| The Director's Chair March 2001
Reviewer Bias or Reviewer Preference?
Wow, what a touchy subject we have this month! Or at least
it seems so ... on the surface. In reality, though, it is hardly as touchy as one would
think after you dissect it. Conspiracy theories abound in the audio press about this
publication or that and how reviews are tied to advertising dollars or extended equipment
loans. I’m sure some of this exists; in fact, I have heard my share of stories over
the years. Most of them probably have some basis in fact; although, I know how stories
mutate as they are passed from person to person, growing in both severity and distortion.
The word "bias" itself is one problem. I
don’t think it is appropriate to use the term "bias" interchangeably with
"preference," but it is almost universally so. For example, I have a preference
that I’m going to divulge to the readers of Home Theater & Sound here
today: I prefer solid-state amplifiers in my system and always have. There, the news is
out. Quick, alert the press! Wait a minute. Would not anyone reading my reviews throughout
the years be able to figure this out? Could not a reader or manufacturer examine my
reference system and tell that I have spent my own money on solid-state amplifiers? I
guess we should not alert the press after all. It’s not really news to any careful,
or even casual, reader.
Does it take a rocket scientist to figure out that if I
review a tube amplifier, one should take into account my preferences (toward solid state)
before reading the review? I have reviewed tube components. I have also given them very
positive reviews based on my observations of their performance, but I bought nary a one.
This does not mean my reviews were not accurate, only that in the end I still preferred
solid-state. It also doesn’t tell a tube lover whether or not he or she would buy the
component under test. Buyers, also, have different preferences. When I think of
bias, I think of undisclosed agendas. That is a whole subject unto itself and has no place
in reviewing or reporting of any kind.
To go one step further, I think disclosed preferences are
one sign of honest reviewing. If I make it clear going into a review that this or that
is important to me, then my reviews can be qualified with this in mind. It makes me, the
reviewer, laid bare for the reader to examine. If I have a clear preference and then
inaccurately assess a component due to these preferences, it should be obvious to the
reader.
There is also the benefit of finding a reviewer that has
similar preferences to your own. This will make the reviews more valuable to you because
you will likely align yourself with the reviewer’s assessments. When you audition a
product reviewed by that particular reviewer, you will likely say, "That’s what
Joe Reviewer said, and you know, he was right."
In the end, any review should be read with your
preferences, and those of the reviewer, in mind. This will give you the correct
perspective and lead to proper weighting of the review. You can then decide if what the
reviewer said should be taken with a grain of salt or if you should seek out the product
under test to audition for yourself.
So don’t get too worked up when you perceive a
reviewer’s preferences. It’s not only natural but can be beneficial as well. As
for bias, or hidden agendas, we’ll tackle that one soon. That is a whole other
ballgame. Buckle your seatbelts. That one will be juicy!
...Jeff Fritz
jeff@hometheatersound.com
|
