Home Main Category General Firearms

How do I submit a letter to the editor of G&A

PegasusPegasus Senior MemberPosts: 2,747 Senior Member
Try as I might, I cannot find the email address to use in sending a letter to the editor of G&A. I just read the July issue of G&A and I cannot believe how wrong an article can be yet still be published in G&A.

The letter is composed, just need an email address. I must be blind because I can't find one anymore on the masthead of the digital version of G&A. Maybe I need stronger glasses.i
«13

Replies

  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    When I had a subscription dispute with a magazine I called the phone number for their advertising department and offered to buy a full-page ad. I was going to publish their nasty letters and copies of my cancelled checks for all the world to see.

    Things got resolved in record time after that call.
    Jerry
  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,747 Senior Member
    This site is weird, I can't even fix the typo in the title of the thread. Edit post doesn't do anything.
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,756 Senior Member
    Pegasus wrote: »
    This site is weird, I can't even fix the typo in the title of the thread. Edit post doesn't do anything.

    Sure you can...We do it all the time...go advanced...
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,747 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    http://www.outdoorsg.com/about/contact/

    In the drop down menu select editorial as an option.
    Yeah, I saw that. It's limited to 400 words. That's way too little to explain in detail the magnitude of the error.
  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,747 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    Sure you can...We do it all the time...go advanced...


    I only have "Go Advanced" when I post a reply, not when I edit a post.
  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,747 Senior Member
    Looks like Wambli fixed it for me. Thanks Wambli.
  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,747 Senior Member
    I just checked and even trimmed to the bone my reply is 900 words.
  • JKPJKP Senior Member Posts: 2,228 Senior Member
    Care to detail the nature of the error(s) in the article?
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,756 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    I didn't was abou to but probably Jayhawker did it.

    Here is the email address to the editor of G&A.
    [email protected]

    Yep..You're welcome...
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,747 Senior Member
    Thank you so much, Jayhawker.:applause:
  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,747 Senior Member
    Thank you. Email will go shortly.
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 16,756 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Doesn't work for us.

    That's what we're here for.....that and the free guns and babes....
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,788 Senior Member
    And the exorbitant salary and expense account.
  • CHIRO1989CHIRO1989 Senior Member Posts: 12,417 Senior Member
    Did somebody incorrectly call something an AR10 again?
    I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,747 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Doesn't work for us.

    We can't even edit our posts. I thought we used to be able to do that, but no more. That's important to me because I make so many typos and I like to go back and fix them.

    Now I can. Hooray.
  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,747 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Sure you can. See post 15

    Something just changed because now I have Save, Go Advanced, Delete and Cancel buttons when click on Edit Post. It was not there earlier today.
  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,747 Senior Member
    JKP wrote: »
    Care to detail the nature of the error(s) in the article?

    I guess you'll just have to get the next issue of G&A.

    Seriously, I'm not sure what the policy is here. I would not want to offend someone, unintentionally.
  • SpkSpk Senior Member Posts: 3,855 Senior Member
    Pegasus wrote: »
    I guess you'll just have to get the next issue of G&A.

    Seriously, I'm not sure what the policy is here. I would not want to offend someone, unintentionally.

    Well. I don't receive G&A anymore or any of the others. The articles were very short on detailed information for my tastes and, of course, the frequent misuse or terms, definition and outright errors. I had Rifle Shooter, Handguns, Guns and Ammo and Shooting Times. I enjoyed Shooting Times the most and it was the last one to get the boot. I used to bring things up to Scott E. back in the day but he kindly reminded me, "it's just a hobby mag." I've since let things go from then on. I don't take things as seriously anymore, they're just magazines not professional journals.

    Since I won't be receiving next month's article maybe I can look it up online. All I need is month and topic.

    :angel:

    I can still edit mine...hmmm.
    Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience -- Mark Twain
    How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and [how] hard it is to undo that work again! -- Mark Twain

  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,747 Senior Member
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    The Forums are supported by G&A but they are an open forum open to all gun discussions. But, I'm sure you can expound on how you believe such article is "wrong" in a civil manner without offending anyone no? It's a forum open the whole world, if the author decides to become a member and answer it's Ok too.

    Where's the fun in that?

    I sent the email to Eric Poole. I'm busy for the rest of the afternoon and will try to come back tonight or at the latest, tomorrow.

    In the meantime, I noticed that I am now unable to edit my posts, once again.
  • ZeeZee Senior Member Posts: 23,518 Senior Member
    Pegasus wrote: »
    In the meantime, I noticed that I am now unable to edit my posts, once again.

    It's a conspiracy!!
    "To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
  • Gene LGene L Senior Member Posts: 11,624 Senior Member
    Pegasus wrote: »
    I just checked and even trimmed to the bone my reply is 900 words.

    You can likely send a letter to the editor of 5000 words or more, just don't expect it to be published. Or edited down to publishable length for you and published. Letters to the Editor MUST be shortish to fit into the format of the magazine.
    Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 8,120 Senior Member
    I have had comment published in Field & Stream and the word limit is pretty restrictive in order to allow for several such comments to make it to print. They don't expect a ton of detail, just a quick swipe at (or praise for) the author for whatever the main point is (e.g. "Jack's article is so fraught with errors that the internet would run out of virtual ink if I chronicled all of them").

    In general, I can't recall any magazine that I've personally read in recent years that will publish a full-scale critique as if it were a man mini-article. Your rebuttal will have to be a quick snipe with one or two specifics, at most, rather than a detailed technical assessment.
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 27,288 Senior Member
    Just taking a S.W.A.G here. I'm betting it's the article on scopes, objective lens size, 'light gathering', and exit pupil size, among other topics in the article. Just guessing, though. The rest of the magazine articles were about pistols and tacticool riffle gunz. :tooth:
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    That was my guess too, but flying horses drop flying apples, and I was gun shy :jester:
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,747 Senior Member
    You guys are so punny.

    Yes indeed, the article in question is the one to which tennmike referred. Now, can anyone tell me what's wrong with the article?

    While we're waiting, here is a major hint. As some of you may remember, I have been an avid photographer for close to 50 years. Ernie can even attest to that as he saw me running around with a camera taking pictures on the line at Rston in 2013. I even had some of these pictures published with my article in the Gun Digest annual the following year. I have a couple of DSLRs and about 7 lenses for them. I'm currently teaching my youngest all about photography and optics. About exposure and composition.

    Now, when you peruse magazines or websites dedicated to photography, you always see the lenses listed with two very important numbers; focal length and maximum f-number. For instance, my normal lens for my DSLR is a 35mm f/1.8 lens. With those two numbers, I know exactly what the lens is, the magnification range and the speed of the lens, so I know when and how to use it.

    I have harped several times here about getting the nomenclature correctly when someone talks about a riflescope. We put the magnification first, an X and then the diameter of the objective lens. This is exactly the same as a camera lens, except that we use the power instead of the focal length, and we use the diameter of the objective lens instead of the f-number, but the numbers have the same function.

    The sensor in my cameras is an APS-C, which means that the normal lens for that camera is 35mm. Normal here means, no magnification. If I said that my lens was a 70mm f2.8, this would represent a small telephoto of 2X magnification. When the film was 35mm, the normal lens was 50mm. So a 300mm f/4 was a 6X telephoto. Easy peasy.

    So why is that other number important?
  • DanoobieDanoobie Member Posts: 95 Member
    This is why I stopped buying gun mags, OP. I would read an article, and say to myself
    "I just paid 5$ for this?". I've come to the conclusion that these mag's articles are mostly
    advertising, and product exposure is far more important than any accuracy or
    professionalism. "No such thing as bad press.", and all that.

    Which "other" number? In the case of rifle-scopes, diameter of the objective lens gives the
    consumer a general idea of the amount of light they can expect to exploit at dawn or dusk,
    for hunting, IME.
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 24,634 Senior Member
    Danoobie wrote: »
    This is why I stopped buying gun mags, OP. I would read an article, and say to myself
    "I just paid 5$ for this?". I've come to the conclusion that these mag's articles are mostly
    advertising, and product exposure is far more important than any accuracy or
    professionalism. "No such thing as bad press.", and all that.

    Which "other" number? In the case of rifle-scopes, diameter of the objective lens gives the
    consumer a general idea of the amount of light they can expect to exploit at dawn or dusk,
    for hunting, IME.
    Guns and Ammo pays the rent here----a subscription is just the right thing to do.
    Shut up-----KAREN; OK Cynthia
  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,747 Senior Member
    Danoobie is getting very close.

    And I agree with NN, which is why I subscribe to G&A, RS and ST digitally.
  • PegasusPegasus Senior Member Posts: 2,747 Senior Member
    And I still can't edit my posts, nor can I properly reply with a quote as the original text is cut off.

    Yeah, I'm beginning to believe what Wambli said.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    Pegasus wrote: »
    And I still can't edit my posts, nor can I properly reply with a quote as the original text is cut off.

    Ha!

    Edited to add....................:jester:
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement