Here's an interesting posting on Hodinkee, written by Stephen Pulvirent upon his return to Hodinkee, after being away for two years -- Letter From The Editor -- Understanding HODINKEE's Editorial Policy.

You should read the entire letter, but let me share a favorite passage --

"Another question we get often is: Why is there so much relatively positive writing on HODINKEE, and so few truly negative reviews and stories?

A journalism professor I had in graduate school told us something the very first day of class that has stuck with me ever since: “If you’re going to write about something bad, it needs to be bad in an important way. Just being bad isn’t enough.” If we flat out do not like a watch, you won’t see it on HODINKEE. There’s no need to savage an obviously, and merely, mediocre product. It’s lazy journalism, it’s a waste of our limited editorial resources, and it doesn’t do anyone any good. Now, a major flop from an important brand? A problem with pricing? A dishonest press release or announcement? Those are things we write about.

I really connect with this difference between something being bad and something being bad in an important way. In this hobby, it is easy to write about the bad things -- bad dealers, bad ethics, bad watches, bad auctions, etc. -- but I generally find it more worthwhile to write about the good things in the hobby.

Of course, there are times when it is appropriate to cover some of the things that are "bad in an important way".

Well said, Stephen, in your letter and a shout out to your journalism professor!!

Jeff