MMM magazine Quality and Accuracy

[pepe63xnotuse]

747 - 2012-11-19 3:36 PM

Dear Mr Editor,

 

Not everyone has a big motorhome, many have campervans, many have self build PVC's, so take those rose tinted specs off and look at the real world. BTW, the selfbuilders went down that route because they think a lot of professionally built ones are crap. At the number of complaints against new (and eye wateringly expensive) vans, I think they have a point. Anyone who only read your mag (and not any motorhome forums) would have a totally false impression of the motorhome world.

 

Although we now have a Mh,we've previously had a "selfbuild" and the above,makes some VERY good points ! ;-)

[Tony Jones]

In fact, MMM HAS in the past campaigned on our behalf. There was a long-running feature called the "Height Fight," which involved MMM approaching councils and others who imposed "artificial" height restrictions (ie not multi-storey carparks etc). This produced a number of good results, and where a local authority insisted on maintaining its policy, they were "named and shamed," encouraging motorhomers to spend their money elsewhere. I'd love to see that re-instated.

 

On the wider issue of how good/accurate/useful the magazine is, the main quesiton is "What do you buy it for?"

 

Those who are "in the market," or expect to be shortly, will obviously want to know what vehicles they can choose from, and well-illustrated descriptive articles (even if not ruthless "tests") will help them decide which models to travel to, look at, and test for themselves.

 

Self-builders (and prospective ones) will probably look for some specialised practical help.

 

But those of us who already have our chosen van, and aren't planning to change anytime soon, will have different priorities. Personally, I mainly want to read travel articles and "practical" stuff - modifications, bright ideas, gadgets etc.

I don't read site reports, as all I want is somewhere to stay the night. In the UK, that usually means CCC CSs, which I find from the club book, and abroad I'll look out for aires etc. So yes, I'd love to see more emphasis on aires - and maybe an "aire of the month."

 

In an ideal world, we'd have at least three very different magazines for motorhomers, but that's not the planet we live on so editors have to try to provide the most useful "general mix."

Personally, I find that PMH is best for me at present, so I subscribe to that, but most months I'll buy MMM too when it appears on the shelves.

 

If MMM did the two things I mentioned above (Height Fight and Aire of the Month) - and PMH didn't, that would probably tip the balance back to MMM for me.

[Rayjsj]

I heartily agree about 'The height Fight campaign' of yore, a lot of us DO still tour 'our little island', and are often astounded at the 'Small mindedness' of some Councils.

I too get shocked when the 'odd' reader backs up their Councils decision, the person usually backs up their stance by adding ' we only tour in Europe, where there is more room for M/H's'.

Well, I live in a Seaside town, and would welcome more M/Homes, our Council, Pembrokeshire, though, has caught 'The whiff of money' to be made from motorists, and lots of previously 'Free' parking spots now bristle with ' don't do this,or that signs, plus of course 'pay and display' and pay even more if your M/H overhangs the small parking bay. Yes, bring back the 'Height Fight' and add the 'Small print Fight' with it, that bans Motorhomes or Campavans as a class of vehicle altogether .

Ray

This is not about 'overnight parking' just somewhere to park during the day.

'Night Stops' could be a whole other campaign !

[Iain Strachan]

As a person who has earned his salt through professional photography for 44 years I find this attitude, offensive, pretty soon you will be publishing text speak articals, from people who know no better! Please try to keep up the standards, by supporting professionals, both journalists and photograhically.

PS. I would not get out of bed for £150 front cover offer.

[Tracker]

Iain Strachan - 2012-11-19 7:28 PM

 

As a person who has earned his salt through professional photography for 44 years I find this attitude, offensive, pretty soon you will be publishing text speak articals, from people who know no better! Please try to keep up the standards, by supporting professionals, both journalists and photograhically.

PS. I would not get out of bed for £150 front cover offer.

 

Sorry, but why would you find the buyer's of the magazine's attitudes offensive Iain?

 

It's not aimed at you and neither is anyone criticising your work - apart from which in a land of free speech we are all allowed to voice our views - including your good self !!

 

I hardly think that some of the articles in many magazines including MMM qualify as journalism, and although some if not all of the photography can be stunning at times nobody has any given right to be supported just because they are a 'professional' unless there is a demand for their work.

 

The best will survive and rightly so and it is, in my view as a taxpayer, a shame that the same rules of survival and promotion don't apply in all of the state funded departments!

 

The best would have nothing to fear and the worst would shape up or ship out leaving the nation better served and the taxpayer getting a better return on his ever increasing tax bill.

 

Oh I do so like a good rant - not aimed at you Iain - I hasten to add!!

[pepe63xnotuse]

Iain Strachan - 2012-11-19 7:28 PM

 

... I find this attitude, offensive, pretty soon you will be publishing text speak articals, from people who know no better! Please try to keep up the standards...

 

..ahem..*cough*...."articles"... ;-)

 

Keep those standards up now.. (lol) (lol)

 

[Guest 1footinthegrave]

Ditto,

 

but going back to campaigns on our behalf, if MMM staff directly wrote to a specific council each month asking about their lack of, or provision of M/home parking ( I'm talking daytime here ) that would be VERY informative for it's readership, it might, just might get these councils to re-think their attitudes, especially if published in a major periodical. The very same councils spend God knows what on tourism information, but presumably only want certain types of tourists, not us folk.

 

P.S. In our neck of the woods the local community council are proposing to turn the only remaining free car park into pay and display, and the outright prohibition of Motor homes parking there, probably with height barriers although that may not happen as there are a couple of coach bays. This is depressingly par for the course around here now, and what few free car parks remain in Gwynedd more and more have height barriers, so come on MMM, what about it............

[Mike B.]

1footinthegrave - 2012-11-19 9:01 PM

 

Ditto,

 

but going back to campaigns on our behalf, if MMM staff directly wrote to a specific council each month asking about their lack of, or provision of M/home parking ( I'm talking daytime here ) that would be VERY informative for it's readership, it might, just might get these councils to re-think their attitudes, especially if published in a major periodical. The very same councils spend God knows what on tourism information, but presumably only want certain types of tourists, not us folk.

 

P.S. In our neck of the woods the local community council are proposing to turn the only remaining free car park into pay and display, and the outright prohibition of Motor homes parking there, probably with height barriers although that may not happen as there are a couple of coach bays. This is depressingly par for the course around here now, and what few free car parks remain in Gwynedd more and more have height barriers, so come on MMM, what about it............

 

Because local campsite owners put councillors in office. You will never get councillors campaigning for 'aires' which in the mind of some business people takes money out of their pockets. It matters not a jot that if you don't spend it on the campsite fee you will spend it on some other activity or product in that area.

The majority of seaside population/business owners think we fill up our vans with enough food, diesel, booze and everything under the sun to last the full period of however long we are away from home and just want to mess up their town, block their parking spaces and use the facilites for nothing that they pay their council taxes for.

Say what you want about the French but they are a lot cleverer than the aveage British tourism 'expert'-look how many British vans visit France every year.

Look how many and how often you see advertisements in MMM for campsites & reviews of same-half the magazine every month. Adverts bring in revenue-campaigns to stop people using them (or at least giving them a choice) do not.

It ain't gonna happen

Mike

[Guest 1footinthegrave]

I was not about Aires if you re-read my post, simply about finding somewhere to park during the day without the height barrier / lack of suitable length parking bays, or the prohibition altogether of Motor homes parking anywhere.

 

I'm not stupid enough to think there will ever be a system of aires in the UK, too many vested interests as you say, or petty minded councillors who see us as public enemy number 1.

[Iain Strachan]

Pepe, yes exactly that's why I don' t write, good editor of course would correct my spelling! But cannot do anything with the rubbish photography which it seems they are willing to accept.

[Iain Strachan]

Tracker no need to appologise (see I cant spell), my rant was aimed at the Editor, no one else.

Cheers

[Tracker]

Cheers Iain - we all make speeling and grammer mitakes from time two time !

[Derek Uzzell]

Iain Strachan - 2012-11-19 11:45 PM

 

Pepe, yes exactly that's why I don' t write, good editor of course would correct my spelling! But cannot do anything with the rubbish photography which it seems they are willing to accept.

 

Many of the articles published in MMM are penned by amateur authors. There is no reason to believe that Ken Always (whose photography you criticised earlier) is a professional journalist, nor that he is a professional photographer.

 

A lot of the photos in Ken's article were taken during his conversion of a Mercedes van into a motorhome, but these pictures may not have been ear-marked for inclusion in a later magazine article. Obviously, once the conversion was complete, it would not have been practicable to re-take, say, the early, gloomy pictures of the van's interior printed on Page 151 of December's MMM.

 

I can write a reasonably coherent, correctly spelled and punctuated English sentence, but I'm a 'snapper' not a 'photographer'. If I submitted an article to MMM to be considered for publication, I would hope the text would be acceptable, but I wouldn't be confident regarding my photographic efforts. It would seem from your comments that you would be the opposite. There is a difference however, as MMM's editorial staff would be pretty much stuck with my 'crap' photos, but could do something to improve your 'crap' text.

 

I enjoyed Ken's piece and, while recognising that some of the photos could be better, felt that they were perfectly 'fit for purpose'. I could understand, perhaps, if you had criticised the photography in pieces from non-amateurs (like Dave Hurrell or Andy Stothert), but it's surely a mite hard to target for criticism someone creating a unique article who will undoubtedly have been doing his best.

 

If you are going to suggest that MMM should only publish articles that include photos meeting your high professional standards, the magazine will be a whole lot slimmer. Me, I don't care - if I know I can't do something well, I accept this and admire others who can. If I know I can do something adequately, I won't be critical of those who cannot.

[snowie]

Derek Uzzell - 2012-11-20 10:50 AM

 

Iain Strachan - 2012-11-19 11:45 PM

 

Pepe, yes exactly that's why I don' t write, good editor of course would correct my spelling! But cannot do anything with the rubbish photography which it seems they are willing to accept.

 

Many of the articles published in MMM are penned by amateur authors.

 

If you are going to suggest that MMM should only publish articles that include photos meeting your high professional standards, the magazine will be a whole lot slimmer. Me, I don't care - if I know I can't do something well, I accept this and admire others who can. If I know I can do something adequately, I won't be critical of those who cannot.

 

Hi Derek;

I was going to keep out of this thread, but I think it is as possible to improve the photographs as it is to improve the text of an amateur submission.

I welcome more amateur contributions; I even agree with "Tracker" on this point. Variety and a little "left field" thinking is to be welcomed.

I'm no expert, but I've done a bit of Photoshop manipulation, and I wouldn't mind if someone "improved" my pics.

 

I have wondered recently whether there has been some cheapening of the paper that MMM is printed on; a lot of the pics appear to me to be a bit Muddy. Production standards needn't cost the earth I would suggest.

 

regards

alan b

[nuevoboy]

Daniel the editor - 2012-11-19 11:36 AM

One of the areas I have put in more resources is in sub editing.

 

Which means what, please, Daniel?

[Derek Uzzell]

snowie - 2012-11-20 11:53 AM

 

Derek Uzzell - 2012-11-20 10:50 AM

 

Iain Strachan - 2012-11-19 11:45 PM

 

Pepe, yes exactly that's why I don' t write, good editor of course would correct my spelling! But cannot do anything with the rubbish photography which it seems they are willing to accept.

 

Many of the articles published in MMM are penned by amateur authors.

 

If you are going to suggest that MMM should only publish articles that include photos meeting your high professional standards, the magazine will be a whole lot slimmer. Me, I don't care - if I know I can't do something well, I accept this and admire others who can. If I know I can do something adequately, I won't be critical of those who cannot.

 

Hi Derek;

I was going to keep out of this thread, but I think it is as possible to improve the photographs as it is to improve the text of an amateur submission.

I welcome more amateur contributions; I even agree with "Tracker" on this point. Variety and a little "left field" thinking is to be welcomed.

I'm no expert, but I've done a bit of Photoshop manipulation, and I wouldn't mind if someone "improved" my pics.

 

I have wondered recently whether there has been some cheapening of the paper that MMM is printed on; a lot of the pics appear to me to be a bit Muddy. Production standards needn't cost the earth I would suggest.

 

regards

alan b

 

It's possible to 'improve' writing to the point where it barely resembles the original material, but this won't be practicable if a photo is poor quality to begin with. I don't know whether any tweaking was carried out on the photos Ken Always provided to MMM but, if not, it might simply be because they were considered adequate for the type of DIY article involved. MMM is just a motorhome magazine after all, not an assemblage of photographic masterpieces.

 

As far as MMM's paper quality is concerned, my earliest copy is August 2007 and I can't detect any difference. Neither - dare I say it? - can I detect any real difference in the quality of the photos and writing in the 2007 articles compared to present-day MMM. Sure, the magazine's format has changed, but the writing/photos in 2007 (in my view) seem to be no better or worse than nowadays.

[snowie]

Derek Uzzell - 2012-11-20 10:50 AM

 

It's possible to 'improve' writing to the point where it barely resembles the original material, but this won't be practicable if a photo is poor quality to begin with. I don't know whether any tweaking was carried out on the photos Ken Always provided to MMM but, if not, it might simply be because they were considered adequate for the type of DIY article involved. MMM is just a motorhome magazine after all, not an assemblage of photographic masterpieces.

/QUOTE]

 

 

Personally, I wouldn't single out any specific article at this point, I'm not at all sure who the pro's are and who are the amateurs, as far as the photographs are concerned.

Just a personal opinion,

regards

alan b

 

[Derek Uzzell]

nuevoboy - 2012-11-20 1:17 PM

 

Daniel the editor - 2012-11-19 11:36 AM

One of the areas I have put in more resources is in sub editing.

 

Which means what, please, Daniel?

 

The following webpage describe sub-editing

 

http://www.prospects.ac.uk/press_sub_editor_job_description.htm

[nuevoboy]

Thanks Derek, I've had a look at the link and was fascinated to read this from the job despription:

 

 

"The work involves processing all the copy before it is published to ensure that it is grammatically and factually correct and reads well."

 

 

Referring to MMM December 2012 edition I quote from Daniel (the editor's) welcome introduction:

 

"....and I love dark evenings where the call of a good book, a comfortable chair and a warm corner are enough to staisfy me".

 

Seems like the sub-editors aren't sub-editing the editor. (lol)

 

 

N.B. Edited by my sub-editor, as I'd missed some "parentheses" out.

;-)

[Tracker]

Why all the fuss about photo quality?

 

It's a magazine for heaven's sake - not a signed limited edition print!

 

Isn't the whole object of a magazine article and photo to give a reasonable representation and flavour of what the area looks like in reasonable quality at a reasonable production cost and to that end I think that on the whole they succeed.

 

 

[snowie]

Tracker - 2012-11-20 7:39 PM

 

Why all the fuss about photo quality?

 

It's a magazine for heaven's sake - not a signed limited edition print!

 

Isn't the whole object of a magazine article and photo to give a reasonable representation and flavour of what the area looks like in reasonable quality at a reasonable production cost and to that end I think that on the whole they succeed.

 

 

 

Well it may be a cliche, but pictures do speak a thousand words; really good ones at any rate.

In fact I could get almost as much out of some articles if they were pictures only, but that's just me,

regards

alan b

[Derek Uzzell]

In the original posting Wills Wagon asked forum members to comment on his view that

 

"...the quality of articles and the accuracy of information has deteriorated in MMM over the past six months and apart from Andy Stothert and David Chapman some of the photography is also poor."

 

I replied that, within the last 6 months, I hadn't noticed the types of negative changes he had mentioned and asked for a definition of "quality of articles" and examples of 'inaccuracies'. In fact, I'd go further and say that I haven't noticed such changes since I began reading MMM in 1996.

 

That the magazine has changed since 1996 there's no doubt, but so have I. In 1996 I knew little about motorcaravanning or motorhomes - now I know lots. Let's be honest, motorcaravanning is not the most thrilling of pastimes and motorhomes not the most exhilarating of vehicles. What may have excited me about motorcaravanning/motorhomes 16 years ago won't necessarily excite me now. The level of involvement I had when reading MMM in 1996 is not there nowadays, but that seems perfectly understandable to me and I don't see my diminution of interest resulting from MMM going downhill.

 

Whatever Daniel Attwood's editorial plans are for MMM, they won't regenerate the enthusiasm for motorcaravanning/motorhomes I had in my novice years. These days I skip over many of the articles in MMM (eg. the travel pieces), but I can appreciate that those articles will be of great interest to other readers. I also appreciate how challenging it will to produce a magazine that will still be attractive to people like me whose motorcaravanning appetites have become jaded. So far (as far as I'm concerned) that challenge has been met..

 

 

[Iain Strachan]

Derek, There is no doubt that you can write and your dedication to the forum, and advice, well researched and freely given, is a credit too you and this community of motor home users. In fact I seem to remember that you replied to my very first post, a question about carrying gas bottles, with good advice! On this occasion however where the original post was asking for a view on the "quality of articles", I am going to have to stick with my original views. Each to his own.

You also mention that you don't try to get things published because your just a snapper, how about you write and I'll take the photographs!

Cheers

 

[747]

Don't listen to him Derek.

 

I can get out of bed for less than £150. That means more profit for us.

 

Now where did I put my Brownie 127?

[Iain Strachan]

Jim, I look forward to seeing your first MMM cover. I have a Brownie in the attic too.

Cheers