Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

  Register / Login

As an editor I will agree with John

Regardless of the content/merit of this particular thread, I will agree with John that one of the most important roles played by journals is to allow the publication of differing viewpoints, even if they are not those that I would agree with personally.

Assuming that the article/column/letter is well written and raises important issues without containing *ad hominem* attacks or deliberately offensive (as opposed to "provocative") commentary, it is certainly a candidate for publication in Positive Feedback Online. In fact, we just published such an exchange between PFO Senior Assistant Editor Lynn Olson and one of our readers at the link below. Both Lynn and I disagree quite strongly with this reader on the subject of DSD and the reader's claim that Red Book PCM's superiority, but the exchange led to some interesting commentary and some useful content.

Throughout, we agreed to disagree agreeably.

So John is certainly right in this regard: an editor need not agree with the content of an article or column to publish same. In fact, it is extremely important that various viewpoints be included, to act as checks and balances for editorial content and to provide a broader array of outlooks. I would hate to think that anyone thought PFO mirrored my personal preferences in all things. It never has, and it never will.

Indeed, any journal which restricted its content to only those contributions agreeable to the editor would become a drab read very quickly. A one string banjo is no fun at all.

So whether or not one agrees with John's stance on audio tweakery, one should not assume that the act of publication equals agreement with the views published. Still less should we wish that John *ought* to publish only articles or columns that he agrees with.

Given the content of this thread, it is clear that John did accomplish his editorial mission: to spark quite a vigorous debate on this topic.

The ration of heat to light, and the SNR...well, that's another thing. But I would rather have us exploring these points (subject to the "disagree agreeably" proviso) than not discoursing at all.

Regards,

David W. Robinson
Editor, Positive Feedback Online




This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Kimber Kable  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups


You can not post to an archived thread.