinion is more important than yours, you need them. Remember that it's said that for every person who bothers to complain there are numerous persons who feel similarly but don't bother. I'm not complaining yet I'm merely criticising - subtle difference.
Maybe you'll take something useful from this maybe not? Thanks for at least reading.