[AMRadio] Followup on IARU bandplan


Peter Markavage manualman at juno.com
Tue Oct 23 01:42:46 EDT 2007


Seems to me these types of advertisements were quite popular back in the
50's and 60's. I remember National, Hallicrafters, and several other
manufacturers using this type of ad in QST, CQ, and 73 mags. It clearly
states at the bottom that it's an advertisement. What's the big deal?
Next, are we going to pound them for all those past April Fool articles
misleading readers? How about the glossy paper; sometimes difficult to
see the text (eye strain) when you have a lamp directly pointed at it.

Pete, wa2cwa

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 23:45:21 EDT SBJohnston at aol.com writes:
> 
> I wonder how many people noticed the "fake article" advertisement in 
> a recent 
> QST...  here's a recent discussions about it...
> 
> - - - - - - - -
> Good Morning -
> 
> On page 29 of the October, 2007, QST, I was disappointed to see a 
> Kenwood advertisement deliberately made to appear to be a QST 
> feature 
> article.  The layout, font choices, even the use of a large, colored 
> 
> drop-cap character at the start of the story - all were aimed at 
> misleading the reader into thinking the page is a QST article rather 
> 
> than an advertisement.
> 
> This old trick is unworthy of QST.
> 
> Steve WD8DAS
> - - - - - - - -
> 
> To which Debra Jahnke of QST responded:
> 
> >I am sorry that you were unhappy with the Kenwood advertorial. 
> >As you know, an advertorial is an advertisement designed to 
> >simulate editorial content, while at the same time offering valid 
> >information to prospective buyers, and is an accepted advertising
> >practice. Our internal rules dictate the company uses their full 
> >logo and their contact information in addition to the word 
> >“Advertising” on the page. Most mainstream magazine 
> >advertorial rules are not as stringent.  
> 
> That is fine for mainstream magazines.  But  QST has more at stake 
> as the 
> journal of the ARRL.  Over the years extensive efforts have been 
> made to ensure 
> fairness and truth in the reviews of amateur equipment in QST, 
> hopefully 
> unbiased by corporate pressure or propaganda,  and this sort of 
> deliberately 
> misleading advertising un-does all that work.  It introduces a 
> question in the mind 
> of the members and readers:  "Is this article or review really 
> unbiased?"  Or, 
> "is it just a paid advertisement or press release piece?"
> 
> >However, you are certainly entitled to your opinion regarding 
> >this form of advertising 
> 
> Actually, as a long-time member of the ARRL I hope I am entitled to 
> a bit 
> more than just my opinion.  -grin-  I expect my views to be 
> considered in the 
> policies of the league and its publications.
> 
> Thanks for your response...
> 
> Steve Johnston, WD8DAS


More information about the AMRadio mailing list

This page last updated 23 Oct 2017.