Impartiality of editorial v. advertising on the Luminous Landscape site

[David Watson]

Well, at least you now accept that LuLa doesn't have to behave like a newspaper...the problem I see is you have an agenda about your perception that Mike is anti-Hasselblad which actually I dispute. Mike would LOVE to love Hasselblad in fact used to love Hasselblad until Christian Poulsen decided to close the system.

I'm still pissed that Hasselblad closed their system because about that same time, Imacon/Hasselblad also quit supporting DNG as an option in their backs. They HAD it in the backs and a firmware update removed DNG as an option...they "claimed" it was because DNG was deficient even though they never even tried to talk to Thomas Knoll about support for their lens data inside of DNG–which of course, DNG can now support but Hasselblad has not returned to offer DNG as an option.

So far, other than getting rid of Christian, Hasselblad hasn't changed. Which is why Mike bought a Phase One and so did I. What, you want us to NOT use our equipment? Should Mike NOT write about Phase One?

You saw Mike's response up–thread. What part of that don't you understand or believe?

Not at all - what you guys use and talk about is your affair.  I would just like to see an end to the being pissed off with Hasselblad thing.  Christian is history, life is too short and the large number of ongoing Hasselblad users out their would, I am sure, love to hear Michael's  opinions of their equipment without going over old ground again.

[Schewe]

I would just like to see an end to the being pissed off with Hasselblad thing.

Why? Has Hasselblad changed? As long as the situation remains the same, the reasons for being pissed off remain. Exactly how do you get un-pissed off if no change occurs? Heck, I've sold all my 'Blad equipment, there's really no going back for me.

So, it seems that you're still sticking to your personal agenda...at least you let LuLa off the hook for being held to the same journalistic requirements as a newspaper. Mike has indicated a willingness to try a Hasselblad again. Maybe Hasselblad will take notice and make that happen. If the company doesn't, are you suggesting Mike buy a Hasselbald on his own? I think we've already covered that ground, right?

LuLa is under no obligation to be anything other that what it has been...a source of useful information if it fits your needs. If not, move on.

[David Watson]

Why? Has Hasselblad changed? As long as the situation remains the same, the reasons for being pissed off remain. Exactly how do you get un-pissed off if no change occurs? Heck, I've sold all my 'Blad equipment, there's really no going back for me.

So, it seems that you're still sticking to your personal agenda...at least you let LuLa off the hook for being held to the same journalistic requirements as a newspaper. Mike has indicated a willingness to try a Hasselblad again. Maybe Hasselblad will take notice and make that happen. If the company doesn't, are you suggesting Mike buy a Hasselbald on his own? I think we've already covered that ground, right?

LuLa is under no obligation to be anything other that what it has been...a source of useful information if it fits your needs. If not, move on.

Yes Hasselblad has changed; changed its management and upped its game technically and commercially IMO.  I don't think they will be going back to an open system any time soon and I don't think they should as they would be the losers.  Anyway my guess is that P1 is heading in just the same direction.

No I don't expect you or Mike to buy a Hasselblad and have never suggested that should happen.

Yes I think Hasselblad should supply a system for review and I think that this in the best interests of LuLa's audience (apart from the "pissed off" brigade)

Will they?  I hope so.

BTW I got pissed off with a car manufacturer many years ago and vowed never to buy another car from them; time passed; management changed; new models came out and I realised that the only person I was hurting by continuing to be pissed off was myself so I bought another car  from them and have continued to do so.  I guess I sort of grew up and learned the value of an open mind.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Yes I think Hasselblad should supply a system for review and I think that this in the best interests of LuLa's audience (apart from the "pissed off" brigade)

Will they?  I hope so.

Might I respectfully suggest that you should perhaps be talking to Hasselblad rather to LuLa?

Eric

[dmerger]

I suppose an extension of your positiion concerning 'free society' may be that squatters are within their rights to take someone's home. I'd shoot the mothers, no questions asked and no quarter given. Same for Mr Bloody Wikileaks: ...  

Rob, you leaped, from a discussion about whether free media should be exempt from criticism, to home invasions and killing people.  Who can argue with such logic?

I’m still a little confused, however.  You seem to say that free web sites should be exempt from criticism, but at the same time you criticize Wikileaks, a free web site.  So, which is it?  Should free web sites and other free media be exempt from criticism, or maybe you’re just exempt from the standards you want others to follow?

As for other freebies, I avoid them; I'm willing to buy something if I need it and can afford it. This site is an exception to the freebie rule and I hope it stays that way.

So, Rob, I take it that you don’t watch TV, listen to radio, read newspapers or magazines on line, or visit web sites, if they are freebies?  You must live a very sheltered life indeed.

 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... just because something is free doesn’t mean it’s above criticism or expectations of behavior.   

And when exactly has this site been closed for criticism?

Some threads do get locked when they run their course, and they do so when the only reason OP continues to badger everyone else is to satisfy his desperate need for attention, hearing his own voice and admiring the beauty of his own arguments. Which, coincidentally, appears to be the course this thread is taking.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... so far out of the normal expectation in a free society...

And which "normal" expectation would that be? The sense of entitlement that someone is obliged to take care of you, protect you from your own decisions, shield you from responsibility for your own actions, provide you with an "objective", "unbiased" opinion so that you do not have to do your own legwork of comparing other opinions, other sources and yourself analyzing the facts? And that "someone" is supposed to do it at their own expense? And proactively demonstrate they have your best interest at heart?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... how life should be.  Sadly that isn't how it is and you are not the "norm" and the "norm" has to be protected against those who are cleverer, stronger, more ruthless, richer, and finally have ideologically different perspectives.  This does mean, I regret, that some "busybodies will inadvertently poke their nose in your business...

Ah, have not heard such an eloquent socialist manifesto for quite some time.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... a duty to the readership rapidly ensures that they try and tell the truth. 

What is the truth as opposed to opinion?  A review on David Watson's site should clearly state the features, benefits and shortcomings of a product as a matter of fact and then in addition the writer's opinion.  This enables the reader to make his or her own judgement on the facts and then include the opinion of the writer when weighing up a decision to agree/disagree and/or purchase the item.  What is also expected is that products will be compared, with other similar products in respect of their respective strengths and weaknesses...

Strangely, as much as I tried, I could not find your review site on the web. An alpha/beta stage perhaps? Not yet open to the public? I am looking forward to its public premiere though, and heck, might even consider paying for such high standards, objectivity and lack of bias. So, please keep us posted.

[Rob C]

1.  Rob, you leaped, from a discussion about whether free media should be exempt from criticism, to home invasions and killing people.  Who can argue with such logic?I’m still a little confused, however.  You seem to say that free web sites should be exempt from criticism,2.  but at the same time you criticize Wikileaks, a free web site.  So, which is it?  Should free web sites and other free media be exempt from criticism, or maybe you’re just exempt from the standards you want others to follow?



3.  So, Rob, I take it that you don’t watch TV, listen to radio, read newspapers or magazines on line, or visit web sites, if they are freebies?  You must live a very sheltered life indeed.  

Wow what a smell of burning hay!

1.  Clearly, you don't understand 'thinking out of the box'. You should, by now, the phrase is almost obsolete having been around so long!

2. Wikileaks, the problem, has nothing to do with free or otherwise: it is a disgrace that such dangerous and unhelpful sites are allowed to exist. As I see it, the man is nothing but a trouble maker of the first waters. Does he - or you, for that matter - imagine that messing about with international relations is a brilliant stroke of universal helpfulness? Do either of you really imagine that any relationship, personal, business, never mind international, is ever, can ever, work to a satisfactory end if it is totally transparent? Assuming you have a wife - would you really want to know if she has slept with your best friend - or vice versa if guilt was yours - and do you imagine that the world's salivating masses are the first people you'd like to inform of such an event, to tell of her peccadillos or yours? I'd hope not, for both your sakes.

3. I don't look upon tv as freebies. It's there, whether I subscribe to it or not and I do not. I watch news and documentaries and that's about it. The ads are often muted (when I can find the button) and I sometimes watch in that mode and they become rather entertaining, inadvertently. Okay, weak pun intended. But regarding press freebies, no, I don't pick them up at the supermarket nor any of the other places they get stuck. Neither do I look at the goddam leaflets that get pushed into the letter boxes here. An Indian restaurant used to stick little ads under the wiper blades on cars; I had one gum itself so hard it had to be scraped; I can assure you I wouldn't dream of patronizing that place.

Rob C

[David Watson]

Ah, have not heard such an eloquent socialist manifesto for quite some time.

Thank you for all your compliments tongue in cheek as they may be!  When and if I ever had the energy and enthusiasm to do what Michael has so admirably done and create a site like Luminous Landscape I will be sure to ask you to be our sternest critic.   Please be aware that in line with my so-called socialist principles all participants will be means tested and only the poorest and dumbest will be able to read the reviews free of charge.  In fact we might even arrange for the richer members to pay the poorer members to join.  

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... only the poorest and dumbest will be able to read the reviews free of charge...

Hehe... that is why I offered to pay 

[dmerger]

And when exactly has this site been closed for criticism?

Some threads do get locked when they run their course, and they do so when the only reason OP continues to badger everyone else is to satisfy his desperate need for attention, hearing his own voice and admiring the beauty of his own arguments. Which, coincidentally, appears to be the course this thread is taking.

And which "normal" expectation would that be? The sense of entitlement that someone is obliged to take care of you, protect you from your own decisions, shield you from responsibility for your own actions, provide you with an "objective", "unbiased" opinion so that you do not have to do your own legwork of comparing other opinions, other sources and yourself analyzing the facts? And that "someone" is supposed to do it at their own expense? And proactively demonstrate they have your best interest at heart?

Slobodan, you’ve taken my words out of context and twisted my meaning beyond any recognition.  I won’t otherwise respond to your ridiculous straw men.  

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Slobodan, you’ve taken my words out of context and twisted my meaning beyond any recognition.  I won’t otherwise respond to your ridiculous straw men.  

Just connecting the dots and reading between the lines.

You know, as Cardinal Richelieu used to say: “Give me six lines written by the most honorable of men, and I will find an excuse in them to hang him”   Metaphorically, of course (i.e., in my case). And you would be much better sparring with me than with Rob in his trigger-happy mood  

[PierreVandevenne]

2. Wikileaks, the problem, has nothing to do with free or otherwise: it is a disgrace that such dangerous and unhelpful sites are allowed to exist. As I international, is ever, can ever, work to a satisfactory end if it is totally transparent? Assuming you have a wife - would you really want to know if she has slept with your best friend - or vice versa if guilt was yours - and do you imagine that the world's salivating masses are the first people

Typically, in what we generally accept as a democratic society, individuals are entitled to privacy and governments are supposed to be transparent and accountable. Of course, that's only the theory...

[jeremyrh]

"My stance, more or less, is that whoever owns this site is free to do with it as he pleases. Period. "

Amen, brother!

I'm sure Silvio Berlusconi would agree.

[Rob C]

I'm sure Silvio Berlusconi would agree.

I'm sure Mr B would, and were Michael a politician I'm sure he'd agree too. As I'm neither Silvio, Michael not anyone other than myself, I feel happy to form and live with my own ideas, as I'm sure do you. However, comparing the relative positions and clout of Mr B and Mr R in an attempt to draw a parallel is an absurdity.

Only thing, I'm not about to stuff my opinions down anyone's throat unless they first try to tell me what I should think or do and try to smoke-screen the fact with claptrap about the 'accepted' views of some mythical society that we are supposed to live in, but sounds like nothing but the theoretical Marxist control-society that failed to survive in its own, vast, powerful place of greatest and total domination and strength.

The individual is the best we've got or are ever going to get; from great individuals came the best of what we have in the world today. From collectives come and came nothing but doom and mental slavery accompanied by fiscal poverty for the huge majority, not something we suffer from much in our western society today. And don't bullshit me with tales of the poor in the cities: whilst they can blow their daily bread on drugs, whores, music, bars and betting shops, my heart refuses to bleed. Its called initiative and pulling yourself up by your own efforts. And many have shown those efforts to work. Just look at the vast array of illiterate millionaires on tv or in other inescapable media outlets. If they can, anyone can; you don't need the 'privileged' option of university to make it in life. Come to think of it, the wealthiest men I personally know/knew had no such qualifications whatsoever.

So there you go - you become what you already are.

Rob C

[jwwbrennan]

Objectivity, by all appearances to me at least, can only be imagined by a group who already agree or are predisposed to agreeing. Deciding someone is objective is very subjective.

Discussion forums are virtual homes. The host chooses to invite people and they choose whether or not to continue to accept the hospitality based mostly on the choices and rules of the homeowner.

Once I can appreciate a poster's leaning I find the writing more informative. The world is imbued with advertising, I have come to appreciate the more honest overt style - the paid kind.

[pegelli]

Might I respectfully suggest that you should perhaps be talking to Hasselblad rather to LuLa?

Eric

+1, Despite some allegations Michael has already stated he is "not" pissed at Hasselblad and would jump at the opportunity to get the use of one of their systems for some time to do a thorough test.

[Philmar]

+1, Despite some allegations Michael has already stated he is "not" pissed at Hasselblad and would jump at the opportunity to get the use of one of their systems for some time to do a thorough test.

Where is the end of the queue?
I too am not pissed off with Hasselblad and would dearly love to put one through a cursory and unrigorous test. In fact, I'm quite indifferent towards Hasselblad. They'd have no fences to mend with me.

Come and get me Hassy - I'll be your Valentine.