One characteristic of Lenswork (and it's in abundant evidence in Brook's post above) is that there is simply no ambiguity whatsoever about where the editorial point of view comes from or who it serves. Try to accurately discover what agendas drive the editorial bias of any other magazine. The 'popular' photo mags seem to be slavishly beholden to whatever their advertisers are pushing, and that creates the almost amusing hypocrisy of digicam advocacy illustrated by traditionally taken photographs. Even B&W seems to 'respond' in kind to their advertisers with feature articles and the like (recall the extensive spread on Michael and Paula whose photographs are advertised at the very front of the magazine in almost every issue. Nothing wrong with that, of course, but it can raise eyebrows nonetheless.).
In the interest of avoiding hypocrisy it would be interesting to have those who are throwing stones here be upfront about their own agendas and motives if they have any that haven't been disclosed.