Stereophile's refusal to review more low

I have read countless letters to the editor pleading for more reviews of real world priced equipment. So far they have not responded in any meaningfull way. I wonder why they continue to run these letters if they are so focused on the mega buck stuff. What do you think ?
Odd response, Bmpnyc (what is your name anyway?). You go out of your way to insult me when all I did was try to reconcile the competing views here. I said no criticism was intended and I did NOT say "advertisers control reviewers." I have no reason to question the integrity of any of Stereophile's reviewers. I've said before that I think they call it like they see it, and Atkinson's speaker measurements are straightforward and useful, even if he doesnt use a real anechoic chamber.

The fact is Stereophile is a buff mag, published as a vehicle for advertising mostly high end or near high end stereo equipment. It is not a scientific journal or one of those little artsy magazines. What distinguishes it from Stereo Review is the target market. And that's why I don't think people should be upset or accusatory if Stereophile doesn't review much mass market or inexpensive equipment.

Yes, as I mentioned above, they do mention some good cheap stuff. Mr. Fremer has given favorable mention to a lot of inexpensive record playing equipment. "Sam Tellig" has mentioned all sorts of stuff, including 18 gauge solid core wire from Radio Shack. Certainly no advertising control there. But the general content is dictated by the need to survive and the goal of making a profit, for which they obviously need mid to high end circulation to attract advertising dollars.
Great thread. Convincing arguments. I'm not sure what to think. Sometimes I wish I wasn't so cynical.
We may not have solved any problems but it has been a blast reading all the posts. Better then any letters to the editor I have ever read. Thanks for the participation.
Remember Stereo Review and Audio? They specialized in lo-fi and mid-fi and where are they now? While most of us can not afford the equipment reviewed by S-Phile some of us can buy that same equipment when it becomes used and depreciated which makes those reviews somewhat helpful looking back.
Hi Paul, please accept my apology if I have offended you. I might have been a bit too passionate there, but all of my comments were not specifically directed at you. Michael Fremer's post here reminds me of a scene from, I think it was Annie Hall, where some obnoxious, cynical, know it all is on line at a movie theater loudly pontificating his interpretation of a book, and after a minute of listening to his rant, the author who just happens to be on line behind him says something like "you don't understand a thing about my book". I think he is being straight with everyone here, and that we should believe what he has to say. Just to be clear, I didn't say agree with him, just believe that he is telling it as it is. I had a subscription to Stereophile over 12 years ago, can't remember exactly, and let it lapse. About 6 years ago I started reading it again and subscribed. I have read so many interesting letters and articles that increase my knowledge of things that I don't have time to explore personally. If it was no longer available I would miss the experience of sitting down for an hour and a half and speeding through a new issue, then slowly reading it in detail over the next few weeks. I am only too happy to know that equipment that I hope to own is being reviewed. Jcd, makes a good point. I am looking forward to a future Audiogon purchase of a high end multi-channel amp that has been reviewed in Stereophile and is for sale at a good price here at Audiogon. I know a good deal when I see one, and Stereophile is one of them.