Popular Mechanics, the magazine on all things mechanical and well...popular, is under a lot of heat from a small but vocal number of its readers who feel the magazine is too pro gun and features too many gun articles and advertisements.
From a Review site on Popular Mechanics Magazine:
I received a subscription for Christmas last year as it seemed like a pretty broad based magazine with lots of good articles on a variety of topics. And that is absolutely true - however, I ultimately cancelled due to the number of advertisements for handguns. Call me what you will (and yes, I'm from that bastion of liberalism, Massachusetts) but I could not support a periodical that advertises these items. Just my own personal feelings on this matter.
Popular Mechanics is a gun friendly magazine, as evidenced by articles like this one which explains why the assault weapons ban must end. Another article why smart guns are a dumb idea
The gun friendly leaning tendencies of Popular Mechanics have not gone unnoticed by people who support gun control or gun bans. Some letters have been sent into Joe Oldham, the editor of the magazine, showing displease at the amount of gun articles, opinions, and advertisements.
In the June 2004 edition of Popular Mechanics Mr. Oldham addressed the issue:
As the editor, yes, I decide what will run and what will not. And yes, I enjoy the shooting sports and am a member of the National Rifle Association. I believe that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees me, and individual, the right to own a firearm. Like most of the readers of Popular Mechanics I am generally a law-abiding citizen, have served in the armed forces of this country and am not a "gun nut". From letters I received, I think I'm pretty much in step with the majority of our readers. Knowing that I have the support of most of you reading this, I can tell you categorically that no amount of irate letters or whining or protesting will scare me into forcing gun articles out of these pages. It's part of our heritage. It's part of our editorial mission.
And that's why we print articles on firearms. Let the letters begin. Till next time.
It's about time someone stood up against the political correct atmosphere in today's society. As a consumer the people who don't like the editorial content of the magazine have every right to not read the magazine, or just ignore those stories. They don't have the right to try to shut those ideas and stories down.
Article comments
1 - Jim Carruthers
So, let me get this straight, the only way to ensure a, well, I'm not sure what the hell your point is, is to publish articles in a general interest magazine which offend your subscribers and readers.
I haven't read PM in a long time, but I've always thought of it as a "how-to" magazine (for example how to replace incandescent bulbs with LEDs in a flashlight). So, aside from how to use a handgun as a remote control on your teevee, what's the point. Handguns are made to kill people. From a PM perspective, if you don't kill people with your handgun, then you're not doing it right.
So when do you get all offended about the little ads for French berets in the back of The New Yorker being carried in The Weekly World News?
Maybe you'd be happier with Popular Mechanics if they stuck with less controversial topics, like the intricacies of building motorized floats for Gay Pride Parades and circumventing Alabama's ban on sex toys with a little help from our friends at Black & Decker.
2 - Tom
Jim,
You are Canadian, so I wouldn't expect you to fully understand the intricacies of Liberty and the black and white reasoning of our Bill of Rights.
And as far as upsetting your readership, if you read my article you would see that it is a vocal minority which is upset.
My father-in-law uses a gun most every day. He is a semi-professional sharpshooter and NRA pistol champion.
He has shot a gun most everyday for the last 20 years and no one is dead. Only paper targets have suffered his wrath.
Just because a gun is capable of killing people doesn't mean that is its sole reason for being.
3 - Jim Carruthers
Isn't that usually prefaced with: "You shore got a purdy mouth", and some banjo playing?
Just for your own information, but the vocal minority is what guides general interest magazines. Rule of thumb is that every letter you get represents at least ten times more of your subscribers. You don't sell magazines or subscribers to advertisers by constantly offending them.
And I don't have a father-in-law, which means whatever I make up is as statistically valid and relevant.
4 - bhw
As a consumer the people who don't like the editorial content of the magazine have every right to not read the magazine, or just ignore those stories. They don't have the right to try to shut those ideas and stories down.
Since when? I thought we all supported the Dixie Chicks boycotts, the FCC boobie-thon-athon, and the public outrage against Whoopie's bush, no?
Since when don't consumers have a right to tell the people who make the products they buy what they do and don't like in those products? Since when don't customers have a say?
Oh, only since what they're saying goes against what you like to see in a product.
5 - Padhraic
Popular mechanics has'nt been an interesting magazine for years. Did you catch the US Army / Alien preparation / First Contact issue?
I'm not a big gun fan, but those people should be writing to the editor complaining about boring content, not gun content.
6 - Mac Diva
I am not a Canadian. However, I believe consumers, of whatever political persuasion, have a right to try to influence businesses they have or might make purchase items from. So, it seems to me that buyers of and subscribers to PM have a right to let the editors know they don't approve of its advocacy for gun ownership. Gun nuts, in turn, have a right to scream for even more articles affirming 'the Gun is God.' If the publishers want to sacrifice wider readership to advocacy for a gun in every pot, they are free to do so. But, I believe it would be a bad decision. Mechanics include a lot more technology than guns.
In the interest of disclosure, I believe the author of this entry should have acknowledged he owns at least fourteen guns. When I write about the iPod, I always make it clear I own one (have had three, starting with the first, in fact) so people know they are hearing from an advocate of iPod ownership. The same disclosure should apply to gun ownership.
7 - Mac Diva
Ditto Padhraic's comment about PM seeming to be out-of-touch. I accessed the magazine online a few days ago when writing a piece about the iTunes Music Store. I was surprised to see that most of the content consisted of snippets. Furthermore, the snippets were not necessarily accurate. For example, PM is under the impression that iTMS works with only Apple computers. The majority of users of the store (and iPods) have been Windows users for months.
8 - Tom
Your right Mac,
In the interest of fairness I will disclose my gun collection. I do own 10 guns. I've sold a few.
Most are shotguns and rifles, used for trap or hunting. I do own a few handguns for personal protection.
9 - Jim Carruthers
Y'know what really offends me, is that Popular Mechanics would be worrying about such a pussy subject as handguns. Handguns? What, the pink ones from Smith and Dildo?
Real men don't care about handguns! Real Men Who Read Popular Mechanics care about Atomic Airplanes, and watching teevee. Robots and Flying Submarines, and things which look like a penis with more balls than anybody else.
Those whiners and their handguns, they probably just have, as Oprah calls it, "issues" with their dinks. Hey, pal, if you gotta brandish your gun, just remember, "this is my rifle, this is my gun, one is for killing, one is for fun".
I bet the current editor of PM goes to the boys shower in his NRA underwear.
10 - bhw
Actually, I didn't think you needed to say that you are a gun owner, Tom. I guess I assumed you were, but it doesn't really matter because you're not reviewing the quality of a specific gun or even guns in general, you're commenting on a magazine's editorial policy and the "backlash" against it.
11 - Tom
Actually, I didn't think you needed to say that you are a gun owner, Tom. I guess I assumed you were, but it doesn't really matter because you're not reviewing the quality of a specific gun or even guns in general, you're commenting on a magazine's editorial policy and the "backlash" against it.
Very true. I was just getting that out in the open. Every time I post anything it seems like Mac brings up that fact that I am a gun owner.
12 - Jim Carruthers
I'm wondering about Popular Mechanics's obvious bias against people who are able to "defend" themselves with a hankerchief, a stick and a handful of poo. Obviously, they are just dissing the huge MacGiver audience.
Every general magazine (I'm leaving out niche pubs like "Monkey Spankers Monthly") depends on two things, attracting as wide an audience as possible, and avoiding alienating any of the audience they already have.
If PM insisted on running ads and articles on bed-wetters, and bed-wetting prevention devices, and they get a lot of complaints from the general readers that they don't like the emphasis on bed-wetters, wouldn't it make sense to run editorial more to the general public.
Or should they give in to the militant bed-wetters?
13 - Mac Diva
I bring up the topic because Tom is as much an advocate for guns as I am for the iPod. Maybe more. Tom has been known to cop provocative poses with parts of his arsenal over at the Naproom. (True, he does a good job of lovingly photographing his guns, but still. . . .) The Diva has so far resisted the temptation to go semi-clothed with her 40 GB iPod and post the JPEGs to her blog. However, Apple just released the fourth generation 40 GB iPod. Who knows what might happen when I get my hands on one?
Anyway, I appreciate Tom being forthcoming.
14 - bhw
The Diva has so far resisted the temptation to go semi-clothed with her 40 GB iPod and post the JPEGs to her blog. However, Apple just released the fourth generation 40 GB iPod. Who knows what might happen when I get my hands on one?
lol .... women just don't seem to get as worked up over their hardware as men do, for some reason. I trust you'll keep your cool.
15 - Mark Saleski
this will surprise nobody (especially tom): i don't own any guns.
this may surprise tom though: i think the assault(and other particular) weapons bans are just plain stupid. they don't have the intended effect (crime reduction) and are usually tossed around for political gain only.
16 - Mark Saleski
oh, forgot to mention:
i have fired weapons:
a 22 rifle
a .30-.06 (scared the crap outa me AND knocked me on my ass)
a soda can cannon (which shot flaming tennis balls)
17 - gordon ladd
I beleave we should be alowed to own a pistol and long gun. A long gun for sport and a pistol for protection. If you are asalted and have A pistol for protection its like the old sayinhg (an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure).
I dont beleave in taking someons life but
when it comes to them or me thats A horse of a diferent color.SHOOT FIRST