[shark]

http://tohatchacrow.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/climb-magazinesafe-as-milk.html

Would be interesting to see Redhead's rejected article to see if Pickford is vindicated in declaring it misogynistic although likening Redhead to the Taliban in the email was 

[Grubes]

Shark not sure why you posted that as a public spat.
From what I have read it was a private spat which one party (Redhead) decided to post publically. It was bad enough reading that thread on UKC.

If you are really interested e-mail dave pickford and ask for an unedited version of the exchange. However I don't know why he would feel the need to answer it.
I have no idea why this has been publicised other than to start a witch hunt against him.

My personal opinion I think this is a thread for the log pile.

[Muenchener]

I know nothing about the details of this incident, but in general my impression from my occasional visits to the UK is that Mr Pickford is doing a good job. Climb magazine is one of two climbing print periodicals I can think of that is having a decent go at still doing something worthwhile in the online era. (The other is Climax from Austria, which goes in for a lot of nicely printed photography and in-depth interviews)

And surely an editor is well within his rights to turn down any submissions to a magazine for any reason - if he didn't he wouldn't be, erm, editing would he?

[shark]

Shark not sure why you posted that as a public spat......My personal opinion I think this is a thread for the log pile.

Its public now.

And there is the wider more interesting issue of "difficult views" being aired and dealing with accusations of misogyny is of course a UKB specialism.

[galpinos]

Logpile.

I posted on the UKC thread but thought UKB was better than airing half a conversation.

DP doesn't come across well but I'll reserve judgement until I see his comments in context. JR isn just JR.

[SA Chris]

Storm -> teacup -> logpile.

[Baldy]

Well I would like to read the article now 

[petejh]

Shark - why don't you offer to publish JR's article here? I'd be interested to read it as no doubt would many others. It might get ripped apart if JR's points are overly toxic or if the article is a bit shit, or it might get applauded, who knows? But he's guaranteed a knowledgeable audience who can make their own minds up. It would be nice to think a climber of JR's stature - like him or not - could have his views heard. I don't like the idea that Dave Pickford thinks he speaks for me - although his views were aired via a bit of a dirty trick perhaps by John Appleby.

Muenchener - I find the mainstream climbing media - Climb, Climber and ukc -  anodyne in the extreme these days and unwilling to debate anything outside of narrow, uncontroversial vested interests. I think many others think the same. Pretty pictures and Pickford's wordy editorials are 'nice' but the average content of both mags seems to me to be an endless stream of destination articles written by photographers as opposed to genuinely interesting content written by writers with something interesting to say. The payment structure tells you all you need to know about the climbing mag's priorities: photographers get paid lots more than the writers do. Articles must come with lots of pretty pictures or they aren't worth writing - not that money should be the primary motivator for writing something you care about, but even if you did submit a gem I find it hard to believe the mags would dare to publish more than a single page of text without a good quality photograph on it.
The standard of writing in Climb (the better of the two) can be terrible when it's penned by photographers selling their photos from their most recent trip to newrockistan. I've found myself reading a few photographer's articles recently which I should have been paid to read, not the other way around. And ok it's hardly Private Eye, but whenever I flick back through climbing mags from the 80s and 90s the general irreverence stands out. Where's the irreverence in today's climbing media? There is none - 'dissent route'? - a poor fucking joke.


The ukc thread has subsequently been pulled from the public eye and deposited in their 'pub' which will be deleted following 7 days of no replies - I can't stand that site becasue of the way they try to censor anything that rocks the boat  - which I gather is what JR's article is about...

[tomtom]

Having read JR's tweets about this over the last week its seemed rather bizarre and one sided (glad other people think so too).. Logpile.

That said, if the original were available as Pete suggests that would be interesting..

Maybe UKB should commission people to write an article every month? (different person every month etc..) Pay them with a UKb T shirt or 1/2 a wedge or something..

[Dave Flanagan]

Are the mags not just giving the people what they want?

I understand why a manufacturer might not be very pleased if a mag that it advertised with slated it products but I don't see why they would shy away from advertising with a mag that was somewhat controversial, surely a bit of controversy would grow their readership and raise the mag's profile?

I can only imagine the pressure of producing a monthly climbing magazine and I would assume the editors would love to receive lots of great writing into their inbox but I don't think it works like that and that is why they are forced to rely on rather formulaic destinations pieces.

[Fiend]

JCT sticking her tawdrily narcissistic oar in = auto-log.

[petejh]

She hasn't 'dipped her oar' (fnarr fnarr) in here though has she.

[rehab21]

I find the mainstream climbing media - Climb, Climber and ukc -  anodyne in the extreme these days

Agreed, and that could be extended across the media as a whole. The combination of commercial interests, conflicts of interest and the perceived sensitivity of their readership leads to an anodyne product - I mean, go check the magazine racks of your cornershop/supermarket and see how many challenging cover stories there are. Maybe something from Private Eye is my guess.

We don't have the benefit of having seen the article, but if Pickford has refused to print then can we assume it was either totally off the wall or he's trying to avoid a difficult conversation with the board? I'm imagining "Dave, sales have fallen during your tenure, and we've seen a marked drop off in female readership", or "Dave, there's been a reduction in advertising revenue since you started printing articles criticising corporate involvement in climbing and how it is destroying the sport". That would be depressing, but probably understandable. It's an attractive job; I'd want to keep it. As for Pickford's comments, they seem extremely misjudged but the whole thing is very unedifying without knowing all the context.

Luckily for all us off the wall, non-corporate type advocates of free speech, while the print media has become increasingly risk averse, the internet offers access to a soap-box whenever we want it. Two platforms to air his views are already available to Redhead and he's got his own website, anyway. If the article is a tirade against the corporate hijacking of climbing, then this is probably it's natural home.

I think it's unfair that Redhead has chosen this route (another assumption, I know his mate could just have decided to have an online rant independently) - either chuck the offending letter in the bin and forget about it, or publish and be damned!

[shark]

Shark - why don't you offer to publish JR's article here? I'd be interested to read it as no doubt would many others. It might get ripped apart if JR's points are overly toxic or if the article is a bit shit, or it might get applauded, who knows? But he's guaranteed a knowledgeable audience who can make their own minds up. It would be nice to think a climber of JR's stature - like him or not - could have his views heard.

 

[Fiend]

She hasn't 'dipped her oar' (fnarr fnarr) in here though has she.

The very fact she's posted a lengthy sycophantic suck-up to JR in the comments, full of "I'm a climber me, and female" (uh HUH) indicates this a particular sort of turd for her to buzz around.

Then again, posting the article would be good, JR's stuff is often interesting in it's own right.

[petejh]

Well we should keep a fuck-off big fly swatter handy then.

[lagerstarfish]

the extra attention might be good for Redhead's book sales

[petejh]

Well that's got to be a good thing - if it means he's less inclined to try selling me his paintings every time I bump into him 

[abarro81]

I tried to read one of his articles on that website but thought it was crap. Maybe I'm just a soulless sport-climbing philistine, but he comes across as a pretentious douche to me.

[petejh]

An artist found to be pretentious, whatever next!

Pretentious yes, but remember Redhead pushed the boundaries in the 80s, climbing hard and bold trad routes ground-up or with minimal inspection - including the country's first E8... Margins of the Mind. Indian Face, attempted ground up taking falls from on high... Numerous E7's climbed ground up.

I'm not too surprised he finds today's scene a little underwhelming at times. Fast-forward 20 years and a climber who does those sort of things gets lauded by the media - if that climber is linked to companies who pay for advertising. There's a commercially-driven dilution of what's considered significant through the continual emphasising of non-leading edge accomplishments.

[SA Chris]

Shark - why don't you offer to publish JR's article here? I'd be interested to read it as no doubt would many others. It might get ripped apart if JR's points are overly toxic or if the article is a bit shit, or it might get applauded, who knows? But he's guaranteed a knowledgeable audience who can make their own minds up. It would be nice to think a climber of JR's stature - like him or not - could have his views heard.

 

Really? His mysoginistic (sp?) ramblings may scare off the female readership that has flocked in since it was voted decided DFBWGC was no longer a good idea.

[mark20]

The 'rejected' article was on Footless Crow a couple of months ago
http://footlesscrow.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/perillos-here-be-dragons.html

I bet JR is wanking over the controversy

[mark20]

Actually I misread that, the article in question was him 'expanding' on the one above

[lagerstarfish]

Shark - why don't you offer to publish JR's article here? I'd be interested to read it as no doubt would many others. It might get ripped apart if JR's points are overly toxic or if the article is a bit shit, or it might get applauded, who knows? But he's guaranteed a knowledgeable audience who can make their own minds up. It would be nice to think a climber of JR's stature - like him or not - could have his views heard.

 

I think he's more than capable of publishing his own stuff on 'tinterweb

I like to read his tweets

[Fiend]

the female readership that has flocked in since it was voted decided DFBWGC was no longer a good idea.

Very good.