[Leica] cloaked unsubstantiated statements (put up or shut up)

[Mark Rabiner <mrabiner@concentric.net>]

Ed Buziak wrote:
> 
> Marc,
> 
> Mike Johnston is a fine journalist and a photo magazine editor... as such he
> hears many things, some of which cannot be passed on openly. Although more
> of a "rookie", as you say across the pond, I am in a similar position and
> have heard opinions on the matter from someone who knows more about
> repairing (and, thus, the construction of) Leicas than most today... like he
> has serviced around *one hundred* Leica-250s!
> 
> After I sold my M6 and replaced it with an M3 I asked my friend if the
> earlier model was indeed a better instrument, as it truly felt, but do you
> know, his "wise-old-owl" reply was...
> 
>     "...if you are attracted by the features which are exemplified by
> rangefinder camera design, then
>     despite its age, the M3 is still an excellent choice. However, the Leica
> M series has evolved and
>     doubtless will continue to do so. The current M6 with its TTL metering
> really does provide the
>     photographer with a tool that is capable of excellent results."
> 
> I can't tell you what he *really* said because (like Mike rightfully argues)
> it's off the record. But I feel confident enough, having been told by an
> authority, to pass the information on as *fact* if I am asked... and would
> feel rather disappointed to receive the retort "so much BS" for my
> unattributed advice. Mike and fellow editors (and Erwin) may or may not know
> something from time to time of what is being planned for the future at
> Solms, Tokyo and elsewhere... and we receive "secret" internet addresses
> which show products and press releases for inclusion in forthcoming
> publications... we can't tell you even if we wanted to... and even if we did
> we couldn't reveal our sources, period!
> 
> Ed Buziak / Publisher
> "Camera & Darkroom"
> 
> ed.buziak@camera-and-darkroom.co.uk
> 
Ed the fact that you and Mike are Journalists unfortunately puts you in a
position where we do not expect less from you, we expect more.
And this applies to other "authorities" on a "pedestal" of any sort who want to
announce to us the bad news or good news "inside story" about what a true piece
of cr&^ our cherished expensive little toys are.
We don't expect a "journalist" to say or certainly write things along the lines of:

"Severely reliable top unnamed sources have let me in on the fact that this
thing is not built very well"	Who cares?
I've had high school teachers who would kick me out of the class for this type
of statement.

We are supposed to lie down and roll over because someone of "authority" status
makes sweeping cloaked unsubstantiated statements?!
The journalists I've spoken to over the years and I have done some just don't
speak in those terms: large unsubstantiated and/or cloaked statements.
They know no one wants to hear it and stop listening quick.
They know that anything they say is meaningless unless properly qualified. Why
write? Why talk?
I am very familiar with your magazine as well as Mikes so I am surprised such
basic issues as these are on the floor.
You wanna tell me something that is significant and going to "rock my world" but
you don't want to tell me where you got it from?
We should just listen to the true rumors form the authorities who would have us
trade in our M6's for M3's or 4's.
I'm surprised a trained and experienced Journalist would speak in these terms.
I would hope people on this list with a more solid background in Journalism will
weigh in on this.
I don't proclaim to be an expert on Journalism but I'll be damn amazed if I'm wrong.
Mark Rabiner