Just not exactly how I'd expect. It seems that the reaction of members of the main stream gun media (to include "Sherriff" Jim Wilson, Bryce Towsley, and a blogger named Bob Owens) seems to NOT be about the debacle of the R51 pistol (or the owners left out in the cold by Remington), but rather the "calling out" of Richard Mann (author of the recently published glowing Shooting Illustrated R51 article) by Nick Leghorn at "The Truth About Guns."

For your reading pleasure (since we're not out shooting R51s):

Leghorn's article:

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/05/foghorn/shooting-illustrated-remingtons-r51-erosion-journalistic-integrity/

"Sherriff Jims" BLOG post - where among others things he accuses Leghorn of calling his friend a "liar" (I could not find anything of the sort in the TTAG article), and even seems to possibly threaten Leghorn. (In article "Come out and see me some time and we’ll have a warm, personal visit." In comments section user named "Jim Wilson" states "When he calls my friends and colleagues liars then I take exception." and "The boy lives in Texas and he ought to learn about Texas manners and Texas paybacks.")

http://sheriffjimwilson.com/2014/05/21/sour-grapes/

Bryce Towsley's article titled "The Continuing Saga of the R-51" - which interesting enough mentions almost nothing about the "R51 saga" (as in the gun) but does manage to: take on Leghorn, defend his friend (Mann), defend the practice of MSM gun media being treated to the "honor" of private, closed shooting sessions catered by gun manufacturers, and ends with his PLUGGING the R51! ("I will say that this pistol has the potential to be a game changer. Clearly Remington blew it with the introduction, but there are reports coming in now that they may have the problems solved. It might be smart to watch this as it continues to develop and don’t write off the gun just yet. Once they get it running right, I think you are going to like it."

http://brycetowsley.com/tactical/continuing-saga-r-51

Finally, someone (seemingly only representing Wilson's views) feels Leghorn is "burning bridges..."

http://bearingarms.com/burning-bridges-standing/2/

"Sherriff Jim" and Towsley, who both cite Mann as their good friend, seem have no concern for anyone but Mann, regardless ALL the others (by and large average, everyday people - you know, their loyal readers...) who've been splattered by the proverbial feces, known as the R51. That feces, which since having been tossed into the proverbial fan, has pretty much blown back on everyone.

Leghorn (who's R51 review I found to be somewhat of a hit piece) published a subsequent blog article titled "Shooting Illustrated, The Remington R51, and the Erosion of Journalistic Integrity" in which he (in my opinion fairly) questions the appropriateness of the Shooting Times cover story, given the seeming widespread prevalence of problem plagued R51s.

Apparently this act (The questioning of Shooting Illustrated and Richard Mann by association) has them (The guys mentioned above) so riled up as to post entire blog entries on the subject, while by and large completely ignoring pretty much everything else R51 related. You know, the troubling issues with the R51 (like it not working), the owners left out in the cold after purchasing a gun whole heartedly endorsed by the print gun media, the MONTHS now that some owners guns have been back at Remington, and the complete lack of communication by Remington to owners on the matter. From what I can see, these guys could care less about the latter, but WHOA MAN on the former!

Anyone else troubled by all of this? Richard Mann and another buddy of some of the guys mentioned above (Jeff Quinn of "Gunbast") have both posted online endorsements of the R51. Is it just me, or it irresponsible to post gun reviews online (where content can and is expected to be updated) and regardless as to whatever their personal experience was (with a single, manufacturer provided, example of the firearm) to not update their posts when pretty convincing evidence later becomes available that there is an issue with a gun that they've endorsed to the public?

Anyhow, as I stated, I did not care for Leghorn's initial R51 review - but commend him for his piece examining ethical considerations related to the print gun journalism world.

445r51 wrote:while by and large completely ignoring pretty much everything else R51 related. You know, the troubling issues with the R51 (like it not working), the owners left out in the cold after purchasing a gun whole heartedly endorsed by the print gun media, the MONTHS now that some owners guns have been back at Remington, and the complete lack of communication by Remington to owners on the matter. From what I can see, these guys could care less about the latter, but WHOA MAN on the former!

Honestly, I rather doubt that the referenced authors have very much latitude to "report" what other people claim to have happened to them. Journalistically, there's only so much that they can "report" without seeing it themselves or without a very solid reference before it becomes hearsay (a journalistic no-no) and runs the legal risk of Slander. That means law suits which, even when won, tend to be expensive for magazines, which are always on the razor's edge between profit and loss ("new media" has been eating their lunch for the past decade or more).

That is one of the advantages (and disadvantages) of the "alternative media" such as bloggers like "Nick Leghorn." They are free to report "hearsay" which may be important trend indicators but also may be nothing more than gossip. In theory "Journalistic Standards" are supposed to minimize the amount of Caveat Emptor that readers must employ. There is an entire system of checks in the Publishing industry which help enforce "Journalistic Integrity" spearheaded by Editors but, supposedly, reinforced by everything from lawyers through supervisors to peer-pressure and training. It doesn't always work, of course (particularly in politics!), but there truly is an attempt being made. When presenting product reviews, authors are generally required to report only what they personally have experienced. If they can report the experiences of others at all, it is typically very carefully couched in "weasel words" such as, "there are reports, unconfirmed by this author, of <blah blah blah>." They are usually more or less free to offer opinions on subjective matters directly relating to their review such as, "the trigger was crisp," "the gun felt heavy," "it pointed naturally," "this could be a game changer," or "just another entry in a long list." As I wrote before, I have friends, professional authors, writers, and contributors, who are part of the publishing industry.

What troubles me is the infighting, back biting, and even veiled threats. There has always been a certain rivalry between traditional media outlets and "new media." To a certain degree, that is to be expected. They're competitors, after all. But this appears to be getting personal between both sides and that worries me.

I bet the gun-grabbers are lov'n it, though.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk