Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters How NOT to treat a writer

FWIW to curious readers, let me tell you about a few examples of how not to treat a gun-writer � not this one, at least.

For a good many years, I've enjoyed the respectful courtesy of the manufacturers and importers of guns and closely related accessories. I've bought a number of the products that I've written about, usually at the "friendly" price, and I've been given very few "freebies" � which I've never expected or asked for.

� A few years ago, a sales executive from the importer of a well known and excellent line of products (which I happen to be a long-time fan of) asked an industry friend of mine to nominate a writer who could help his company publicize their new model of a certain especially fine product. My friend highly recommended me. The sales exec, a stranger to me, heartily approved the nomination and said that he'd like very much to talk with me. My friend told me, and I immediately called the exec and offered my help � specifically to buy the product, to use it extensively, and to devote a chapter to it in each of several books, to write a magazine article about it, and (for no fee) to write and illustrate a promo booklet about it for the importer.

He approved heartily and referred me to the person who'd have to approve the acquisition. (I should mention that I know one writer who got one as a gift from that importer.) That person would not even consider giving me a discount � not even a little one � or to sell me one outright. I've bought one from an authorized dealer, at full retail price plus shipping and handling, because I know its quality and look forward to using it a lot for a long time.

� One of the books that I'm doing involves a project that would give a highly regarded American manufacturer-importer's certain product immeasurable positive advertising. I wrote the company's top squat � a couple of years ago � with details of the project and asked what I'd have to pay to buy one. That company gives production samples of its products to some writers like big fat licorice sticks, but I haven't even got an answer to my inquiry.

� A month or two ago, I wrote to the president � whom I know � of an American manufacturer of an especially good firearm, asking for the price of the model and caliber that I want to buy for my use (a) to enjoy and (b) to write about. No answer.

So I've concluded that these people don't care whether I write about their products or don't want me to. So I'll enjoy their products � bought on the retail market � but won't mention 'em in print or show 'em in any photographs in my books or articles.

Fair enough?

In the usual way that these arrangements work, the manufacturers and importers get a lot more from the top writers than the writers get from them. Well, not those from this one. My keyboard is now completely unable to enter their names into my prose, but my check records show 'em, so the deals are complete. No manufacturer or importer who cold-shoulders me is going to benefit from my exposure of his product. I'll enjoy it and benefit from it and so will my work and my readers. Period.

Seems fair enough to me.

Ken,

You seem more than fair on that. Personally, if I was in your position and I got cold shouldered, I wouldnt even let them benefit from the profit of me purchasing their product. And I wouldn't put it in print, but Id be maligning their company by mouth on a regular basis...though you couldn't malign the product if you didn't own it or never had used it, bad company-consumer relations is often enough to turn me away from even a great product.

How does the old saying go?

Please a customer and he'll tell ten people. Offend a customer and he'll tell everyone . <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Truer words have never been spoken!

In Ken's situation it sounds like the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing.

Sounds like, If they can't buy you, they don't want you...
Or, am I missing something?
By the way, If I were a writer, your way is my way.. No ifs ands, or buts.

Don

I'm not in the boycott business. Besides, even bad-mouthing is advertising, so I don't mention these twats' brand names in print in any way. And their products are superb, so bad-mouthing them would be lying. So I'm content to do my thing (including enjoying the use of their products) and get along quite well with plenty of other good stuff to write about.

As a consumer not familar with how these arrangements work, I have to ask, does receiving a product for review gratis or at a discount obligate the writer to write something favorable about a product? Would a negative but truthful review of a product make it into print under these arrangements? Would such a negative but truthful review impact the writer's ability to receive goods to review from same company or others in the future?

No.

[color:"brown"]Sounds to me like they lost a "mighty champion" for lack of a little common courtesy.

It's THEIR loss, Ken... not your's.


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

Ken,

I think there�s another perspective that should be considered. There�s a good chance that what might seem like a �cold shoulder� from a manufacturer is actually honest ignorance.

A plague of any industry are gifted loonies that are crappy businessmen. We see that all the time in the firearms world � a great gunsmith that�s clueless on how to get the word out, a designer that can�t manage his books, and maybe the most common - a successful garage shop that goes from quality to slop while trying to ramp up production to meet the increasing demand.

Large companies aren�t immune to this either. The folks that are actually designing and building products didn�t go to school to learn how to market and sell them and probably couldn�t care less except in an abstract way. Their focus is on the product and building it - selling the product doesn�t get them out of bed in the morning. Talk to them about business strategy and they nod their heads while thinking about tolerances and due dates.

No doubt, dealing with folks like that can be like beating your head against a wall. It�s frustrating to show someone a potential path to success only to have them fail to consider it, but business smarts and design smarts rarely reside in the same brain.

Answer from Ken:



And I absolutely believe him! To make it long term in Ken's business, I think you have to be honest and tell it like it is. "Being bought" might line your pockets for the short term, but will cheapen your opinions in the long run and thus negatively affect your career as a writer. I get tired of people accusing every writer of having an agenda, or being a "shill" for this product or that company. Writers, like all hunters and shooter, have their opinions, and if they favor a product or a company, it may be for the reasons Ken has stated...they put out a good product or offer a quality service. Simple as that!

Ken,

I�ve had much the same experiences. Just about three weeks ago, I contacted a manufacturer of an outstanding product and asked for a good price on one of their widgets. As soon as they learned that I was a writer, they seemed to get tunnel vision. At no time was I asking or even hinting at a freebie, just a good price. I had credit card in hand and was ready to buy. They responded with an e-mail that said if I didn�t have a magazine article assignment, they weren�t interested, but that if I did, they would send the product to me free of charge.

To make matters worse, I then logged onto their web site and ordered the product at the regular retail price�I mean, it�s a good product and I want one. My credit card hasn�t been billed yet and I haven�t received a product or heard a word. I kinda get the feeling that they�re not taking my order.

I have a friend who lives close to their factory, so I asked him to drop by and pick the product up for me. He did and I have it in my hot little hands.

So, if I was going to get them some free press, I could have it. But if not, I couldn�t even buy it�Howz that work?

Im learning something here...if you're a gun writer, and you wont take some companies' "pay off" then they wont let you buy their product at all? Is that really true?

I suspect that there are some in the gun industry who think that a freebie DOES obligate a writer to a glowing report, but if a writer is buying it with his own shekels, that he intends to bash the product.

I'm not sure how we convince bozos like that we writers do have a concept of integrity - that our word (in PRINT yet!) is indeed our bond.

The only thing that bothers me more is that there are some readers who remain convinced we're all on the take. One way to reverse that opinion would be to write mostly negative reviews - thereby spiting our faces with "nosectomies". Can't win, maybe.

Exactly. I gotta attribute a part of what happened to Ken to what you just mentioned JOG. Much of my life was spent working in the industrial world. Promotions where given to those who excelled in the area they worked in. But, no consideration was ever made as to whether or not the guy they promoted could handle the 'bigger" job.. Implicit with the "bigger" job is a sense of "marketing" for the company; being able to see when to act, such as in Ken's case, doing what's courteous. Many of these guys who were promoted don't have a clue about how to treat people, including their own employees.

Don

Just sent this e-mail to the gun-company president whom I mentioned above:

"****:

"Some little while back, I sent you a letter of inquiry.

"No answer.

"So I sent you an e-mail.

"No answer.

"So I conclude that you�re just not interested in having me buy a ******* ******** or writing about it.

"Fine.

"I won�t.

"Regards,

"Ken

"Ken Howell � Editor, Smokelore magazine
"Box 28
"Quemado, NM 87829
"505-773-4342"

I think that might get some ones attention.

JOG, DMB, in one case, I was dealing with an employee, albeit a high-echelon one. The completely unresponsive "contacts" are the other companies' presidents, one of whom knows me personally and has excellent past reason to remember me favorably. The other is the son and successor of a now-dead president of the other company, whom I knew and had a good relationship with.

If you're original letter of inquiry included the above, me thinks you were intentionally put on ignore, and not just lost in the shuffle. If I were a gun company/hunting or shooting sports company muckity muck, Id see to it you got some attention, even if it meant just selling you a product retail if you wouldn't take my offered discount/freebie. I cant phathom how they think ignoring you will keep their product out of your hands if you really want one, but surely can see how ignoring could lead to worst case, bad pub, and best case no good pub.

Color me <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> on why they'd treat a gun writer that way.

I gather you believe in the "there is no such thing as bad publicity" rule, which is why you wont write about them at all. If it were me, and I genuinelly liked their product, Id write that, AND also write how I were treated by the company in an effort to obtain the product. Not that you, Ken Howell, need to do it for credibility, but if I saw a writer write: "This company treated me like crap, I bought their product anyway and paid retail, I loved it and here's why...", Id have to believe that! Atleast then you give your readers some honest info to chew on about the product and the company. And you tell those like you who would buy this product in spite of your treatment about a good product, and also those like me that don't like to buy products, good or otherwise, from companies that do business that way. I do understand your reasons for not calling their name...not being in "the writing/marketing biz" I know you know more than I about it and probably yours is the best way. So, I guess Im just stating what I'd like to know about the product and the company. I also would wager if you wrote an article like that, you'd certainly hear from the company in short order.

Apparently I'm missing something here. Set aside for the moment the fact that magazine articles are primarily intended to get people to read the magazine so they will buy products from the magazine advertisers.
Now let's assume that the pupose of an article about a product is to be helpful to the reader concerning the value of that product. Further assume that a particular product is useful, but if the maker won't "play ball" to the writer's standard, the reader will not have the information he would have had regarding something he might need because of fit of pique by the writer. So after all this talk of writer's ethics, the reader's need to know means nothing compared to the maker doing business in a way that meets the writer's "standard." Is this really what you meant to say? If your ultimate goal is to give useful information to your reader, this is, IMHO, indefensible and would disqualify one from having an ethical journalist standard.

This certainly gives ammunition to those who are suspicious of all "gun writer's" objectivity. (Not me, I figure I can usually tell who's BSing and who isn't. And some definitely are. Some definitely aren't.)

I sincerely hope you didn't mean what it sounds like.

t