EDITOR'S LETTER
When Readers and Advertisers Talk Back
by Andy Engel
First, I apologize, although odds are it will happen again. I'll explain: Judging by e-mails and phone calls, it seems I manage to rub someone the wrong way in nearly every issue. Sometimes it's a reader, more often it's an advertiser. Sometimes I'm wrong, sometimes we just disagree. And really, I never intend to offend.
I'm glad for feedback, though, even when it's negative. As I said in my first editor's letter, a magazine isn't one point of view run up the flagpole, it's a conversation among many people. You participate simply by reading — or better yet, by writing letters or e-mails to the magazine or by sounding off on the forums at deckmagazine.com. And I'm always looking for readers who want to write an article.
So, what sort of things do people say? A good example is a recent phone call. A representative from a wood-treatment company took me to task for saying in the previous issue's column that copper-based preservatives corrode aluminum. I was thinking of copper-containing preservatives such as CCA, copper azole, and ACQ, all of which do corrode aluminum. But there is apparently a distinction between preservatives, which I missed. This fellow works for a company that uses MCQ, or micronized copper quaternary. Although copper-based, MCQ is said not to corrode aluminum significantly. I learned from that conversation — and so, perhaps, have you.
Readers write in with ideas, compliments, and occasionally complaints. In any event, it's great to hear from you. You're the reason this magazine is produced, and hearing what you like or dislike makes it easier to give you what you want.
When advertisers contact me though, it's usually because they don't like what the magazine had to say about their product, or they don't like that the magazine had nothing to say about their product. And I can see their point of view. After all, without advertisers, you wouldn't get this magazine for free and I wouldn't get paid.
Still, while advertisers pay the piper, they don't get to call the tune. Here's why that's best for everyone. You readers are smart. I'm sure you can think of at least one magazine where it's clear advertisers supply the content. How much time and credence do you give it? Very little, I'd wager. And there's very little value to advertising in a magazine that subscribers don't read and trust. Editorial independence is what gives magazines, and the advertising in them, value. In fact, Hanley Wood (the publisher of PDB) adheres to the American Business Media Code of Ethics, which states that editors must "accept as their primary responsibility the selection of editorial content based on readers' needs and interests."
Most advertisers know this, but they're proud of their product and quick to defend their brand. That's understandable, and I try to treat them fairly and honestly. When called for, we'll print a correction. Other times, I encourage advertisers to write informative letters to the editor. When they do, it benefits us all. So, to all of you, readers and advertisers alike: Thanks for joining the conversation.
