"Kingmakers" Or Court Jesters

[rando]

Quote

Having paid my money and walking into a room where the vendor is in a panic because king-maker Darko (or whomever) is supposed to amble in at any moment isn't a great experience.

 

I should make it clear this is the only audio site I visit.  Any product interest spurred by conversation here results in a visit to the manufacturer's site only.  Which is why I had to go look what a "king-maker Darko", as stated by @mrvco here, is.  Having briefly acquainted myself with his site.  I was left to suspect lighthearted observation revealing him as a primadonna was why he was made the butt of that joke.  As opposed to a byproduct of slowly earning respect through giving voice to piercing intellectual examinations that placed issues into the public eye which chafed mrvco.  

 

There has been a fair amount of discussion about power and responsibility of the fourth estate on CA of late.  Some of them drawing members of the audiophile press into conversations happening here.  I'd like to remove this from the heated topic(s) and focus instead on what responsibilities should be upheld by published professionals reporting on the high end stereo market and related topical matters.  I'd ask that decorum and respect be observed as well as allowing others to express their thoughts without castigation.  

 

My personal thought is beyond legal obligations stipulating their conduct and good faith reproduction of any officially conducted interview they use in their articles, it is predominantly entertainment.  Hobby magazines, online or in print,  are not to be confused with international news agencies conducting investigative journalism under their masthead.  Refusing to provide coverage of current events about to have a large scale effect on, or to do so in keeping with the views of, their readership is tantamount to failure though.  If those current events include numerous legal filings which could severely limit, regulate, or impact products inherent to participation in the hobby it is up to the discretion of each media entity to decide on their level of involvement.  They can refuse to reply to their mailbag or comment on social media by never admitting to an opinion or interest of any kind in the events taking place.  If that pressure effects their readership or advertising it is a pure and simple business decision whether to continue down their current path.  Instead of re-consulting the ideals that have steered them through thus far before the sails shred.  Or they are faced by a new type of competitor who stands on their shoulders making a human bridge upwards into the light for their subscribers.  They either use their power to influence opinion or hope they are nimble enough at predicting it to avoid succumbing to the heir apparent's displeasure.    

[mrvco]

4 hours ago, rando said:

 

I should make it clear this is the only audio site I visit.  Any product interest spurred by conversation here results in a visit to the manufacturer's site only.  Which is why I had to go look what a "king-maker Darko", as stated by @mrvco here, is.  Having briefly acquainted myself with his site.  I was left to suspect lighthearted observation revealing him as a primadonna was why he was made the butt of that joke.  As opposed to a byproduct of slowly earning respect through giving voice to piercing intellectual examinations that placed issues into the public eye which chafed mrvco.  

 

There has been a fair amount of discussion about power and responsibility of the fourth estate on CA of late.  Some of them drawing members of the audiophile press into conversations happening here.  I'd like to remove this from the heated topic(s) and focus instead on what responsibilities should be upheld by published professionals reporting on the high end stereo market and related topical matters.  I'd ask that decorum and respect be observed as well as allowing others to express their thoughts without castigation.  

 

My personal thought is beyond legal obligations stipulating their conduct and good faith reproduction of any officially conducted interview they use in their articles, it is predominantly entertainment.  Hobby magazines, online or in print,  are not to be confused with international news agencies conducting investigative journalism under their masthead.  Refusing to provide coverage of current events about to have a large scale effect on, or to do so in keeping with the views of, their readership is tantamount to failure though.  If those current events include numerous legal filings which could severely limit, regulate, or impact products inherent to participation in the hobby it is up to the discretion of each media entity to decide on their level of involvement.  They can refuse to reply to their mailbag or comment on social media by never admitting to an opinion or interest of any kind in the events taking place.  If that pressure effects their readership or advertising it is a pure and simple business decision whether to continue down their current path.  Instead of re-consulting the ideals that have steered them through thus far before the sails shred.  Or they are faced by a new type of competitor who stands on their shoulders making a human bridge upwards into the light for their subscribers.  They either use their power to influence opinion or hope they are nimble enough at predicting it to avoid succumbing to the heir apparent's displeasure.    

 

It wasn't a joke, but a very specific experience that I had at RMAF.  I only mentioned "Kingmaker" since it seemed appropriate considering the vendor's comments, they clearly saw this as a make or break opportunity, actual customers at a consumer show be damned.  It just happened to be Darko, but easily could have been a writer from Stereophlie, TAS, etc.