Why did Triathlete fire you twice for writing that no one triathlon bike is good for everybody (or something like that)? I’m guessing that it is an advertiser issue – a statement like that could run the risk of alienating current/potential/future advertisers. This interests me because I’m back in the journalism business after a three and a half year hiatus. And two weeks ago, I pissed off an advertiser in a story. But nobody got fired. Just wondering if you can elaborate on this a little.
And why, after firing you once, did they re-hire you, knowing full well that you were probably going to write the same thing again in the future? And for the record, I’m glad you’re writing in Inside Tri. I get that one delivered to the house.
While we are somewhat on the topic of magazines…I have been impressed with the improvements in both IT and Triathlete. Looks like they’ve both stepped up their efforts quite a bit!
“why, after firing you once, did they re-hire you, knowing full well that you were probably going to write the same thing again in the future?”
they forgot how bad i was.
i have nothing but good things to say about triathlete magazine. i think it’s a really good publication, and it’s improved 100% over the last 4 years or so.
their “bike of the month” is really not a bike review per se, more of a homage to a specific bike. but, they sort of already have that when they write about some pro’s bike. so, i treated it as more of a review, and maybe that’s not what they envision for the piece. but, my own view is to write something that the reader can take away, and part of that is identifying that customer for the bike.
that necessarily means i’m identifying that person who is NOT a customer, and this is what pisses of kestrel, or whomever. had i written that THIS year, i don’t think kestrel would’ve had a reaction, because they’ve now got the tri specific bike they needed (airfoil pro). but this was back when the talon was performing double-duty, as both kestrel’s road bike and its tri bike. so, for me to say that a specific slice of the tri market can’t successfully ride this bike was a hard thing for kestrel to hear.
but, my view was that the reader was the one being served here, not the bike company. it’s not the reader’s fault that kestrel was late in bringing the airfoil pro online. today, of course, kestrel can aver that the talon and the airfoil pro serve two distinct customers. not so easy to have to state this back then.
Magazines can be very shortsighted. When they pamper to their advertisers by suppressing the truth about bad product, they not only do their readers a disservice but also the companies who make good product. They are afraid to piss of some one company, and instead they piss off all the other companies. Not very smart if you’re a magazine.
When Dan was on the brink of getting fired and his review was getting pulled, I told Triathlete I would pull my ads if they did that. That year I pulled more advertising from them than the company reviewed by Dan will ever place in their lifetime. So in this case serving the reader would also have served themselves.
I have to agree with Dan that Triathlete magazine is much better now,
I’m surprised by the lack of a good periodical for Tri’s or maybe I just haven’t found it yet? I picked up the inside tri gear guide, I didn’t think very highly of it.
None of the reviews were very critical and all of them were too short.
Is there a better mag out there for Age Grouper Tri’s and gear?
Well, I have said the same thing for five years to all the tri mags, but few seem to listen. They are risking becoming irrelevant unless they change. People don’t need the results of the Quelle Ironman five months after it was held, we can find that out the same day online. I personally think they should morph more into a CycleSport style of magazine, with the addition of some training and gear stuff. but what do I know.
Definitely “advertorial” is a good way to describe it. It almost felt like the manufacturers were give a blank piece of paper and told to write 4-5 sentences.
Plus all the meaningless goofy icons on different products…huge let down for my 5.00.
Scuba diving used to be the same way then Rodales Scuba Diving did gear reviews on par with Consumer Reports for 4-5 but they’ve recently dumbed it down quite a bit…
Tri could definitely use an unbiased magazine with training and tips…recruiting newbies it the only way for a sport to grow.
I know there is an enormous amount of gear associated with tri’s but that should only help create a real performance based review…
Hey Dan and Gerard, why don’t you just start your own magazine?
It’s not like we haven’t talked about it, but I think we can both do without the hassle. Maybe, once I retire to the outskirts of society like Dan has, he’ll put me in charge of slowmag.
I agree on IT. But I still think that Triathlete sucks. Their “editorial” process is just horrid. Practically non-existent. I still find 20-30 blatant typos or usage issues per month. That a professionally published magazine still screws up “to” and “too” as well as “lose” and “loose” is absurd. To say nothing of misspelling “Gordo Byrne” (sic) and product blurbs where the last two lines of the description are completely missing (see this month’s shoe review). Oh, and where everything with an “s” at the end gets an apostrophe - regardless of whether it is plural/possessive or not.
And don’t even get me started on all the articles that say “Gee, if you need carbs a good drink is Gatorade (or whatever)” and then you get to the end and see the author happens to be a Gatorade institute researcher, yet there is NO disclosure.
Triathlete is simply a journalistic nightmare. In fact, i just cancelled my subscription for these very reasons.
I don’t know Gerard, my partner in the race car is a magazine publisher right here in Toronto and he just sold his biggest magazine. He’s always looking for a new project…
…or how about Lisa Bentley. Seriously guys, you two have the “street cred” (hey, I’ve got 4 kids) to do a magazine. Canadian dollar and all those perks to do it up here.
… is why they have pages and pages at the end of race listings: it’s a lot more efficient to go on a website to look that up and it makes me feel that’s just ‘fluff’ to bring the page count up so they can sell more ads (more pages = more space). I’d sure do with that space given over to actual gear reviews and/or technical articles in general.
Haven’t bought triathlete for a few years so I’m not sure if it’s any better nowadays.
…I still find 20-30 blatant typos or usage issues per month…
I’ve noticed the same thing, and it always amazes me. I’m no grammar pro, but when I can spot that many typos/grammar errrors, there has to be a serious gap in their editorial process.
