Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

gwl-g - [gwl-g] Recommending plant sources - changing topic from reviewing books

gwl-g@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: gardenwriters-on-gardening

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Claude Sweet <hortventures@cox.net>
  • To: gardenwriters-on-gardening <gwl-g@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [gwl-g] Recommending plant sources - changing topic from reviewing books
  • Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 10:06:49 -0800

Using the analogy of a magazine publisher avoiding publishing a negative review of a book title - Is it considered ethical behavior to name sources that supply inferior, misnamed, or diseased/dead plant material and/or have very poor customer relations concerning replacement or refunds?

With the internet and a search engine, I find some really bad nurseries investing heavily in glitzy web site that attract the uninformed reader of gardening publications. Don't we have an obligation to point this information out? I can recall Michigan Bulb Company ads appearing in publications for years even though it was widely known in the horticultural trade that there were wide spread consumer complaints and dissatisfaction.

Claude Sweet
San Diego, CA

Nancy Stedman wrote:

Gee, this is kind of depressing to me.
Isn't the point of a review to steer people to good books and keep them away from those that waste their money? Or to at least write enough about a book so a potential reader can tell if it is of interest to him or her? If a reader has to buy a book before he/she realizes they hate it, what service is a magazine performing? I imagine that garden magazines (unlike newspapers and most magazines) won't publish somewhat negative reviews because they want to make a deal to sell the books (as American Horticulture often does). Not my idea of journalism...
Nancy Stedman, NYC

At 10:18 AM 1/15/2005 -0500, you wrote:

I was comparing this in my head to restaurant reviews, where the best
reviewers do point out the negatives and the restaurants pray for them to
visit anyway (if you believe what you see in the movies <g>).

Also, since most honest reviews would not be good or bad, but would point
out strengths and weaknesses as seen by the reviewer, avoiding a review if
there was anything bad in it would mean that the good is never talked about
either. This does not seem like a good thing to me.

Esther Czekalski







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page