Laurence Payne wrote:
Here's what happened
http://www.laurencepayne.co.uk/cables.html

...and lectured on the complete independence of journalists and advertising department. This
wasn't really something I cared about, but it seemed very important to our hosts, who kept
returning to the subject.

I have come across this as well. My reading of the situation is that
the many who read nonsense promoting a cable in a review may jump to
the conclusion that the magazine is being paid by the particular cable
company for the positive review. The potential downside of doing this
is pretty large and I strongly doubt it is done in any mainstream
magazine. What the magazines are doing, of course, is providing a
positive vehicle for all cable manufacturers to advertise and reaping
the advertising income by doing so.

We were treated with courtesy. Thank you for the tea. If What Hi-Fi? (or anyone else) feels like
setting up a more structured session in the future I would be very interested in taking part.
But my verdict from this session is a definite Not Proven. Worse, there was no stuctured attempt
to demonstrate cable differences. I was offered travel expenses. I think I deserved a fee for a
wasted afternoon.

Why the despond? Surely what was interesting about the afternoon was
how those with a vested interest in magic cables maintain it. I wish I
had been there. It will be interesting to see their report of the
afternoon if it appears in print.

Did you get the impression the magazine staff were being truthful or
that they were doing their job and supporting their employer at a
public event? Were they believably emotional and/or enthusiastic?