Weatherby nation saved me money!

[PARA45]

DW, I'll have to agree with you.  I recently watch The Western Hunter show, and the publisher of some magazine was hunting in Colorado public land.   The 1/2 hr show was of his 5 day hunt in the mountains of Colorado, and even though he did see deer, he was never able to get a shot on a deer.  The show ended with him going home empty handed, but he did say that he didn't considered going home empty handed a failure.   I thought it was a good show, and I don't personally mind seeing these guys not get a deer.  It happens, and it's a fact of life.  The other Yahoos who all the time end up shooting monster bucks, doesn't do it for me. 

[danno50]

I don't have much use for the vast majority of the writters and even less respect for them because their loyalty is to the money and not the reader.    Thanks Chris.

The following is an excerpt from an article written in February of 2017 by Richard A. Mann of Gun Digest Magazine in a sort of "defense of gun writers and advertising". In 2014 he and other gun writers gave the Rem. R51 impressive reviews, but when the pistol went public, it failed.( it sounds like telling untruths or giving "partial" info. is normal and everyone does it.)
Excerpt and link below:

"By not announcing a reliability recall immediately, Remington left consumers to speculate that trusted firearms journalists had deceived them. Several loyal readers contacted me wondering how I could endorse a pistol with so many problems. My only defense was that I could only report on the pistol I’d received. Incidentally, my R51 review occurred only a few weeks after my clairvoyant powers had left me. When I tested the R51, I had no way of knowing what was to come.

As for lying gun writers and gun magazines, which are allegedly bought and paid for by advertisers, this is patently false. As in any profession, I know charlatans exist in mine. Might some writers lie on occasion, or even more often? Without question. Your loved ones lie to you too; dishonesty is an unpleasant fact of life. However, given the editorial checks and balances in print publications, I’m sure lying occurs on the Internet at a higher frequency. I know this because I’ve worked in both venues for more than a decade. Something that occurs even more often are gun writers refusing to report on products that just plain suck.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/02/14/gun-test-remington-r51-gen-2/

[Chris338378]

I don't have much use for the vast majority of the writters and even less respect for them because their loyalty is to the money and not the reader.    Thanks Chris.



As for lying gun writers and gun magazines, which are allegedly bought and paid for by advertisers, this is patently false. As in any profession, I know charlatans exist in mine. Might some writers lie on occasion, or even more often? Without question. Your loved ones lie to you too; dishonesty is an unpleasant fact of life. However, given the editorial checks and balances in print publications, I’m sure lying occurs on the Internet at a higher frequency. I know this because I’ve worked in both venues for more than a decade. Something that occurs even more often are gun writers refusing to report on products that just plain suck.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/02/14/gun-test-remington-r51-gen-2/

I rate that right up with campaign promises from politicians.  I'll even take that a step further by saying if this isn't true why does it seem like the vast majority of the product tests happen with stuff that most people will never buy because they're way out of their budget.  A perfect example of this is is when they review $2,000 plus scopes, $800 fishing reels, and $1,000 fishing rods.  Yeah they'd be nice to have and use but realistically not every one of could justify spending that much money on whatever it is or manage to sleep with one eye open forever if the wife finds out.  LOL