Re: Article in April 2001 Issue of Railway Digest

[John Coyle <nospam@newsranger.com>]

In article <9c1co5$db0$1@bugstomper.ihug.com.au>, E.P says...
>

Hi, I would like to take a different point about RD. I think that the magazine
has improved over recent years. EXCEPT that readers opinions are NO LONGER
permitted! In particular, if one is even slighly critical of RD. What would be
said if NEWSPAPERS stopped publishing letters from the public, that may be
critical of an editorial stance? I was amused at the drawn out "battle" in RD,
some years ago, over the policy of the magazine going national in focus. A
policy that has been demonstrated to be far sighted and correct, now that there
are so many interstate operators around, these days! Sure, RD is trying to copy
the style of "TRAINS" magazine, which some people don't like, but at least the
news, articles and photos, are mostly high quality.


>Hey I once had plenty of articles and photographs published in Railway
>Digest back about 4-5 years ago.Ok I still buy Digest but I usually find
>digest too commerical, where as Motive Power Mag, is much more informative
>than the "Locomotives & Traffic" section in RD.
>
>I like the RD of the 1980's when we had Loco and Rollingstock reports on
>conversions and withdrawals/scrapping etc...Maybe the rollingstock newletter
>that gets printed in ARHS Bulletin could be published in Digest.
>
>After all its is current happenings.Isnt that what RD is all about.Bulletin
>is more a historical thing.Ok what has happened today, tomorrow its
>history.But thats my opinion.The argument of which magazine should have the
>Rollingstock report has been going on for years.Knowing what happens behind
>the scenes being a ex ARHS employee.
>
>I'm not having a shot at Maikha's article, my articles were similar to that,
>I was just stating how I think the mag has gone down hill (in my view) in
>the past years.
>
>E.P
>
>