Outdoor Articles Becoming Nothing More Than A Advertisement

[Gary Korsgaden]

Has anyone noticed that outdoor articles have become nothing more than another ad for product or services. Outdoor articles laced with product plugs are nothing more than paid advertisements. Even though the OWAA strictly frowns upon this. But writers continue to use this as a means to get promotional dollars. I realized first hand when I wrote crappie articles, one publication called and asked if they could
change the type of jig I mentioned in the article for the name of one
that paid for advertising in the magazine, what could I say either get published and get paid or it would be rejected. It is at this point I became extremely disgruntled with the whole culture and phased out. I realize business is business but shouldn't a line be drawn in the sand here. Look forward to your comments..............
I think I will strike some sensitve cords here..........

[Fred_G]

Gary,

I couldn't agree more. This is the main reason that I have dropped most of my fishing magazine subscriptions. I got tired of reading about the products of the authors sponsors. Some of these articles are so laced with product promo's that there is no room left for good information on the subject supposedly being written about.

Fred

[Bob Jensen]

Valid question. Some outdoor writers overdo the product mentions, but are we really interested in syrupy articles that are non-committal about product? I write articles, do seminars, produce a television show, and include product mentions in many of those activities. I sincerely believe that most anglers want to know which products will increase their chances of catching more fish.

There is a difference between blatant commercialism and credible endorsements. If I am talking about catching walleyes on jigs in the spring, you can bet I an going to suggest the use of a Fire-Ball jig. I believe it is a service to the angler reading the article that I mention the product by name. The reader, I think, please let me know if you feel otherwise, would rather I name the productive jig than simply refer to it as a round head, short-shank jig. Can anyone suggest that the Fire-Ball is not one of the best walleye jigs on the market today?

Now if I were to say the Fire-Ball jig is the only jig that will catch fish, I would be doing a disservice to the reader, to Northland Fishing Tackle, and would be jeopardizing my crediblity. There are lots of jigs that will catch walleyes in the spring, but if I had to select one to do the job, it would be a Fire-ball.

Publications that edit all product mentions, just like publications that knowingly allow untruths to be printed, are doing their readers an injustice.

I have yet to find a lure that works everywhere, everytime. However, when I recommend a product in an article, in a seminar, or on tv, you can bet that I am confident in its capabilities.

I have a lot more to say on this subject, but the spaghetti sauce is burning.

Looking forward to other comments.

Thanks for the question Gary. You make us think.

Best Fishes,

[Mike Frisch]

Guys - this is a sensitive topic, and I believe some very good points have been raised on both sides of the issue. As an outdoor writer, I will add my two-cents worth. First and foremost, I believe there is a difference between writing an article for the sole purpose of promoting product and writing an article designed to benefit anglers by providing information, some of which, in my opinion, should include what lure to use. When an article starts with "I hopped in my "so-and-so" brand boat, fired up my 60-hp "so-and-so" motor and headed for my favorite spot, I quickly get the message that the author is merely trying to mention product, not provide me, the reader, with some useful information. On the other hand, if an article includes useful information that will help me catch fish,I want to know what the author is using to catch those fish.
Also, when I mention a product in an article, you can bet that I, like Bob, believe in the product being mentioned. I've had people respond to me when I mention a product, "Yeah, you're only using it because you get them free." My response usually goes something like this, "Yes, I may be sponsored by that company, but I used their products long before I was ever sponsored by that company." I won't mention a product unless I believe in it.
Also, I want to add one final note. Several years ago, I read the series of books that Bob co-authored with Gary Roach and Randy Amenrud. Those books not only offered some of the best walleye-catching tips I'd ever read, but they also offered suggestions on products that I purchased and used to be a better walleye fisherman. I think those books would have been incomplete without those mentions.

Anyway, I'd be interested to hear more on this topic.

Mike Frisch

[Box]

As a non-writer and non-pro who spends more $$ than I should on hunting and fishing stuff, it doesn't bother me to see even blatant mentions and product placement (I noticed on a recent show that Bob used a Frabill net on a totally small walleye ;) hehe...). It's up to me to decide what I want, and as mentioned, it is often nice to see and hear about what people are using.

When it gets over the top, I just laugh. Look at all the shows - they have the obligatory shot of the Minnkota motor, the up close shot of the ABU reel, etc. But I do think it is pretty cheesy when hosts mention the name of the boat and motor when it is obvious what they are driving. :)

But many people watching the shows or reading the articles are not into fishing like many people you find here... if they like a writer, or host, for whatever reason, I think they may want to try a product endorsed by that person. There is such a big selection of equipment that the novice can get confused. At least this gives them something to start looking at.

I make computer games, and you would be surprised at the product placement in hunting and fishing games I have had to deal with - some of it products people here may endorse. Personally I don't mind it, but it may lose credability with some people.

-Box

[Walleye Express]

Gary.
I've had maybe 20 or so articles printed in National Magazines and a lot more in local paper back types (Hunting/Fishing News) (Great Lakes Steelheader). And the first nut I had to crack to get printed was in the content of my articles. I seemed many of my submitted articles were to (Joe and Me like) for the mags I tried writing for. They wanted strickly facts, places and equipment used articles. And sticking those facts in, along with the knowledge and instruction on how to use both while fishing with Joe, wasn't what they wanted. They wanted what to me was a dry, boring article filled with product indorsments. But I know what you mean. Showing the picture of the product overlayed in the text every time it's mentioned, really sends a message. Like the author is only doing it to keep his entry fee money coming in. Who know, maybe I'd do the same thing if my livelyhood depended on it. Capt: Dan.

[Ed]

Box----computer game producer! Now I understand your bias in the fishing/technology issue!

[Box]

Yes, but that does not mean I want to rape and pillage the waters.

As I mentioned, I do like technology - I never said I didn't.

But not everything I have is "new fangled". I also fly fish... with an old rod.

I was taught by "old-timers" and I must say I am definitely a better steward of the fish and game than them. With or without technology. I have NEVER knowing violated a game or fish law. I have shot two redheads in one shot by mistake, and was over my limit. I did not hide it, but did not get caught either.

You are using a computer, does that make you more inclined to like technology for fishing more? Obviously not... but you assume that it does me... interesting.

BTW - I am also a biologist, but currently working on games. I spent 5 years after college (biology major, environmental studies minor) working as a mosquito research biologist. Need any info on skeeters? ;)

-Box

[Ed]

Box, you sound like a very interesting guy! I'm sure you have the best interests of conservation, wildlife, etc. at heart.

[Piscatorian]

This has been true for a long time, maybe forever in this industry. I, too, have cancelled many of my subscriptions for the same reason.

Can you think of any other industry that suffers from such a lack of objective and comparative information? I can't. What publication will evaluate five different similarly price rods and compare their relative merits? Not one that I've ever seen. Outdoor Life comes the closest perhaps, but falls way short. Tell me what they cost, tell me what they weigh, tell me what type of components are used, etc.

I can get this type of information for cars, computer software, telephones, digital cameras, bicycles, etc. But for rods, reels, depth finders, waders, etc. -- no way.

The internet has some reel potential to solve this problem, and I am still optimistic. However, I have been chastized on forums like this one several times for honestly extolling the virtues of a product over another product that a board sponsor was hawking. Ugh.

In some of the publications, such as a well-known Midwest publication to be nameless, just about every single article is a thinly veiled add for a manufacturer, a lodge, a guide, etc. I, for one, will not pay money to read their advertising.

And many of the television personalities are the worst. Bill Dance, to name one. Yeah sure, you can go to Bienville plantation and catch a few nice bass on Stike King Demonwhopperthingee and a crappy Zebco reel, but you could also catch them on ##### near anything, sooner or later -- it just takes enough film to prove any point you want to try to make on T.V.

O.K., I'm done ranting for now.

[Walleye Express]

Picatorian.
Funny you should mention (FARM POND BILL). I used to watch Mr. Dance's show and have a cabinet full of products he sponsored. But since he started fishing ponds where the bass eat pellets, candy bars and anything that falls into their domain, I lost faith in the man. They may have moved the shoots to ponds though, to be closer to Hospitals. The man is a walking accident. Capt: Dan.

[reddog]

Call me simplistic, thats Ok, but a jig is a jig is a jig, If you have a fireball jig on all day, did you catch all your fish on a fireball, Of course. If I have a blank leadhead on all day, I caught all my fish on a blank leadhead. I caught all my fish on a blank leadhead. I dont know if a fireball is any better, and you dont know if the blank is any better, cuz I didnt try the fireball, and you didnt try the blank. If you found fish in 18 feet of water, and fished in 18 feet of water all day, what are you gonna tell your buddies? I fished in 8 feet of water all day. doesnt mean that the fish are in exactly 18 ft, or 8 ft. We both probably caught fish, but will come home with different stories for our buddies. I'll tell mine that the fish were in 18 ft, and you'll tell yours that they were in 8 ft. No harm done. LOL

Cap Kennedys, and Jim Stones. Those were the pioneers in jig fishing.

[fred]

Would you mention a fishing product that was a direct competitor of a company that was your biggest sponsor?

[Gary J]

So, what did you do?

Did you cave in for the publishers jig and get paid or leave it as is with your own sponsors jig.

[curt quesnell]

Gary is mixin it up again....Good question

When I pull up to my buddies boat and he says he needs only one more
fish for his limit- I ask "What are you using?". Not "How many
times per second are your lifting and dropping your jig" not "How
long have you spent perfecting this technique that you are using
today".

Magazines and TV shows have known this for along time. They only
have so much time or so much space to spend or fill with each
article or show. The rules of news and information..Who, What,
When, Where and Why. The first and most important rule is Who.
Second is What (as in what is being used, not generally but specifically). The others will follow in the story and are important
but are not the Big Two.

As you complain about the articles check to see if all 5 questions
are being answered.

When you get to the point of no longer needing the basics of old
ideas or a primer to something new that has been developed by someone
out there and you pretty much never have to ask "Hey, what are you
guys using to catch those nice fish?. Then, I suppose, you may not
have much interest in the Rods, Reels, Line, Boats, Electronics and
other things these stories include. Then I agree you must cancel
your subscriptions and try to find something more fullfilling.

As a consumer I will scour the articles for the "Whats". Not to
run out a buy a truckload of them but to store in whats left of
my memory for sometime that I may be looking to try something new
or different in a new or different situation.

I was telling a buddy of mine that I was going home to check the
Walleye page on the internet. He asked me "Which one"?. I broke
into a sweat remembering this thread and finally muttered
"WWWWWalleye Central". He said "Oh" and turned away. He didnt
seem angry. He did want to know specifically which Walleye site
I was going to.

Curt Quesnell

[Box]

:)

-Box

[Bob]

You miss the point. The intent of fishing articles today is not to disperse information, but to sell. It so disappointing to start reading an article, expecting to find something interesting and informative, only to find some guy "hawking" a product? In fact, many products. It was not always that way. Not so many years ago articles on fishing were informative, and actually enjoyable to read. But today most writers are "bought and paid for". Their articles offer nothing. The same themes re-hashed over and over again with a plethora of products to sell thrown in.

[curt quesnell]

Bob,

Thats is exactly my point. If thats all you are seeing you
have been thru the re hashing too many times. If the product
endorsements bother you, if you arent reading anything new and
If you arent enjoying the articles anymore you should cancel
your subscriptions because you have absorbed all they can teach you.

To say the articles are bad or bogus isnt right they just arent
grabbing you anymore.

I dont see a huge difference in articles, other than there are
way more of them. The products have alway been included. With
the amazing amount of information on a limited topic some of us
get burned out.

Now, I'm going to hop in my Chevy Suburban, and get the stuff I
need for my Lund Pro V at Napa Parts to raise my 9.9 Yamaha kicker
motor 4 inches yada yada yada yada. You see, I understand what you
are saying.

I hope you find what you are looking for

Curt Quesnell

[Bob]

Curt, I understand what you're saying. There are only so many things you can say about a topic, and then you begin repeating yourself. I agree with you. But there are two points where I disagree: There is far more product endorsing in outdoor articles then there use to be......much more. Secondly, the reason for writing the articles has changed to where their main purpose is not to education, but to sell. They are really nothing more than another advertisement. If there are novice fishermen who need the info (and I'm certain there are), then write an informative article, with out all the blatant selling. If more seasoned fishermen don't find anything new, and there's a need for product endorsement, then at least be honest and label them for what they are.....an advertisement. But that's not what's done. Pick up a magazine or paper with a headline on the cover saying: "New Method To Catch Bigger Walleye", and you'd expect to find something worthy. But "no", it's the old "bait and switch". There is nothig new or noteworthy in the article. Just another guy "hawking" an elixir.

[curt quesnell]

Ok Bob,

You say there is more selling, less topic.

I say there is selling and topic and lots of articles,
long time absorbers of the information get some fatigue.

I think we could still spend a day in a boat together.

Thanks for your input

Curt Quesnell

[Chad]

There are a lot more products out there today then there were 10-20 years ago. Back then all you had was mono line. Now we have mono, no strech, minimall strech, red, yellow, green, and god knows what else they will come up with. How do anglers learn to use all these new products? It is because someone wrote an article. They may have provided the brand they used but I dont see a problem.

I dont read any motor head magazines, but I bet they mention what products they use. Not all products are made the same.

[Rick James]

I write a weekly outdoor column for our local paper.

Yes, I mention the names of the lures I use when writing fishing articles and I think the writer should give the name of the lure. I also mention the live bait I am using, but not many companies, other than the bait shops, care if I mention that. But, I don't say I was using minnows when I was using night crawlers just to promote minnows.
When I read fishing articles, I would be upset if the writer didn't tell me the brand name of the lure they use.

In my hunting articles, I don't believe I need to mention my shotgun name, even if I shot a Remington 870 12 gauge. The size of shot I use may be important. For grouse I use 7 1/2 shot and pheasants I my use 5 shot if I can find it or four shot. I think that is important for my readers to know. I would not like to see my readers using 4 shot on grouse, for example.

Yes, I have been to seminars and read articles where the writer even mentioned the name of the jeans they wear. (Well maybe not) But it seem like it sometimes.

[Ed]

"I was catching good walleye numbers using crankbaits. I used a Rapala Shad Rap, but a Berkley Frenzy or Reef Runner would probably work also."

Is a lot different then:

"I grabbed my Berkley Lightning 6-foot graphite rod, model 147, loaded with Trilene XL 6 lb. line, set up with a Roach Rig and Lindy No-Snag sinker, and attached a Berkley Power Bait. I glanced at my Lowrance X-15 fish finder, grabbed the handle of my Minnkota Maxxum trolling motor (mounted next to my 115 4-stroke Yamaha outboard), and positioned my Lund ProV 1775 with ISP hull on the reef my Garmin 76 GPS found for me. I had my Frabil landing net near my Plano tackle box just in case I got lucky and latched onto a walleye."

[Snowman]

Bingo, you've got it!

[Rick James]

reddog

You have a point. If I write that I caught my fish on a certain jig name it is only for information not that you have to use the same type jig. But I bet if my readers see that I caught my fish in 25 feet on a certain jig, they will try that first right. Mentioning the name of the jig and the depth where I caught the fish give my readers a starting point. If they like another jig so-be-it. Go ahead and use that jig. But if it doesn't catch the fish maybe they should try the one I used. And by the way, all jig are not alike. I use different type jigs for different type conditions.

Good luck fishing

[BlackSilver]

Some publications are good, some are horrible, and Midwest Outdoors is the worst of them all. EVERY SINGLE article is a blatant advertisement!

SET the hook!!!

Hans/MN

[Tom B]

I personally, like the way In Fish does it. At the end of most of their articles ther is contact information for just about every type of lure mentioned. I think that it is also interesting that a person does not have to advertise with In Fish to get a product mention. I am friends with a gentleman that makes great spinnerbaits and has had his baits mentioned in several articles and has never spent a dime advertising with them.

What I don't see with any of Bob's work is the mention of competitors to the products that sponsor him. That to me, is unfortunate.

I am also the editor of a fishing publication and it is something that I am on the lookout for. Eventually, I hope to have a database of companies so that when a product is mentioned, I can include that company, plus their competitors as contact info at the end of the article. To me, that minimizes the "advertising" slant of an article.

Tom B

[Backwater Eddy]

I have read some great points and I would certainly admit that once you acquire some sponsorship relationships, a refined eye gets cast upon your written text rather quickly.

In the not so distant past, I wrote an article that I thought posed a comprehensive look at a spring fishing pattern. I was pretty pleased with it, the response was good, and I was a happy camper.

Unfortunately a well respected and highly valued sponsor thought all the extra "focus" on "peripheral products" in the article was a bit distracting from their product, they were.....Ah....not too pleased.

My response was, “I was writing to cover a series of options I use and find productive and listed the products I felt worked best for me, I give credit were credit is due, that is my style of writing, I guess.”

They were not too impressed with that answer, a clarification was requested.

So I bit my lip & reluctantly pulled out a few stops and said exactly what I felt, let the chips land were they may.

This time around my unpadded response was, “I fell anglers are getting especially wary and generally tiered of over hyped text on anything and everything period! Readers can smell it in the first few lines, go all starry eyed, loose all interest, dismiss any credibility the text may contain, and any useful information you wished to share with them gets lost in a fog if they bother to read the whole text.”

I honestly thought I was now short one VERY valued sponsorship relationship!

Three days went bye, then a week, still no response; I was now completely certain I blew it.

Now for the big shocker, they responded, OK "Cool", we see your point and we can work with that, we appreciate the honesty.

:O

We still work together; I try to keep product reviews and comprehensive tactics articles separate. I feel the two are separate information venues and have distinctly different purposes.

I am not knocking everyone else’s style of writing that may use product reviews internally in their text, it is generally just not my way of doing things is all. To each there own and I still read them all.

My point is I don’t think marketing is the only concern advertisers/sponsors have in mind, sharing your views often can produce change.

Anglers buy tons & tons of stuff & we always will, I think it is in our nature. So being over specific often backfires on advertisers is how I see it.

Backwater Eddy.....><sUMo>

[Ragenald]

This is the very reason I love the ESPN BASS tournament coverage. You see these guys using the tactics that will catch fish for the conditions on that day. You know going in that VanDam will use a Quantum reel and Yamamoto will be fishing his own plastics, but if they want to do well they have to fish like the rest of us.

Contrast that with a recent episode of Roland Martin's show. (A personality that I happen to like and a show that I have learned much from) He was throwing a piece of plastic at bass that were obviously so active that they would have hit anything. He must have mentioned the name of the lure 20 times. These XXXX are the best. The Bass just inhale this XXXX. The only things more annoying are the half hour long shows about canadian resorts, shot entirely on hand held video.

Thanks,

Rage

[Gary Korsgaden]

At that time I had to cave in as I was hungry for exposure. Human nature I guess.

[Gary Korsgaden]

I think the reason they are bad for this (Midwest Outdoors)....is fisherman that get and use sponsors products use that has part of a full-fillment to satisfy the sponsor. Another check by their name of sorts. A easy one I might add as product mentions are rarely edited out of a article.