Thin Line Between Critique and Courtrooms: A Dialogue on the Recent Audiophile Drama

If the bar for ethics is measured using the performance of journalists in todays mainstream media, then that indeed is pretty low. I certainly hope we would hold reviewers to a higher standard than that.

I must say, as someone who spent decades in the journalism business, for both big and small news organizations, this is pretty much 180-degree opposite to fundamental journalist ethics.

A journalist’s responsibility is first and foremost to provide true information to the readers, and in the case of the sort of consumer journalism that product reviewing is, where you’re helping readers make informed decisions, providing information about less than good product is crucial.

Of course, journalists have a responsibility to be fair with and about the subjects of their reviews. But their responsibility is not to protect the reputation of the manufacturer who delivers a subpar product by killing the negative review and returning the product to the manufacturer. That not only makes the journalist an agent of the manufacturer essentially but also erodes the publication’s credibility with readers, who are the customers you have responsibility to. It’s absolutely corrosive to journalism ethics and effectiveness.

Any of the reasons of competency offered as reasons to assume a bad review is being offered unethically or with ulterior motivation could equally apply to good reviews. There’s no reason to assume that one is any more competently or ethically delivered than the other.

Which is not to suggest that the audio press has ever been a bastion of journalistic standards -- there’s plenty that erodes reader confidence in the audio press: long term equipment loans, extremely cozy manufacturer and retailer relationships with journalists and editors -- but among those things, this unwillingness to publish bad reviews and the hermetic belief of where ones responsibility lies that suggests that the proper thing to do when encountering a bad product is not to inform the public but keep it from the public and inform the manufacturer instead, is a dozy.

The best answer to mediocre journalism, technical incompetence and the inevitable tensions between the editorial and business sides of the house (especially in enthusiast and trade publishing where your sources and your advertisers are often from the same community), isn’t just to throw one’s hand up and say, fine, let’s just publish puff pieces.

@chervokas You make an excellent point which does not address my prior comments. I don't have a problem if the review is honest. Quite often negative reviews aren't. I know of an honest review Art Dudley wrote about a multi-driver speaker using full range drivers, which he published in the Listener. Its one of the few rare exceptions I know of (to my knowledge I've not read any of yours); I can point to many more that were not honest.

For clarification, I was making no political statements nor supporting any. Nor was I insinuating that the criminal justice system could be or is being used politically. I was just pointing out the obvious: people with wealth can do more as litigants as they can afford the expenses than people who can't afford lawyers. I was also pointing out my disappointment in my local court system as to the way cases were handled. 

Just remember, the FTC has sued companies for hiding bad reviews.

Consumer Review Fairness Act: What Businesses Need to Know | Federal Trade Commission (ftc.gov)

No minds ever get changed and its a sure way to get the thread deleted.

It's inevitable.

Guys, let's not go down that road...

@hartf36 Not to be picky but neither of those points apply.

Malice or its absence is only involved in a defamation case if there is a public official or a public figure suing a news media outlet. I doubt that Erik from Tekton fits either category and Erin certainly isn't a news media outlet. This standard came from a US Supreme Court case NY Times v. Sullivan in 1964.

https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/actual-malice/

The 1st Amendment says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

While there is some interplay with the 1st Amendment (See NY Times v. Sullivan) involving the right of the press and rights to comment on public officials and public figures, defamation is a common law tort which is law created by the courts to redress injuries between individuals. The extended 1st Amendment rights involved in the Sullivan case do not pertain to the private individual. 

https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/libel-and-slander/

1.  Absence of malice.

2.  Protected speech under the 1A.

Next.....

@dz13 I didn't know about the judges' hands on or hands off point, thanks for your insight! I guess in dictatorships the rich buy the judge and the system, in democracies they buy  the lawyers who figure out how to play the system (like the guy going to court in NYC tomorrow)

How surprizing! 😁

But the courts are the playthings of the rich who can use the process to delay, harass and intimidate people.

@audiokinesis A defamation case can be brought anywhere the alleged defamatory remarks were published. I’d guess that a YouTube video is pretty much everywhere so the case could probably be brought in any state which gives the plaintiff the opportunity to forum shop a choose a state without an anti-SLAPP law. Then the question is whether the case can be removed to federal court and whether the federal court applies the state’s law which probably is the case.

As to how long it would take to get a case dismissed depends on the state, the court and the judge. Generally, there are 2 ways to get rid of a case pre-trial: a motion to dismiss and a motion for summary judgment. The motion to dismiss only works if there is a clear defect of the case in the pleadings meaning that the plaintiff has not alleged enough to constitute an actionable case. A motion for summary judgment works if the undisputed facts (ascertained via discovery) do constitute an actionable case (a reasonable jury wouldn’t find for the plaintiff). If the facts aren’t in dispute and the law, based upon the undisputed facts means there is no case, you win the summary judgment motion. The motion to dismiss can be attempted immediately and could get rid of some or all of the claims. The motion for summary judgment occurs months into the case.

@grislybutter Sorry for your experience but that is the way things unfortunately are. My later practice focused on litigation in the probate court (meaning guardianships, conservatorships, probate but I also did undue influence cases and prosecuted exploiters of the elderly) but I worked in tort area before. I found that lawyers were too expensive and the process always too slow. Judges seem to continue to want to be "hands off" cases until or unless it came to trial. A good 90% of cases resolved prior to trial and that process could be sped up if the Judge took a hands on approach and culled things down. But the courts are the playthings of the rich who can use the process to delay, harass and intimidate people. I went out on my own for my last 21 years of practice in order to hold down my costs and my fees but I was almost alone with that philosophy with other lawyers and judges.

I think as long as the reviewer makes it clear the evaluation is strictly his professional opinion and anyone thinking about getting that product should do a side by side comparison at a brick and mortar store before dropping dollars. Its ok, and needed. I personally heard a $50k pair of speakers that did not hold a chance against my DYI, or Mid level Paradyne, Klipsch horns, JBL Floor standers. When manufacturers sue reviewers for having an honest opinion, then 1st amendment needs to be upheld. If a manufacturer is not making a competitive product for the cost, then someone needs to sound off without fear of a law suit.

@dz13 I once was cheated out of 20K in a real estate transaction and I soon found out that if I don't have another 20K to lose/give to lawyers, it's all good money after bad. Something wrong with that picture/system. Just like small claims court, you can win and then fold paper planes from the judge's order.

Very simply philosophy…MY EGO at any cost!  Tekton is finding out it don’t come cheap as the never Tektoners multiply.  Sooo unnecessary. 

The irony of this self-inflicted wound for Tekton is that the original ASR review was in October 2023. It had gone dormant at 8 pages over just a few weeks, still within that month. Things didn’t start up again until Eric inserted himself into the discussion in February 2024, outraged at a so-so review instead of a glowing one. His threats of litigation followed shortly afterward which did nothing except throw gasoline and a lit match on the thread. The ASR thread is now approaching 100 pages with over 1,900 posts and has spread to a number of other audio web sites (including this one....)

A master class for business owners in how not to handle a so-so review.

Business 101:

A 5% increase in customer loyality doubles the lifetime return on investment.

So, what is the real cost of alienating 10%, 20% or 30% of your potential customer base?

Probably not a good business decision to (intentionally) broadcast negative PR about yourself?

@gents ,

Well said.

Going forward, let Tekton and it’s big, bad mouthpiece suffer the consequence of being a thin skinned bully in a business that relies upon listener reviews and word of mouth opinion. Bigger and better makers with more money in the game suffered bad reviews on product they nursed & brought to a fickle hit or miss market.

And in a world full of really good speakers, I can easily avoid their typically unattractive offerings- for both the aesthetics and now the whiney litigiousness.

@dz13 wrote: "Any such case filed against Erin would be dismissed long before any trial."

First, thank you for taking the time to share your knowledge of how these things play out.

My understanding is that Erin does not live in an anti-SLAPP state.

I realize this question may not be answerable, but here goes:

If Eric DOES file suit, can you guesstimate a ballpark range for how much it would cost Erin to defend the suit to the point where a judge would dismiss it?

Here is what comes to mind: IF Eric has a lawyer friend willing to take the case despite its apparent lack of merit (and Eric has bragged about having lawyer friends in a recent but now-deleted YouTube video), and/or IF Eric has deep pockets, it seems to me that he could still theoretically "win" by putting Erin in a position where the only course of action Erin can financially afford is to comply with Eric’s demands in return for Eric dropping the lawsuit.

(I think Erin could probably crowdfund his defense, but I'm still curious.)

Please correct any misconceptions you see.

Thanks!

Just my two cents with the caveat that I am a lawyer, recently retired, but I did previous work in tort areas so I understand the law of defamation (slander, libel, slander per se and libel per se). The important things to know about defamation are that (1) if it involves a public figure, it is significantly harder to prove, (2) defamation only involves claims of provable or disprovable facts -- opinions no matter how thinly stated are not defamation as long as they are not based upon provable or disprovable facts (for example saying you hate something is not defamation unless you say you hate it because of a specific provable or disprovable fact), and (3) truth is always an absolute defense. 

I'm glad that @james633 posted the follow up video and I'm late to this party but I watched most of that video and think this is a lot to do about almost nothing. 

No litigation has been initiated as far as I know and Erin was having a cow due to the threats because he is a normal human being and didn't expect that kind of reaction to a generally positive review. Erik overreacted and acted like a bully/jerk for no real reason that I can see. He also impliedly blamed Erin for loss of sales probably without any kind of proof but just using it as a threat. 

Certainly Erik could have reached out civilly to Erin and discussed any suggestions or concerns he had and it appears Erin would have taken such communication seriously. Instead, Erik has created an uproar and cast himself in a negative light. 

There is no real defamation case that I can see (and even cases with good proof of defamation are usually not good cases unless they involve outrageous conduct -- see recent news on those types of cases). Even if Erik could show different measurement results, Erin's results, if not faked, are provable facts and therefore truth -- absolute defense. Any such case filed against Erin would be dismissed long before any trial. If filed in an anti-SLAPP state, attorney's fees would be awarded but hopefully Erik was just making an empty threat. 

I hope this all just simmers down and the YouTubers see there was really no real threat to their livelihood.  

Erik has no business being the spokesperson for tekton. He should let someone else do it and stay off social media indef.  he should just say his reaction was emotional then just  go away, 

Actually, I think that this whole thing started as a misunderstanding.

The speakers were initially reviewed without feet, leaving four small holes in the cabinet bottom and the tester said that he saw an anomoly in the impedience curve. I don’t know that he originally shared his curve, but what it was was a tiny lump in a portion of the curve where it really doesn’t even matter.

He reported the anomoly and the mfg suggested that he needed to put the feet on to get rid of the shift in the curve.

BUT, I think that they were talking about two completely different thngs!

The feet were installed and the reviewer did infact notice a shift in the impedience curve, just as the mfg said there should be. But, this was not the same shift of which the reviewer was commenting on, and infact, he never even noted this shift due to the lack of feet.  Also, the reviewer and mfg never did agree on what frequency the shift was occuring at.

The reviewer attributed this miniscule bump to an enclosure resonance to which the mfg took offence.

The reviewer then retested the speakers this time also turning them upside down and noted that when turned over, the miniscule bump was now gone, and this is evidence of the top panel being resonant because the weight of the speaker dampened the panel resonance.

But when I look at his data, even upside down, I still see the bump, though it is slightly flatter and broader.

If the reviewer really thought it was a cabinet resonance on the top panel, he should have laid a towel on it and put a cinder block on top of that to dampen this resonance and checked again. For all we know, an interior piece of insulation hangs in a different orientation in the upside down test causing this slight difference.

From another review last October:

As of this date, April 11, 2024, despite promising otherwise, company has NOT provided any measurements of any kind for this speaker. I have repeatedly asked Eric Alexander, company founder and designer, both in emails and in this thread to do so but he has refused. Yet, he has demanded that I delete the review or he would litigate against me and ask for damages. Until such time that he proves with measurements that he has a case, this review will stand.

Bad review? Sue sue sue!

@wesheadley I think we all sometimes jump into conclusion. However, not all admit it, unlike yourself 👍.

“Alexander has dropped the Mother Of All Bombs on this situation, displaying disrespect towards the reviewing industry, and regarding reviewers as trivial annoyances that can be easily brushed aside..”

source: Tekton debacle

As someone who writes the occasional online product review and doesn’t get paid, I want to retain my rights to freedom of expression, without fear that some bully will try to suppress my speech with the threat of litigation. As long as I remain respectful, and present my opinion truthfully and accurately and without malicious intent, I should be free to say what I please to whomever I please.

You're right guys! I didn't read the whole thread. After learning that they were set up wrong, missing feet and holes in the bottom, I ASSUMED that there was a request and a refusal to remeasure based upon the Audioholics video. My bad!

After hearing Erin experience i must concur with grislybutter...

😊

@wesheadley you analogy is way off and misses pretty much everything in what went down. I suggest you watch Erin’s second review. This is NOT what happened at all.

Tekton lost business because of his bullying and continued threats. Which did not start now, he has been throwing the ketchup bottle at the wall here too way before the Erin review. He may be good at speaker design but not at PR (big word for don’t be a bully)

Well, from digging into the Tekton review dispute I found that this was essentially the case with Erin’s review.

@wesheadley No, it’s not the same case at all.  Not even close.  Go back and read the string of emails between Eric and Erin as apparently you haven’t, and look at Erin’s follow up review with the feet properly installed and where the results of both measurements and his subjective findings were basically identical to his initial review, which was not negative in the first place BTW.  Your car analogy couldn’t be further from what’s transpired here and is completely off base.

@wesheadley It appears that you did not follow all the facts presented by both parties involved and do make comparison that fits the discussed situation like an elephant fits into mini cooper. 

Look, if you were the maker of a sports car, and I was reviewer of that car, and I did some road tests with the tires grossly underinflated, with the emergency brake left on while I was driving it, and the test tracks that I used to test it were meant for testing four wheel drive trucks over uneven terrain-- and I ended up writing a scathingly bad review of said sports car-- would the manufacturer of that vehicle have a decent claim that my measurements, taken as they were, were a disparagement of that car brand? You’re damn straight they would.

Now add to this that said car maker came to me and said that the manner in which I reviewed their car was wrong for the type of vehicle I was reviewing and gave me a chance to review the car again with properly inflated tires on a track built for sports car testing-- and I flat out refused -- would that be grounds to take me to court?

Well, from digging into the Tekton review dispute I found that this was essentially the case with Erin’s review. The legal action got both parties back to the table and those speakers will now be remeasured after they are properly setup.

So this is not a case of frivolous lawsuit against a review that some manufacturer didn’t like-- it was about a faulty review that would have harmed the maker’s reputation (such as it is) and likely caused some financial harm to the company.

You want to review products? Then at least set them up properly BEFORE taking your measurements and review them within the context for which they are designed. That is what is called being a pro vs. being a clickbait addicted hack.

Where's @millercarbon when you need hm? I guess contrary to popular opinion all publicity is good publicity. Are you allowed to say they are super ugly? 

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!

No Eric shot himself in BOTH feet! Sad but I predict Tekton will be no more by years end. 😔   Hope he can survive.

I have no love for Amirm or his schick, but Eric is losing more business because of this and what’s going on with Erin’s Corner.  Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!

I like it when manufactures like atmosphere comment they are very bright and have years of experience in development. There are many discussions on this forum about room treatments and sound interfearance.there are many reasons as atmosphere has explained. You must listen yourself.i talked to one of the top mcintosh dealers yesterday who said it's all subjective,sound beauty ect .enjoy the music.

I heard from some enthusiasts that Tekton speakers were good and followed the reviews on them. I found a small pair of prototype Tektons in a vintage audio store and liked them. I emailed the owner and asked what they were and he ignored  query. That was the end of Tekton for me. 

Tekton released a video saying he wasn't suing. 

Life is too short. 

Around the same time as the last "big Tekton shill"on this site was about the time I heard a pair of their speakers. We pulled a speaker out of the cabinet and look at the bracing and what was inside..I knew then I wanted no part of ownership .Now after reading the 2 post on the speaker section involving Tekton I realize it was a righteous decision on my part.I never could get past the last time when the owner threatened fellow users on this site with legal action ,so atleast he's consistent.....I never liked the looks,the build,the technology,the fact you can't hear them anywhere to decide if they are actually worthy of dropping hard earned money on..Every time someone defends this brand it's normally "a good speaker for the money".I think that mindset sums it up..

I wish someone would do legal action against me (I could use the notoriety, new Subscribers, and "likes") 🤣

Oh wait...the expression "be careful what you wish for" comes to mind (scratch my 1st sentence).

Once in a while I’ll call out YouTuber’s on their pure and obvious Bullshit (only Canadian reviewers - my ex Home and ex Native Land).

I don’t take my Channel seriously and it’s there to provide a good laugh and sometimes "food for thought".

I’ve met Erin and I understand where he’s coming from. His Bose 901 Video is where I got to know his Channel. It was a fair and honest technical review. And he even admitted liking them for what they do.

Cheers,

Joey G (Time Well Wasted) 😀

Bought Many components based on Herb's (stereophile) reviews. Have not once been disappointed. He reviews from the heart, tells you what he heard. Best writer/reviewer there is, since Art passed on.

Speaker owner (Erik, Tekton) posted his response saying he's not "suing", but mentioned "litigation" multiple times ... you make up your own mind.

Erin - the reviewer - actually gave a decent review of the Tekton speaker lent to him by a viewer. For those who don't know, Erin does a two-pronged approach. 1 - he uses objective measurements in his pseudo-anechoic chamber and Klippel machine. 2 - he follows that up with his own subjective opinions about how the speakers sound and perform. I like this approach.

The viewer didn't provide the feet. Erin has since done a second video with the feet which you all can look up. Many others have also mentioned how Tekton basically has these holes for the feet drilled up into the cabinet which leaves holes in the cabinets. Anyway, lots of stuff still going on, but this could have easily been handled with a discussion between the two instead of Erik jumping to "litigation". As others have mentioned in this thread, Erik has done this before to Amir at ASR and maybe to others (not sure) ... seems to be a pattern.

Erik historically hasn't provided measurements, but says going forward he will. Ok, one way to address it, but why couldn't he have just talked it over with Erin and then they could publicly show results of re-testing and discussion. Would have worked out for both, but now many, including myself, want nothing to do with Tekton.

looks like Eric's 2 videos are back on YouTube...

@jl35 "I can no longer find the Tekton YouTube video where Eric states " I didn’t sue anyone" ...it was the beginning of a long response..."

The video has been reposted on ASR in the thread where this whole debacle started (page 81.)  We'll see if it stays up there, but I could see "someone" objecting and complaining about copyright infringement or such.

@nonoise :)