From the standpoint of a manufacturer with his product undergoing its first major magazine review, I see an entirely different picture of the process and relationships between manufacturer and magazine than the negative one that seems to be favored by most of the responders to this thread.
I do not know nor can I comment on how the other audio publications do their selection and determine their policies but my experience has been one of an immense admiration for ethical behavior on the part of Listener magazine.
It has also come at great uncertainty for myself, my product and my small company.
Last July, I received an e mail from one of the Listener review staff who was preparing a review of a competitors product.He had heard some scuttlebutt about my own product and asked if I would like to participate in an expanded comparison review.
I agreed and forwarded several samples to this reviewer and an associate of his.He arranged a single 20 minute telephone "interview" and we exchanged a single e mail correspondence over set up details for my product in his personal system in early August.At this point, all communications were halted in a total blackout and my only contact since then between either of the reviewers or the magazine was not made until several weeks ago( nearly 7 months total time).
What I was told was that the review process had been completed, the samples returned and an approx. date for publishing of the article(a late spring or early summer 2001 issue is all the more I know).
I do not have advertising with the magazine, nor have I ever been approached to do so.
I have no ties with the reviewers nor have I ever met them.
Nothing was ever asked of me nor inferred.
I will not be aware of the contents of the review until it arrives at my doorstep and is simultaneously being read by Listeners readership.
Now could someone please tell me the whereabouts of that smoking gun and evidence of conspiracy and collusion?
Best,
Ken Lyon
GreaterRanges/Neuance
