Monday, July 28, 2008

Best and Worst Of Richmond Mag A Sham?

I chatted up (or at least attempted to chat up) a young lady last night (details withheld). It turns out she works at Richmond Magazine. She mentioned that she has something to do the balloting/voting process for Richmond Magazines best and worst issue (which was released last week).

I asked her if that many people actually vote for some of these best/worst categories? She told me that they do recieve a lot of ballots, but in more than a few categories most of the ballots are basically from employees of the store, or relatives of the store, or friends of relatives of the store. In other words; People that are heavily biased are able to rig the vote and in an extremely weak sense of the term, commit electoral fraud.

I'm not sure how many people actually turn to Richmond Mag when deciding on where to get their ice cream or where to buy their antiques or where to have their transmission replaced, but I have to assume that it can be somewhat influential. After reading Richmond Mag for awhile and this issue in particular, I would guess that the only people who would be influenced would be the blue hairs who probably make up the bulk of their readership. This is just an educated guess though and really, I have nothing to base these claims on.

Now did anything happen with that staffer I tried chatting up? No it didn't. She was with some stuffy chick who clearly thought more of herself and her looks than any guy ever will. I did briefly consider getting a phone number, but who am I kidding? That call would have never materialized.

34 comments:

Richmondite said...

Yeah I'm pretty sure Elliot Yamin IS NOT the Hottest Richmonder. That vote had to be rigged.

Anonymous said...

Does it ever occur to you that many women would never date a bartender?

J.Woods said...

If I had to guess... Jack doesn't really give a fuck about women who hold bartender dating prejudice.

in vino veritas said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
in vino veritas said...

i think the whole thing is complete bollocks. utter crock. i will say brandon and john were good pulls. i suppose someone yanked their head out of their stuffy suburban ass to come up with those.

Jack Goes Forth said...

Raleighwood- nice to see you started blogging. I'll be reading.

Anonymous- I'll answer your stupid comment with a great quote from Vince Vaughn-

Asked if he always got every woman he wanted he replied, "No, no I haven't gotten every woman I've ever wanted... but I have gotten every woman who has ever wanted me." :)

I get rejected. Every guy does. If a guy isn't getting rejected now and then, then he's doing something wrong.

In Vino: Yeah I'm fine with the blogger category, and really I have no beef with any category, I just thought it was funny that I got some Richmond Mag insider info simply from hitting on a girl.

Anonymous said...

You should start your campaign for best blog 09' right now, which basically would consist of 10-11 of your friends mailing in ballots for you.

Anonymous said...

.....so my comment, was "stupid"?.

Your blog smacks of entitlement and harsh judgmentalism of women. A woman rejects you; you denigrate her appearance and self-assuredness.

Jack Goes Forth said...

Actually, if you would read more closely, I was denigrating her friend for being a bitch. The girl I was speaking with was pretty cool.

And yes, your comment was stupid. This is an open forum and unfortunately I have to accept anonymous comments... I don't have to be nice though.

Next time put your name down instead of putting "anonymous" and then we can have a civil conversation.

a female reader said...

Dear Anonymous: Jack is a 24-year-old bartender. Honestly, I would guess the last thing on the mind of a 24-year-old bartender is "entitlement" and "harsh judgmentalism." Check back when he's 34. If he's still doing it then, maybe I'd agree with you. For now, it's fun. Stop reading if you don't like it.

Richmond Magazine said...

As the managing editor of Richmond magazine, I’m glad to see you’ve picked up our mag at least a couple of times. However, I have to point out a little misinformation in your blog post.

You question whether our Reader Survey is a “sham.” Well, we wouldn’t publish it if we thought it was. So, in brief, that answers your question.

You are right that some folks try to pull a fast one and attempt to stuff the ballot box.

Bear in mind that we’ve been doing this Best & Worst thing for more than 20 years now and can recognize the bag of tricks. For starters, our editor-in-chief, Susan Winiecki, reviews each ballot personally and the clearly invalid ones go straight into the trash — according to rules plainly stated in our magazine and on the ballot. (I won’t go into what we look for, but suffice it to say that we work very hard to weed out any cheaters.)

As for the results, Jack, this is a survey of our readers who take the time to respond. These are their opinions — like it or not.

Which brings me to another clarification: I’m sure some of our readers would get a chuckle to know they’re being categorized as “bluehairs,” since our readership is about as diverse as the crowd you would serve drinks to if you were tending bar in any number of downtown restaurants. Our staff ranges in age from 23 to 43, the not-exactly-ready-for-Grecian Formula crowd, and most of us live in the city. With all due respect, maybe you should pick up our magazine more often and check it out cover to cover. From this month’s story on 1708 Gallery’s InLight arts exhibition on Broad Street to a detailed report on the CenterStage project, you’ll find we’re pounding the pavement to stay current with happenings in the city and beyond.

Anonymous said...

To Rich mag: maybe you should send your post to your staff. I work for a company that does business with a company that buys advertising in your magazine. They were specifically told their company would be chosen for Best of "X" if they bought more advertising.

Just saying.

Richmond Magazine said...

Our editorial staff does not promise any editorial coverage to anyone. Since the editorial staff oversees the ballot publishing, the ballot counting and all of the interviews with Reader Survey winners, this is an impossibility. — Jack Cooksey, managing editor

in vino veritas said...

wow jgf: way to get a mag dainties in a bunch.
ric. magz: thou doth protest too much, methinks.
:)

Jeff said...

It drives me crazy that Richmond Magazine doesn't have online content. And I'm not talking about the "preview." They may think they are helping themselves right now by only offering it in print, but they'll just end up shooting themselves in the foot. Think about how much bigger the online presence of "Best and Worst" would be if it was actually available as an online link?

And what about people who are outside of Richmond and want to keep up, but don't want a subscription?

None of this is to say we "want things for free," but in this day and age, you've got to offer it for free and find a way to make up the costs.

dewey dunn said...

To Jack Goes Forth and In Vino Veritas:

I used to work in the publication trade for a few years in another part of the state. The worst parts about "Best of" magazines were those in the community (and advertisers) who put me through hell for NOT fudging the results of these sort of ballot-oriented issues, either (a) because they were advertisers and felt they were entitled, or (b) people who did not agree with what the voters selected, and expected me to change the results to mirror their own opinions. While I can't speak for Richmond Magazine, I do know these type of accusations are common in the publishing business, and usually have no basis beyond heresay.
Great investigative journalism there, braintrust, you're really ripping the whole thing wide open. Everybody knows anonymous blogging is for those without the rocks to put their names on the accusations they're making. It's a venue for those who can't make it in the real business. Now go get me a beer and some pretzels...

Suzie said...

It is kind of refreshing that JGF (Tucker Max Impersonator) finally found something to talk about with more importance than getting laid. Your blog isn't so bad when its not entirely about you.

wendt said...

I haven't read this years list. They usually do pretty well, like the top three pizza places was right on last year. But way too many west enders are weighing in, choosing Ukrop's for every catagory possible.

Old Guy said...

As a Loyal reader of JGF and a subscriber to Richmond Mag (I'm 47 wishing I was still 24) I am shocked, awed, and pleased to see this discussion.

The world is a funny place. Jack you my friend are right on point again.

Jack Goes Forth said...

Wow, I leave the house for a few hours to see The Dark Knight and return to a comment bonanza. This makes me smile.

Richmond Mag: I appreciate you taking the time to respond. As I mentioned, I have NOTHING to base my argument on except for a few comments from a girl who I met at a bar, who was drinking.

My guess on the blue hairs comes from the fact that sometimes you float some soft and fluffy junk out there that would probably only interest older housewives (of course I can't give a good example at the moment because your online content is nil- "Jeff" is right), nevertheless, you also have some very interesting and current content, so clearly my comment and opinion are pretty off target.

In terms of your ballot process, I would be interested in knowing what makes a ballot invalid. Would it really be that difficult to rig a vote like this? Do you check people's address or if they even exist before counting their votes? Of course not, it would take forever. If I'm wrong though, please enlighten me.

I personally don't care either way because I think the issue was an interesting read, and I guess since I'm young and somewhat in touch with shit in Richmond then not ALL of your readers are in wheelchairs.

As for the whole "buying the vote" accusations, I have no idea and no real opinion. If I owned a business though, you can bet I would pay off the editorial staff for that top spot. Actually, maybe we can talk about the "top blogger category" for 09'. I can't pay you cash, but I know a few VCU girls who are really into writers. :) I doubt "Buttermilk" can offer up that.

Again, thanks for taking the time to converse.


Everyone else: I guess no one noticed, but this post was basically just about me trying to pick up a girl. It's cool how I can add a small bit of Richmond social commentary into my debauchery though.

John said...

The whole thing must be rigged, since Buttermilk & Molasses only gets about six hits a day -- mostly from the editors at the Times-Dispatch.

Jack Goes Forth said...

haha. Nice one Buttermilk.

LaTroy Glastonbury said...

JGF is well on his way to becoming a Richmond celebrity.

Anonymous said...

On responding anonymous.......how does any username trump anonymous? We're all anonymous. If you can't handle it, go private.

On attacking the woman............ whether she was the friend, or the chattee, is irrelevant. You denigrated a publicly identifiable woman on her confidence and appearance. Does it bother you that a woman can derive confidence independent of your approval? Women exist for your pleasure, and you are entitled to it? You speak for all men? Your arrogance and judgmentalism are amazing.

On denigrating the blue-hairs.......Why? Are you jealous of their assets, their spending power? Why even mention it?

On demanding tips........what you blogged may be true, but you don't understand the service industry. We bring discretionary dollars. Bad service, and we go elsewhere or stay home.

You mention your age..........are you claiming adult status or the privileges of extended adolescence?

anony from 12:01

Jack Goes Forth said...

blah blah blah. I hate to go this route, I really do, but let me get it out of the way: You should probably just not click on JackGoesForth anymore. It's that easy.

I've clearly touched a nerve with you, so much so that you have returned multiple times to my blog (where I can say whatever I want) to continue in your effort to attack me. The funny thing is, you will probably continue to click on this blog even though you hate everything about it.

Click on it early in the morning though. I really like being the guy who pisses in your cheerios everyday. Haha. ;)

Anonymous said...

I agree if someone does not like your blog and the content thereof - there are thousands of other blog sites out there - they should find a new blogger to torment and fuss about....

veron said...

Oooh...what a hot topic over here. I really don't agree with most of the results but I thought it's interesting to read what the results were..I do agree it is kind of hard to control which restaurant or company ask their friends or relatives to vote for them. I just wish there was a more reliable method to pick a true winner. I had to google "bluehair" - you guys are too funny!

Anonymous said...

Wow, a Richmond celebrity. Kinda like Dirtwoman?

Janet said...

I was in Tarrants the other night and and looked through the Best and Worst issue (always good for a laugh) and it simply makes me glad I am not a subscriber to the magazine. My only fear is some tourist who uses it as a reference is going to have a less than favorable impression of Richmond. Is every winner a miss? Of course not, but many of them are.

notgrayhairyet said...

Dear Anonymous, Come clean, tell us who you are. As far as I know, this could be jack himself..Wouldn't this be interesting? Who cares, I suppose! The whole blog is fun and causes debate like the man himself. I enjoy his comments, his refreshing honesty (even though I don't agree with alot of it), and watching his writing skills grow through all of this. Please let us know if you are the controversial Jack? In alot of ways you sound like him.

Jack Goes Forth said...

Interesting, but no. As much as I love getting the hate comments, I'm not so engrossed in my blog to the point where I would actually make fun of myself...

I love ME too much for that.

My theory: They sound like me because they secretly want to write like me. Imitation is the.... You know the rest.

suzy said...

I am just in shock they have the balls to argue on blogs, check out what they wrote on spyingonsuburbias blog.

Meade Skelton said...

It must be rigged, because I should be on there some place at least ! I mean, maybe under "Most Beloved/Hated Richmonder".

Anonymous said...

bring back comments!!! by the way, i <3 richmond magazine!