Internet credibility

[Ryan]

The latest Mountain Bike Action (yes I admit I read it) has an article in it which I pretty much take to be an attempt to justify the existence of monthly MTB magazines.
The crux of the story was, to my mind, that news taken from internet resources is unreliable, as are the reviews you can get off sites like mtbr.com and that people should only trust the information they get from reputable sources like magazines.
My thought on this is that the news you get from websites is just as reliable as that which comes from a magazine, everyone uses the same sources after all and as far as I'm concerned, I'd rather get my news daily from a website than have to wait one to three months to get it from a magazine.
On the subject of reviews, I place precisely zero faith in any review I read in a magazine these days, In my opinion the industry is far too close knit and advertisers wield far too much influence over the magazines. For example, I haven't seen a bad review in AMB in the last year, and their bike reviews have gradually reduced in length, until they're now about 3, half page columns in length on average, which is no where near in depth enough if you ask me. I put a lot more faith in the honest, consumer reviews I can get from mtbr.com (once the crap is sorted from the good) than the obviously advertising-tainted reviews the mags dish out.
So what's everyones opinion on this? Do you trust internet resources or are the mags still the resource you rely on most. Sorry for the prolonged rant but the article in MBA really ticked me off :/
</rant>

 

[Gutty]

Didn't vote.
I tend to not trust either in alot of cases. The mags are in many cases running adds for the same product they have been given free to review and keep, you gonna tell me their never biased ? Of course they are.
As for the internet, i don't give any credit to reviews 90% of the time unless i know the reviewer as alot of the reviews you read are either utter crap or someone making themselves feel better about buying product "x".
Here's a classic example of a bogus review.
http://www.mtbr.com/reviews/2003_full_suspension/product_121251.shtml

I generally trust reviews that i hear from people that have in the past proven themselves to be honest and/or knowledgable.(which probably excludes myself :wink: )

On the other hand i tend to believe alot of NEWS i read on the net such as what you'll find over at MTBFreak.com as i see no reason for 90% of it to be lied about.

 

[Mason]

I trust them both. Mags often run on what they hear from company's, and internet does also, but with a bit of word of mouth sometimes. I like the idea that the net ones are free, and thats why i read them. But a mag u can read anywhere. Well i guess that I trust both mags and internet. But someone can always tamper with the internet reviews.

 

[Scott]

For news I trust 95% of news that is said on mtb internet sites. I can't see them gaining anything for jazzing up stories and making them fictional. On the other hand, a website must earn the trust and respect of the readers before it can become a good site. This takes time. After a certain amount of time, the readers will figure out whether the authors of the site actually know anything, whether their opinions can be bought and whether they really care about what they are doing.

I think that basically mtb action are worried about loosing their cut of the market to net 'zines. I actually dont really remember action being that good a mag anyway. </rant>

 

[CHEWY]

i dont really like MTB magazines, they all seem to be really crappy. i used to read dirt action when i was into MX and all there reviews were always quality and usually went for at least 3 - 4 pages. and after reading a reveiw in some MTB mag that basically said the bighit was a crock of shit, while almost every consumer that owns one likes them i dont know what do think, plus on sites like mtbr u get to look at what people have to say after theve been using itfor a year or more and thats a good long term test.

 

[nathan]

I love sitting down and having a good read of a mountain bike mag. But when it comes to the crunch and you really want to buy someting i always check MTBReview because you can usually get a fair idea from there and also email the people and have a chat to them.

On the news side of it i beleive nearly all of it but if your reading a magazine you pretty much know it before you read it if you surf the net. Eg Farkin.net

 

[S.]

Ok, am I gonna try and get information from a magazine that comes out quarterly (AMB), one that comes out monthly (US mags/DIRT), or websites/forums that get updated a few times a day (Farkin, Hcor, RM, NSMB)?

 

[frank-oi]

both but by the time to read it in a mag it's generally old news the only thing i by the mags for is the pics. but yeah .mmm. thats all.

 

[Adi]

Yea, I mainly buy mags for the Pics, and other texts, not reviews of products, if i want that, I'll ask people on the net on sites like farkin and mtbr

 

[kalem]

the thing is with the internet you can get lots of information from lots of sources, that way you can make up your own mind. That's what i like

 

[Yum Cha Racing]

i'd say that the internet is a reliable source of information assuming that you can sort out the crap from the good stuff (like on mtbr.com).
Magazines are hopeless for reviews in my opinion, like someone said AMB hasn't given a bad review in ages but the worst is in the UK Dirt Mag where they just talk about how the bikes built and what its got on it for a whole article and spare about half a paragraph on how the thing actually rides