Tested?

[ParaHandy]

The “Yachting Monthly TESTED” in May’s edition would, one could reasonably expect, be a thorough test of 8 VHF DSC sets. Well, not quite. Breaking the news gently, the reader was informed, firstly, that the “test” was an evaluation which then became a “review” of how one pushes a button and twiddles a knob (their words). It was at least honest by the time you got to this point in the article. It would seem that the more important question whether any of them actually work was left for another day.

But every “test” that YM do is like this. In a previous edition, a hand-held anemometer costing £300 was “tested” but nowhere in the narrative was it mentioned that the device actually worked. It can’t be that difficult, surely?

The practical magazine, PBO, would one assume have asked such practical questions? Not a bit of it. In the March edition, they “TESTED” six Navtex sets which, in the inside cover, was now described as “a look at”. And so it was. The summary asked two questions: which would you buy if money was no object and which would you buy if it were your own money. It is apparently irrelevant whether they work.

Last year I purchased a radar set. I got back copies of PBO & YM tests and a small article from MBM. The PBO & YM tests added nothing to the manufacturers glossy. The MBM article, written by a reader, subsequently proved to be invaluable. The best test and the one on which I based my purchase on was an internet article from an American sailing magazine of a group test. They set up a simple test to determine range and discrimination and reported the results which proved, inter alia, that you get what you pay for.

These YM & PBO tests are a farce. You’re (IPC) either more scared of offending your advertisers than being informative and are just a conduit for PR material or are incapable. Meanwhile, this reflects badly on your other activities such as boat tests which are imho reasonable.

 

[dickh]

Yes, I agree, I also was interested in the 'DSC' VHF issue, until I browsed through it in the newsagents and decided it didn't tell me anymore than I knew - so I didn't buy it. Ditto for the Navtex article earlier.

 

[Guest]

Unfortunately, this happens in most magazines and not just within the marine industry. Some years ago I had an interesting post attached to the French Government which made me a target of the various French print media groups. In this instance they were offering me over the ten year period in which I enjoyed this privilage, foreign trips to some of the worlds most beautiful spots with small groups of their main advertisers from industries like: perfume, luxury goods, cars, champagne etc., The revenue the glossy magazines generated kept these mags in business. They would never say "boo to a goose" for fear of losing its main clients.

IPC is no different, except that we here, as a Forum, can make or break the sale of a so called "tested" item. The power of a bad report can have serious ramifications for a manufacturer and I would like to propose that the number of users of this Forum from around the Globe stand united and offer their opinions on a piece of equipment that has come to our attention from a farcical test. We can be judge, jury and executioner of both the tested product and the media for not giving an honest opinion of a product "tested" for fear of losing advertising revenue. There is a fierce war amongst the printed media for the manufactures advertising budget. If we are the potential purchasers of the products that are being marketed, then we certainly can use the Forum to market our own views based on real life useage or experience.

The common thread from all the Forums within YBW is boating in its different guises. Therefore, the least that YBW can do is open up another Forum for readers' own reports of the products tested an so on. Afterall, each time you follow the link to, for example, PBO, YM etc., you come back to YBW.

Stand up and be counted or use your feet to log off the Forums, never to return to the site!

Responses on a PC to "The Right for a Fair Test" coming to a Forum near you soon!

 

[billmacfarlane]

Totally agree. Why don't we have an equipment forum where we can put our comments and results of our own evaluation of the marine gear we use on our boats. Lest YM think it a moan/whinge forum , there will be both good AND bad on it. Rather have the forum based on a headline or comment , the forum could have a headline that is simply the name of the piece of kit and under it people can put things like problems with the kit , sales support , ease of use , ease of installation , where bought and what price paid , support documantation etc. The advantages of such a forum are that any specific problem with a piece of kit could possibly be highlighted and brought to a manufacturers notice , a user looking for a particular piece of kit can have a look at the forum and get an honest opinion of the kit , good or bad , if a particular piece of kit is complicated or fairly involved to use users can help each other. In a way it happens already on these forums when a person will ask for info re a product but I think it would be better the other way round and have a forum dedicated to marine hardware. Would YM sanction such a forum ? Dunno . What you think guys ?

 

[billmacfarlane]

PS

Just thought of another advantage. The boatymags look at a new product , not something that has been used and tested over a period of time e.g one sailing season. On a hardware forum we could put comments about reliability over a whole season. The one thing that springs to mind her is oilskins. The best test for oilskins is a couple of seasons hard use , not some inane comments re colour , design etc.

 

[vyv_cox]

Absolutely agree. Last month's PBO had a headline title on the front cover "Broad and Beamy". The article began with an explanation of the way in which stability is affected by beam and how broad beam can give an artificial stability that is lost in rough conditions. It went on to say that it would test this on a boat known for its wide beam and relatively flat form. So what did they do? They tested in a force 3!! and reached no conclusion.

There is no excuse for this. Strong winds occur quite frequently in UK and it is surely no problem to wait a week or two until conditions are right. Particularly for a subject that attracts such interest from the boat owning/purchasing public.

 

[webcraft]

Excellent idea - but it will be interesting to see what YBW have to say - they may be too worried about upsetting actual or potential advertisers.

- Nick

BlueMoment.Com
http://www.bluemoment.com

 

[ParaHandy]

I think you would agree that prevention is better than cure. If a manufacturer knew that his/her product might be subject to a more searching examination than is given currently, then one would surmise that products reaching the market would improve. Under those circumstances the magazines should have no problem with Bill's idea. It reinforces their own ethic. But where there is no such critical appraisal or culture, the publication has no choice but to bend to your (webcraft's) argument.

The second argument is that readers would be ill advised to make a purchase decision based upon the evidence presented. Many, may well not do so. Net result is a loss to all parties.

 

[Guest]

You are all absolutely right about the fear of upsetting advertisers - there have been cases in the past where lucrative accounts have been lost because of unfriendly product reviews, tests or whatever.
And does anyone remember the Walker Wingsail v Yachting World case? It involved such high powered, and highly costed, persons in court such as the late George Carman QC. Enough to make any reviewer wary. Beware all you who would like to run your own "honest" tests for a forum

 

[ParaHandy]

There is nothing libellous in Bill reporting, say, that the colour has faded in a one year old oilie. That is not subjective opinion but objective. The law allows you to report on what is true or comment on a fact based on truth. Bill's suggestion is worth reading carefully imho.

 

[billmacfarlane]

If I say for example that I bought a Raymarine ST60 , and after 3 months the paddle wheel transducer packed up , had to be replaced and Raymarine took 3 weeks to send me a new one , then that isn't libellous but it might be useful information for someone who is looking to buy a log. Bit if I say that the service from Raymarine is simply crap , and don't qualify it with fact , then that might be libellous. I'm only talking theoretically of course , but you get my drift.