The truth about media vs sponsorship

[OneSickPsycho]

So how about those sweet expensive helmets...

[derf]

Originally Posted by OneSickPsycho

So how about those sweet expensive helmets...

What the article was getting at was that small heads are to light for the heavy compression foam of the top end helmets which were designed for adult sized heads. The high end helmets are still good for your rather bulbous noggin

[6doublefive321]

The fact that magazines cater to their advertisers doesn't surprise me. What disturbs me about this particular chain of events is the chain of e-mail between the writer and editor. Take the time to read through the entire chain, and you will find a pattern of unprofessional behavior between the two guys. The editor and writer clearly have an agenda in everything that is written, and worse yet, change the agenda based on the pressure they are under.

When I read a "professional" publication, I expect to get some unbiased facts, with a smidgen of opinion. While the writer in this story does try to lay a foundation of fact, his main agenda is to smear the Snell institute, with safety being an afterfact.

The bottom line is this: shame on everyone involved. Shame on the writer for having a personal vendetta and grinding his axe with his "professional" pen. Shame on the editor for fostering the writer's behavior until the shit hit the fan and then pulling a 180. Shame on the advertisers for using their advertising dollars to influence what is printed. And shame on the readers for spending hard earned dollars on that pitiful rag of a magazine.