|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
Register / Login
|
|
|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
Register / Login
|
In Reply to: Re: Who said reviewers are journalists, subject to those posted by andy19191 on February 26, 2007 at 11:37:33:
"If the writer does not derive any income from the reader and is employed by parties that do not have interests wholly aligned with the reader where does this duty come from?"The writer knows that a reasonable reader will rely, to some extent, on their words in making a purchase. The writer's duty is a moral, ethical duty, which, to some around here, apparently count for much. I would have assumed this to be self-evident, but, then, I have learned, more and more people are willing to abdicate duties when it benefits them.
You query is akin to asking what duty do you have not to murder someone for money if you can get away with it, and the law is not looking over your shoulder to politely remind you that you have a duty to your fellow man.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Who said reviewers are journalists, subject to those - jamesgarvin 08:46:43 02/27/07 (4)
- Re: Who said reviewers are journalists, subject to those - andy19191 10:13:32 02/27/07 (3)
- Re: Who said reviewers are journalists, subject to those - jamesgarvin 13:40:06 02/27/07 (1)
- Re: Who said reviewers are journalists, subject to those - andy19191 01:50:30 02/28/07 (0)
- Wrong again! Your opinion does not constitute a fact. - Sordidman 12:09:05 02/27/07 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
