So It Was Just Another Dirty Con Trick...
News2 mins ago
Never send an amateur ....
103 Answers
to do a professional's job!
http://
I'm off to Derby tonight to interview Paul, and to review his show for Acoustic Magazine
Must listen out for that Ace Frehley classic .....!!!!!
http://
I'm off to Derby tonight to interview Paul, and to review his show for Acoustic Magazine
Must listen out for that Ace Frehley classic .....!!!!!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by andy-hughes. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Oh dear - that's me told then!
I may make mistakes - we all do, that's why they put rubbers on the end of pencils - but if they were as basic as confusing Ace with Ace Frehley, I would not remain in employment for very long.
Not being paid is no escuse for sloppy journalism - if you are going to write for others to read, you have to aquire the basic standards of your craft.
I may make mistakes - we all do, that's why they put rubbers on the end of pencils - but if they were as basic as confusing Ace with Ace Frehley, I would not remain in employment for very long.
Not being paid is no escuse for sloppy journalism - if you are going to write for others to read, you have to aquire the basic standards of your craft.
Andy's quite right. It seems not only that an amateur writer made a silly mistake, but also that nobody else bothered to check it before publication. The Gear Review editor has made himself look lazy. Only this thread has woken him up.
Nox is correct to say that anyone can post anything they like; that's what the internet is for. But if your website is sloppy, why would anyone bother to read it? Does the editor care? Or is he more concerned to issue threats of revenge?
His claim that the site is run by volunteers simply proves Andy's point: if you want good results, that people will be prepared to trust, get professionals.
Nox is correct to say that anyone can post anything they like; that's what the internet is for. But if your website is sloppy, why would anyone bother to read it? Does the editor care? Or is he more concerned to issue threats of revenge?
His claim that the site is run by volunteers simply proves Andy's point: if you want good results, that people will be prepared to trust, get professionals.
Thanks jno.
I really did not dream for a moment that the editor of the site would see my post - i would not have written it if i had thought so.
It just made me smile that such a howling error was added to a piece, and as you say, it adds to my argument that non-paid amateurs will never be as good as people who have experience and do what they do well because they are appropriately rewarded.
My main beef wtih wannabes is their ability to take fees from journalists who work full time - that occurs on four national music titles to my certain knowledgew, there are probably loads more.
I really did not dream for a moment that the editor of the site would see my post - i would not have written it if i had thought so.
It just made me smile that such a howling error was added to a piece, and as you say, it adds to my argument that non-paid amateurs will never be as good as people who have experience and do what they do well because they are appropriately rewarded.
My main beef wtih wannabes is their ability to take fees from journalists who work full time - that occurs on four national music titles to my certain knowledgew, there are probably loads more.
jno
The Gear Review editor has made himself look lazy. Only this thread has woken him up.
His claim that the site is run by volunteers simply proves Andy's point: if you want good results, that people will be prepared to trust, get professionals.
Has the Answerbank editor not been 'pulled up' on mistakes on a few occasions?
We all make mistakes...it's human nature.
The Gear Review editor has made himself look lazy. Only this thread has woken him up.
His claim that the site is run by volunteers simply proves Andy's point: if you want good results, that people will be prepared to trust, get professionals.
Has the Answerbank editor not been 'pulled up' on mistakes on a few occasions?
We all make mistakes...it's human nature.
andy, you had every right to write about the review. As you said before, it's been published for all to see, why shouldn't anyone else comment on it - adversely, if it deserves it? The editor seems rather thin-skinned. He's welcome to produce his website as a labour of love if he wants, but the minute he makes it public he lays himself open to public comment, and that's what he got.
At least he made the correction - but only because of your intervention.
The pros do make mistakes, of course. A friend of mine once reviewed a gig by a well known band for a national paper - it read fine, except that because of a brainfart the size of Wales, he got the name of the band completely wrong. Consequently, he never got another reviewing commission from that paper. That's what happens to pros who screw up, and it's why they seldom do so. Amateurs on the other hand can get away with murder.
(I won't name the band, because the poor guy's grovelling apology is still online, haunting him 20 years later.)
At least he made the correction - but only because of your intervention.
The pros do make mistakes, of course. A friend of mine once reviewed a gig by a well known band for a national paper - it read fine, except that because of a brainfart the size of Wales, he got the name of the band completely wrong. Consequently, he never got another reviewing commission from that paper. That's what happens to pros who screw up, and it's why they seldom do so. Amateurs on the other hand can get away with murder.
(I won't name the band, because the poor guy's grovelling apology is still online, haunting him 20 years later.)
Yeah, but as a professionally, if you're going to have a whine about something then be more professional about it. Andy saying he'd never have posted this if he thought it would be seen just makes it a bit bitch IMO.
Also, I remember some of Ed's errors being highlighted. I'm sure if you go through suggestions you'd find the threads. CBA to do that myself.
Also, I remember some of Ed's errors being highlighted. I'm sure if you go through suggestions you'd find the threads. CBA to do that myself.
Evianbaby - it wasn't a 'whine' it was a smile - nothing more, but with a serious undertone as i outlined.
I would never upbraid a a writer I did not know, which is why I would not have done so on here had i thought it would be read by those concerned. I am sure my writing is pulled to pieces on a regular basis, but as the mags i write for don't tend to publish letters of that type, I never know about them - but i am certainly big enough to take criticism when it is offered - as i said, part of the job.
i once wrote a scathing review of a Bon Jovi gig for an American magazine, and got sackfulls of mail sent to the Ed calling me everything under the sun - which is fine, but i would have been far more upset if someone had found a factual error because I take the time and trouble to write accurately, which is part of what I am paid to do - and that was my point entirely.
Non-proffesional fans who write 'for the love of the music' not only make mistakes and provide sloppy writing styles, they take work from professsional writers, and that i do have a problem with.
I would never upbraid a a writer I did not know, which is why I would not have done so on here had i thought it would be read by those concerned. I am sure my writing is pulled to pieces on a regular basis, but as the mags i write for don't tend to publish letters of that type, I never know about them - but i am certainly big enough to take criticism when it is offered - as i said, part of the job.
i once wrote a scathing review of a Bon Jovi gig for an American magazine, and got sackfulls of mail sent to the Ed calling me everything under the sun - which is fine, but i would have been far more upset if someone had found a factual error because I take the time and trouble to write accurately, which is part of what I am paid to do - and that was my point entirely.
Non-proffesional fans who write 'for the love of the music' not only make mistakes and provide sloppy writing styles, they take work from professsional writers, and that i do have a problem with.
// Non-proffesional fans who write 'for the love of the music' not only make mistakes and provide sloppy writing styles, they take work from professsional writers, and that i do have a problem with. //
I think that's just tough luck for professional writers andy. It's the nature of the internet. Anyone can write an article, publish music, make a video, create a blog and distribute them worldwide - it's generally seen as a good and liberating thing.
It's changing lots of industries, not just publishing.
I think that's just tough luck for professional writers andy. It's the nature of the internet. Anyone can write an article, publish music, make a video, create a blog and distribute them worldwide - it's generally seen as a good and liberating thing.
It's changing lots of industries, not just publishing.
ludwig - you, and I am happy to say I, are in the fortunate position of not being majorly affected by this state of affairs, you i suggest not at all, me somewhat but i do have enough paid work as a writer, but given the opportunity, i would be a full-time writer, something denied by the 'freebie' system.
I suggest there would be far more of an outcry if non-paid individuals sert themselves up as accountants, or estate agents, or solicitors!
I suggest there would be far more of an outcry if non-paid individuals sert themselves up as accountants, or estate agents, or solicitors!
