We at EC&M take pride in the editorial objectivity of this magazine. We go to great lengths to “cleanse” our articles of manufacturer names, tradenames, the subversive sell, and the promotion of a proprietary technology.

But, readers and manufacturers sometimes criticize this strict policy or don’t understand the reasoning behind it. Many of you may have wondered, “Why don’t they name the manufacturers of the equipment discussed in case histories?” This is a valid question. After all, certain applications covered in our case histories require special equipment, performance, sizing, configuration, etc. The naming of the specific manufacturer would certainly point the reader in the right direction should he or she face the same application problem.

And we agree. So, beginning with this issue, you’ll see manufacturer names listed in sidebars at the end of all case histories bylined by professional engineers or contractors. (See the article “Dual 1500kW Gen-Sets Provide Emergency Power and Peak Shaving,” beginning on page 40.)

Not only will you get the technical information behind the design and installation of an electrical project, you’ll also have the sources of equipment pertinent to the successful application. The result: More usefulness per article.

However, we’ll still maintain our policy of objectivity. There’s little (if any) value to a “product promo” article bylined by a manufacturer. I’m sure you’ve seen these “puff pieces” in other magazines. To say they’re self-serving is a vast understatement. After all, you can get the same information in our new product review section (and that’s where this information and promotion should be).

So, yes, we’re a little more flexible. Editorial policy changes are good, as long as they’re beneficial to the reader.