ARRL bias at the 2014 Dayton Convention

Ernest - W4EG

Presume bias by the "ARRL Contest Update" published May 21, 2014 covering the Dayton 2014 Convention.

In previous years the big box makers were put up front to let the HAM world know of the new radios that were debuting at the Dayton Convention.

I closely examine this issue and photographs published by the "ARRL Contest Update."

Here are my findings:

On their update they had the Icom RP repeater photo an obvious paid advertiser. Them right below, the Yaesu DX radio and their roofing filters: Plus numerous other none consequential general advertisers.

I continue looking at all of the websites they directed the readers to check. Then I came across the photos posted by what I thought to be an individual that attended the convention.

After checking the photographs: Lord and behold, again the same Companies that heavily advertised in the ARRL magazine where in the photos taken from various angle and published.

You may be wondering why I posted this on this forum.

Here we have FlexRadio System releasing a new product that is revolutionizing the industry and not a word or picture mentioned or found. How bias can this publication (QST) be "DEVOTED ENTIRELY TO AMATEUR RADIO"  How is this issue of the "ARRL Contest Update" say "NEWS AND TECHINIQUES FOR THE ACTIVE OPERATOR"?

They missed the mark on both of their statements.

Not a word about the Flex-6300 introduction or picture of the Flex booth was found in any of the published photos.

As a Life Member of the ARRL and a VE (not active) I am ashamed of their bias and cronyism of this group. My Living Will, will be change and my gift to the League will be stop and given to a more worthy cause.

Steve K9ZW

Open bias to advertisers/sponsors is a common fault of many membership organizations who gradually have become addicted to the revenue from vendors/sponsors/advertisers.  The funding and familiarity with vendors/sponsors/advertisers gradually replace the membership's needs as the organization's main focus. 

Every chance I get I suggest that membership organizations only accept funding from those they are chartered to serve.  Extraneous influences can be minimized by requiring any non-membership funds received be spent for a limited specific cause that otherwise would not be funded from general membership funds - say scholarships or research - and always consider these other sources of income as highly restricted funds not available for general organizational use.

Now we also have to consider that FRS did an outstanding job of keeping a cloak over the new 6300 until days before Dayton, and the ARRL may have simple failed to adapt to a changed situation.  Not certain if FRS did embargoed information releases to the trade, which might have helped gained inclusion in the write-ups and photos. 

Any bets on whether the ARRL will be paying attention to FRS for Dayton 2015?

73

Steve
K9ZW

Ned K1NJ

     I think the first substantial information I got about the 6000 series was from an ad in QST.
Dayton is not far behind us.  There may be more to follow.

Ward Silver

As the editor of the Contest Update, I guess I have to point out the difference between paid advertisements (which run as color graphics) and editorially selected photos (which run with a caption).  You will note that there were NO editorially selected photos of products in the May 21 issue - with the possible exception of the antenna-and-zebra photo.  So I don't see what the possible "bias" could be.  Icom, Yaesu, DX Eng'g, RemoteHamRadio, and Expert Amps all bought ad space - I don't see what the problem is here.

If FlexRadio wants to advertise in the Contest Update, they are most assuredly welcome to do so and if you want to see them represented along with the other advertisers, suggest that they become one :-)  I am also more than willing to put in a press release now and then - if one is sent to me at the address in the newsletter.

73, Ward NØAX

k0eoo

Ernest, did you send that to the ARRL?  If not please do....

Ward Silver

Also clarifying - none of the photographers whose websites were recommended (N6TV, K6ND, K6XX) were in any way "hired" by the ARRL to take photos.  They're all just good guys who took some photos and made it possible for us to enjoy them.

Ernest - W4EG

I don't think it would be published.

I will give it a try and forward it to them anyway.

Todd, WA1M

You're upset because the publication contains paid advertisements from manufacturers other than FRS, who chose not to purchase an advertisement, and because a bunch of hams unaffiliated with the ARRL or said publication took pictures at a monster hamfest of some major manufacturers' products, and overlooked FRS products, as well as any number of other smaller manufacturers?

BIAS!

de WA1M

Ernest - W4EG

Ward,

Let me clarify this so you can understand what I said.

At no time did I say that the websites or the photographer were "hired" by the ARRL. I don't know where or how you got that misinterpretations.  However, the ARRL editors were the one that chose the photos they'll use in the articles. 

Perhaps, the photographers had more photos, but the editor did not agree or like them or someone else above him made the final decision.

Again, I don't know any of the fore mentioned ham you mentioned.  They may be good guys and all that  but they don't make decisions: The League is the final authority.

I also enjoyed the photos; next time just include photos of  big events. And this was one that should had been.

 

Ward Silver

There are no ARRL editors lurking in the bushes - just me and I'm not even ARRL staff.  I pick everything that goes into Contest Update except the paid ads, which I have nothing to do with.  Let me repeat myself - I used exactly and precisely zero photos of equipment - except for the zebra-antenna shot which I chose for its general novelty.  There is no bias for or against Flex products.  Take a deep breath.  Let's move on.

Todd, WA1M

Pfft.  Come clean.  You and the rest of the Illuminati had a meeting and decided to memory-hole every Flex product in order to further enrich your masters from Kenwood, Icom and Yaesu.  Amiright?

Ward Silver

I'm SO busted :-)

Ernest - W4EG

Read the article and LOOK at the photos then come back and restate your answer. 

There is NO COMPLAINT  I am just stating the facts about the photographs, which I believe are more than 50 and tell me that those selected photos are not pushing a product that is handle by the ARRL. Count the number of angles of the same photo that are advertised by the large box makers.

Again, my issue is that a big event as this must had been very noticeable and drawn a large crow.  Unfortunately, I was not there.

Todd, WA1M

I've looked at the pictures, and I still cannot understand what you're complaining -- er, stating facts about. I don't really see any photos of equipment; I see a lot of photos of people at a hamfest, occasionally with somebody's logo or product also in the frame. There are few if any shots I would call a product or equipment shot.

You do realize that, if your theory was correct, that Flex would be prominently featured in these photos, by virtue of the fact that they run a full-page ad in QST, and are therefore on of the major player that you say ARRL is biased in favor of.  Yet, no Flex photos.  So much for that theory.

Ernest - W4EG

And open letter from the editor of QST and my reply.

> Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 22:24:37 +0000
>
> Ernest:
>
> Your presumption of bias is mistaken. What you are seeing in Contest Update are paid advertisements from Icom, Yaesu and others. Flexradio does not appear there because they did not purchase advertising.
>
> Contest Update does not focus on new hardware. The emphasis is on contest operating and the people involved in contesting. The people who have posted Hamvention photos are not in any way associated with Contest Update. Ward Silver, the Contest Update editor, was simply sharing links to their photos for readers who could not attend Hamvention.
>
> We will be reporting on new Hamvention products in the August issue of QST.
>
> 73 . . . Steve Ford, WB8IMY
> QST Editor

My reply to the Editor:

Steve,

I guess,  I properly did not make my issue clear. 

I 've been reading this column for years and I may be old but, I recall in the passed, this column has mentioned the release of new innovations: Praising them for their progress.   

I am not condemning the way you do business; since the bottom line is money. However, we the league members thought the League was here to serve the members; apparently that does not seems to be the case now. 

Now, we have a company that has been in business a decade and is turning the way transistors dethrone de Forest vacuum tube.   

I been bombarded with many positive emails from those that attended Dayton, praising my presumed bias letter.  They say, the Flex radio booth was over run by so many buyers and prospective buyers that they sold out the entire stock.  I would think that the editor of this column would have notice such unprecedented event! Or was he hobnobbing with big sellers or advertisers of the industry? 

Steve, you and I know that the editor normally selects what he precede to be important to his readers.  I am not buying that he was just directing the readers to the photographers links. If that's all the photos the photographers' took, next time tell them to take larger rolls of (film now extinct) or bigger memory sticks.  

My example of your paid advertisers, It's making reference to why YOU only show the photographers link that the column editor selected.  Your answer "they (Flex) did not purchase" an adv.

That again was NOT the issue. 

I'm looking forward to reading the August issue of QST. 

73, Ernest - W4EG 

Ps. Just a side note.  Several years passed, I meet one of the League Representatives at a club meeting and let me re-phrased what he said; FlexRadio System is NOT in the same league as Icom, Yaesu, Kenwood "PERIOD"     Bias or Not?