thyname
Well if you dont understand you probably never will but I will give it one more try.
So Doug is supposed to be a reviewer who works for an ezine; both he and the zine are supposed to be objective. But, and I doubt Doug did a bunch of research on cable design before he wrote his article, he claims all of these attributes that read like they came off the Iconoclast website. More forgivable, but just as irresponsible, would be if he was "educated" by Galen on cable design.
Third paragraph reads like a biography written about Hitler by Goebbels. Now I am not saying either Galen or Doug are Nazis or even bad people (obvious but necessary to point this out in this day and age) but what he wrote is nothing more than a honeyed synopsis on Gavin to add credibility to the cable and the company.
So this comes off as an ad because it is an ad. I have no problem with any reviewer stating that he loves a cable but this is way over the top and lousy journalism from a supposed objective source of information.
So I am faced with this type of ad and what am I or anyone supposed to think? I can only guess that this type of journalism is written only with gaining favor with the manufacturer in mind. Why not just have the manufacturer write the review?
Perhaps its just me because no one has piped in, but I have had enough to this type of stuff. Hurts the industry and should insult everyone's intelligence. At least it should cause a very long pause.