Jump to content
matchlesswdg3

Decent classic military vehicle magazines?

Recommended Posts

If its any consolation, Andy, I had to dig out the May issue to remind me what you were talking about, re "Scouting for Boys"! Any thought that the title of the article was any more than a play on the title of Baden Powell's manual for Scouts passed me by, as I think it would have most folk. Mind you, I remember our Scout troop having copies of the book......considered a bit quaint even in the Fifties and Sixties! Having anything published via a reporter in a periodical is a bit of a leap of faith and in my experience journalists have maintained a consistent standard over the years....rubbish. They publish a "story" that is based more or less loosely on the facts. Any story or article that I have seen on a subject that I know about is invariably full of errors. Read all with the salt standing by!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ferg, thanks for your reply, I agree, its sad that the likes of Classic Military Vehicle Magazine and Key Publishing in my opinion feel that its ok to put out such headlines and incomplete articles and not be held accountable. The sad fact is it would not have taken any effort to just say sorry to me, but it appears the attitude is that they don't have to and can publish whatever they wish just to get a headline.

 

I would have expected it of some of the daily red top papers but what should be a respected publisher should be better than that, I guess the fact that as they are the only military vehicle magazine now they feel that they can act as they wish, sad times !! :-(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really didn't read anything into the title of that article - until I read the comments on here following it - and now I see what you mean. There must be a whole number of people with innocent minds who would not have noticed anything either but I agree that it was unfortunate. Perhaps the Editor does not have sufficient back-up staff in these days of everybody trying to cut costs, and able to look at everything again with fresh eyes for such "clangers" before going to press. Presumably, there is a Proof Reader to look at the whole magazine?

 

But after saying all of that, it would be wrong to overlook the rest of the contents of the magazine which I think has a very good spread. It is very easy to criticise and you will never be able to please all the people all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ferg, thanks for your reply, I agree, its sad that the likes of Classic Military Vehicle Magazine and Key Publishing in my opinion feel that its ok to put out such headlines and incomplete articles and not be held accountable. The sad fact is it would not have taken any effort to just say sorry to me, but it appears the attitude is that they don't have to and can publish whatever they wish just to get a headline.

 

I would have expected it of some of the daily red top papers but what should be a respected publisher should be better than that, I guess the fact that as they are the only military vehicle magazine now they feel that they can act as they wish, sad times !! :-(

 

I asked John Norris for your email address and he, as yet, hasn't seen fit to reply to my email. The title was nothing more than a play on the title of Baden Powell's book. JC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes a shame really, its become a "Photo study" good pictures though, and if I wanted to know that much more re-hashed stuff on land rovers I'd buy a land rover mag! I emailed them after a piece they did on a type of vehicle that I have and they said something like " this one had not been seen since" blar blar . so I mailed them quickly to say I have it and it still exists, they messaged back and said thanks, and they they would put something about it in the letters page. Well they did put it in. my exact email spelling mistakes and all! good job I didn't say anything incriminating!! who the hell checks what is published!

 

rant over.

 

I would be interested to know which issue this was in so that I can respond more fully. JC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I really didn't read anything into the title of that article - until I read the comments on here following it - and now I see what you mean. There must be a whole number of people with innocent minds who would not have noticed anything either but I agree that it was unfortunate. Perhaps the Editor does not have sufficient back-up staff in these days of everybody trying to cut costs, and able to look at everything again with fresh eyes for such "clangers" before going to press. Presumably, there is a Proof Reader to look at the whole magazine?

 

But after saying all of that, it would be wrong to overlook the rest of the contents of the magazine which I think has a very good spread. It is very easy to criticise and you will never be able to please all the people all the time.

 

Thanks for such a balanced view. JC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my opinion Classic Military Vehicle (CMV) Magazine has taken a worrying turn for the worse ! Last month my M3 Scout Car was featured. The freelance journalist came (nice guy) and took the photos and some notes and passed them to the editor who produced the article. The Freelancer and I discussed heading the feature ‘Somewhere in Somerset’ but without telling me anything the Editor published it as ‘Scouting for Boys’ !!! The inference that I bought the vehicle to go ‘Scouting for Boys’ was not lost on a number of people who more than mentioned it to me, this included my wife who happens to be the Headteacher of a couple of Primary Schools who was shocked to say the least.

 

In addition to this the article contains both typo’s and incorrect information that frankly just smacks of lazy journalism. I emailed my concerns to the freelancer, he was also shocked and passed it to the Editor who was on holiday so it was passed onto the MD of Key Publications who emailed back saying he would come back to me. That was a month ago and nothing since just silence, other than I’m aware that the Editor has had a go at the Freelancer stating he didn’t see the issue, its normal to go for a headline, why did he complain (not realising it was my complaint), he was out of order and stating it was normal to take a title from a book written in 1906 (I had to Google it) and use such a phrase in modern times.

 

So no apology, no feedback, nothing just a contemptuous silence from both the Editor and Key Publishing. So please take this as a word of caution if you want to have your vehicle in this magazine don’t make the same mistake I did, get a signed agreement to say that you want to see the article first and have full editorial rights and a veto, if you don’t then anything could happen and it seems the new Editor won’t even respond to concerns or have the courtesy to reply. What makes it worse is he put the Freelance Journalist’s name on the article so he ‘takes the blame’. I even had to buy my own copy, needless to say it’s the last one I will ever buy.

 

"Had a go at the freelancer?" Here's my email of 08.05.17 to him "Afternoon,

 

Today, I have been told that you are not happy about the heading for the feature on the White Scout Car in the May ’17 issue of CMV. I am surprised that you felt it necessary to telephone the Commercial Director to discuss it.

 

I can only apologise for any upset this innocent headline has inadvertently caused, but remain mystified why a simple play on words, about the fact that it is a Scout Car using the title of Baden Powell’s famous 110 year old, scouting handbook, should have any negative connotations. Such plays on words are common in magazine headlines such as the ‘four wheels on my ‘wagen’ line on the cover.

 

Yours sincerely,

John Carroll"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I asked John Norris for your email address and he, as yet, hasn't seen fit to reply to my email. The title was nothing more than a play on the title of Baden Powell's book. JC

 

Its sad that I had to post on here to attract your attention. Please don't blame the Freelancer (I've kept names out of my posts to date), you were sent my email address, the Director of Key Publishing also had my email address, he also replied to me saying he would come back to me. That was over a month ago now so clearly neither of you thought it was important enough to even give me a reply even if it is that you don't agree and no-doubt if I had not posted on here then my concerns would have remained unanswered.

Edited by w896andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its sad that I had to post on here to attract your attention. Please don't blame the Freelancer (I've kept names out of my posts to date), you were sent my email address, the Director of Key Publishing also had my email address, he also replied to me saying he would come back to me. That was over a month ago now so clearly neither of you thought it was important enough to even give me an a reply even if it is that you don't agree and no-doubt if I had not posted on here then my concerns would have remained unanswered.

 

It is sad that it had to be posted on here, I don't like washing dirty laundry in public. To answer your point in this recent post; I wasn't sent your email address I am afraid, although I don't doubt that people at Key had your address but - unfortunately - I hadn't. That is why I asked 'the freelancer' for it in response to his email to me. Further up, you say that he supplied 'notes' and that I compiled the feature, this is also not true, he supplied a complete feature, I asked for some amendments and he supplied a second version of a complete feature and captions. As for putting his name on it, 'so he takes the blame', err no... Message me your email and I will send you his whole feature.

As I said in a post above, I can only apologise for the upset this innocent headline has caused completely accidentally. John Carroll

Edited by Jolly Jeeper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is sad that it had to be posted on here, I don't like washing dirty laundry in public. To answer your point in this recent post; I wasn't sent your email address I am afraid, although I don't doubt that people at Key had your address but - unfortunately - I hadn't. That is why I asked 'the freelancer' for it in response to his email to me. Further up, you say that he supplied 'notes' and that I compiled the feature, this is also not true, he supplied a complete feature, I asked for some amendments and he supplied a second version of a complete feature and captions. As for putting his name on it, 'so he takes the blame', err no... Message me your email and I will send you his whole feature.

As I said in a post above, I can only apologise for the upset this innocent headline has caused completely accidentally. John Carroll

 

Ok so this doesn’t spiral into a slanging match and we don’t upset the Mods lets inject some facts into this conversation to unravel who has not done what.

 

1. I had an emailed reply from the Key Publishing Group Editor on 26 April, I don’t want to post it here but it clearly states that my concerns would be investigated and passed to the Commercial Director who would “follow the matter up and will speak to the freelance CMV editor” the email finished with “please accept my apologies and rest assured the matter will be investigated as quickly as possible”.

I further emailed the Group Editor on the 8th May to follow him up. Neither the Group Editor or the Commercial Director have responded to me since 26th April.

 

2. I asked a specific question regarding who wrote and titled the article, the answer I received was very clear. You are now stating that this is not the truth. So somebody is not being truthful with me.

 

3. Clearly you were aware of my concerns by the 8th May but did not respond and are now saying Key Publishing have not passed my details to you when they said they would or asked you to reply to me or agreed that they as Key Publishing would reply to me.

 

Now clearly we are not going to agree on whether the title was appropriate or not and lets skip over the typos and inaccuracies as perhaps our Peers reading these posts should be the judge of good or bad journalism.

 

I would ask you to take a step back and ask yourself: Have I as a customer received good treatment from Key Publishing and CMV Magazine ? You can keep blaming other people but I as a customer see you all as one business. People from that business at all levels are not telling me the truth, blaming each other and not doing what they said they would do. That’s before we get to I’m a customer and I have a complaint which needs somebody to reply in a courteous and professional way. The last part of your post even asks me to message you my email address, again I seem to have to do the running here just to make myself heard. So my last question is: Is this really the way you do business or is it the people above and below you always letting you down and causing the problems ?

Edited by w896andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok so this doesn’t spiral into a slanging match and we don’t upset the Mods lets inject some facts into this conversation to unravel who has not done what.

 

1. I had an emailed reply from the Key Publishing Group Editor on 26 April, I don’t want to post it here but it clearly states that my concerns would be investigated and passed to the Commercial Director who would “follow the matter up and will speak to the freelance CMV editor” the email finished with “please accept my apologies and rest assured the matter will be investigated as quickly as possible”.

I further emailed the Group Editor on the 8th May to follow him up. Neither the Group Editor or the Commercial Director have responded to me since 26th April.

 

2. I asked a specific question regarding who wrote and titled the article, the answer I received was very clear. You are now stating that this is not the truth. So somebody is not being truthful with me.

 

3. Clearly you were aware of my concerns by the 8th May but did not respond and are you now saying Key Publishing have not passed my details to you when they said they would or asked you to reply to me or agreed that they as Key Publishing would reply to me.

 

Now clearly we are not going to agree on whether the title was appropriate or not and lets skip over the typos and inaccuracies as perhaps our Peers reading these posts should be the judge of good or bad journalism.

 

I would ask you to take a step back and ask yourself: Have I as a customer received good treatment from Key Publishing and CMV Magazine ? You can keep blaming other people but I as a customer see you all as one business. People from that business at all levels are not telling me the truth, blaming each other and not doing what they said they would do. That’s before we get to I’m a customer and I have a complaint which needs somebody to reply in a courteous and professional way. The last part of your post even asks me to message you my email address, again I seem to have to do the running here just to make myself heard. So my last question is: Is this really the way you do business or is it the people above and below you always letting you down and causing the problems ?

 

Point 1. I was away on holiday until May 8 and this matter was mentioned to me on the phone as soon as I returned. That same day I emailed John Norris and, as part of the email correspondence, I asked him for your email address.

 

Point 2. The feature as a complete thing was supplied by the freelance - words and captions by him, title by the editorial team. Here's the beginning of his email, "Hello John,

I've finished the revision of the M3. Let me know what you think and I'll send over the pix.

All the best..."

 

And my reply, "Yes, that's more concise. Please send the photos and captions as a word doc and it should make a very nice story for the mag.

Thanks,

JC"

 

I have no reason not to be truthful.

 

Point 3. They did ask me to respond to you and, as point 1, I asked the freelance for your email address and haven't had it yet.

 

Point 4. You have a point about customer service and I am trying to deal with it - admittedly later than it should be - but if you don't send me your email address it is difficult to do so. I am 100% happy to mail you the completed feature as submitted with original title. I am not blaming the management in any way - had your concerns been raised by email from the office, I would have your email but it was raised on the phone immediately as I caught up after being away. I thought that, as I was having some email correspondence with the feature's author, that he'd pass on your email address. With hindsight I can see that I should have gone back to the office to get it to avoid this situation. Unfortunately I didn't and this matter has remained unresolved until today. I would suggest that as I have made more posts in this thread in the last couple of hours than anything else for months - and sent you a PM - shows that I am trying to resolve it. JC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John wrote:

 

"I can only apologise for any upset this innocent headline has inadvertently caused, but remain mystified why a simple play on words, about the fact that it is a Scout Car using the title of Baden Powell’s famous 110 year old, scouting handbook, should have any negative connotations. Such plays on words are common in magazine headlines such as the ‘four wheels on my ‘wagen’ line on the cover."

 

Here's my two pennorth...

 

I think Clive got it right when he said 'These magazines are good at giving newcomers an insight into the range of vehicles that they might find attractive to own or model, particularly if someone has never been to a MV show' I also agree with him when he says 'Extraordinary that these magazines that are meant to be about military vehicles, seem to be largely devoid of any technical information about servicing & keeping them running'.

 

Before we criticise John C too much, I'd like to point out that its hard to write day in and day out. I've spent seven years writing a microscopy textbook. Hard work, yet easy to slam it when its published and reviewed: anyone can do that, and they do. I have also been that side of the fence and reviewed lots of books. My reviewing style is easier on the author these days!

 

cheers, Mad Scientist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...