Main Page Content:
MagazinesRSS feed
-

Making magazines distinctive from online

Posted by Martin Stabe on 27 November 2007 at 18:24
Tags: Magazines, Wired, pr

The US edition of PR Week has an interview with Wired business editor Jason Tanz, who has some advice for magazines looking cope with the disruption caused by the Internet:

I think we have a philosophy that, the Internet can do a lot of things really great, so focus your magazine on the things the Internet can’t do really great—write long stories, print it on nice paper, have beautiful layouts. I think that a lot of other magazines are trying to make stories shorter and become adaptable to the web, and essentially make the magazine product something that dovetails quite nicely immediately into the web format. So why buy the magazine? Even though we do put all the content of our magazine online for free, people still do find a different experience in coming home and opening it up and spending time with it. I’m very proud to be working at a place that believes in that kind of flight to quality.

The whole interview is well worth a read. Tanz also explains how Wired handles the print and online newsrooms, the growing workload of journalists who are also blogging, and discusses his boss Chris Anderson’s recent controversial decision to blacklist the e-mail address of PRs who send unwelcome press releases.

-

Saving scoops is asking for trouble

Posted by Martin Stabe on 22 September 2006 at 13:56
Tags: Journalism, Magazines, Online

Over at the newly-launched blog of the US magazine industry magazine Folio:, Marrecca Fiore shares an anecdote highlighting the dangers instantaneous online news represents for monthly or even weekly trade publications.

On Tuesday, Folio: received a tip that financial disclosures by a printing company would reveal that it was closing five plants. Rather than rushing the exclusive online, the editors decided to hold it for the magazine’s weekly e-mail newsletter, which due to be sent out on Thursday.

You know what’s coming.

Inevitably, the story was revealed to the world when it was mentioned in a related press release by another company.
Fiore writes: “We got scoopted on our own scoop. Lesson learned, point taken. In the Internet age, research is easy, breaking news is hard and saving stories is unwise.”

-

Is long tail ‘hitism’ causing journalists’ negative view of blogs?

Posted by Martin Stabe on 19 September 2006 at 12:55
Tags: Blogs, Journalism, Magazines, New Media, Newspapers

“The decline of newspapers… is the most concrete evidence of the disruptive effect The Long Tail can have on entrenched industries,” Wired editor Chris Anderson writes in his much-discussed book (which grew out of an article via a blog).

In The Long Tail, Anderson deals with the effect of his theory on the news business only in passing, but in a recent interview with Press Gazette, he elaborated on how it applies to journalism and traditional publishing.

The theory is about the transformation of businesses by digitisation, particularly in the cultural industries. Barriers to entry and distribution have been dramatically altered because digital products are so cheap to create, distribute widely and archive indefinitely. Online, products can be made available that would have been prohibitively obscure for offline businesses to stock.

The result is a market featuring a small number of high-demand blockbusters competing with an increasingly huge number of niche products with minute demand. Visually, this can be represented as a demand curve starting with a “short head” followed by a “long tail”.

Two “long tails” are transforming journalism, Anderson argues. One is a changing distribution of the value of stories over time. Because online archives are accessible forever via search engines, authoritative stories of lasting relevance will, in the long run, become more valuable that breaking news. As this realisation filters down, a change in news values is likely to occur.

“In a weird way, it completely inverts the calculus of news — which is that the new stuff is what matters and the old stuff doesn’t matter — because the good old stuff gets more relevant over time as more people flag it up and link to it,” Anderson said.

Secondly, blogs represent a new long tail in competing publications. Big media may continue to dominate the mass-market “short head”, but the growing millions of blogs represent an important new “long tail”.

Journalists have been so slow to understand the impact of these changes and have frequently been contemptuous of blogs. Anderson offers an explanation for why: Those working in traditional cultural industries, he argues in the book, are so accustomed to trying to develop products with mass appeal that they suffer from “hitism” — the assumption that only those things that attract huge audiences have value and that the rest is amateur rubbish.

“A lot of journalists have an arrogance about our profession that just does not reflect the reality of what people are reading right now,” Anderson said.

But this isn’t just arrogant, it’s factually incorrect. Print publications depend on economies of scale and must appeal to mass markets. Consequently, the countless niche topics that would never shift enough magazines or newspapers to sustain a print publications are being left to the blogosphere.

The recurring debate about whether blogging is a form of journalism is irrelevant to Anderson. Whether they like it or not, journalists are competing with bloggers for readers’ attention — and increasingly, the advertising revenue that pays their salaries.

“Fundamentally, it doesn’t matter what journalists think — this is happening anyway,” Anderson said. “Those of us who try to understand it and figure out what is our place in a world of 27 million blogs are going to be the ones who really do figure what journalism’s next era is going to be about.”

/Discuss.

-

How lads’ mags can avoid the top shelf

Posted by Martin Stabe on 28 June 2006 at 16:10
Tags: Journalism, Magazines

The BBC has a fantastic spoof on its web site, looking at what lads’ mags would have to look like to avoid being relegated to the top shelf.

Claire Curtis-Thomas MP says newsagents should place magazines like Nuts and Zoo — along with the Sport, ahem, newspaper — on the top shelf where they would be out of sight to children.

Lads’ mags’ editors are naturally unimpressed that their titles should be classed alongside Penthouse and Asian Babes. The Periodical Publishers Association has written to MPs to remind them about recent Home Office-sanctioned guidelines on displaying lads’ mags.

Guidelines by the National Federation of Retail Newsagents specified that lads’ mags are not top-shelf titles, but some supermarkets, like Tesco and Sainsbury’s, already require lads’ mags to be covered or positioned out of reach to children.
So, do lads’ mags belong on the top shelf?

-

The Stage relaunching online, too

Posted by Martin Stabe on 25 April 2006 at 14:26
Tags: Journalism, Magazines, Online

The print edition of The Stage is being relaunched later this week — but so is its web site. With less than 48 hours to go before the relaunch — and perpetual panic now a way of lifeScott Matthewman has a preview of the new site up on Flickr.

The most startling thing about the design, as Matthewman notes, is the huge amount of real estate devoted to the magazine’s bold new logo.

-

Political bias in the British media

Posted by Martin Stabe on 21 April 2006 at 13:06
Tags: Journalism, New Statesman, Newspapers

“Media bias” is one of America’s favourite political footballs, but it’s a game that is played only occasionally here in Britain.

As John Lloyd argued just a year ago, anger about perceived bias in the “MSM”, is major factor behind the mercurial rise of a blogosphere subculture that takes opposition to mainstream journalism as one of its touchstones. At the time, Lloyd said it would be better for British bloggers not to follow this particular American obsession.

That was never a serious risk. Here in Britain, only broadcast journalists are troubled by their American counterparts’ professional ideology of neutral non-partisanship. With no expectation of objectivity to start from, screaming about bias is not a very effective political tactic — revealing a political agenda at the Telegraph or Independent is just stating the obvious.

Of course, that has never stopped individuals or political groups from periodically claiming they can’t get a word in.

The latest group to fret that their views are “significantly under-represented in the mainstream media” are the signers of the “Euston Manifesto”, a call to arms for those who identify with the Left but favour a pro-war, pro-Israel, pro-America foreign policy. Named for the station near the pub where it was drafted, the document was published in blog form by the New Statesman and is currently being debated ad nauseam in the blogosphere. Ironically, most of the signatories are well-known journalists with access to columns in national publications — like, um, the aforementioned Mr Lloyd.

Of course, those passionatly against the war have a rather different view of who is marginalised in British journalism. John Pilger recently gave a speech at Columbia University in New York, arguing that journalism, not truth, is the first casualty of war.

Rather than worrying about the particular political views found in newspapers, Pilger’s main concern is that journalists have a “servility to state power” that “is hotly denied, yet routine”. Pilger shared the Columbia stage with three journalists who are unlikely to have demurred: Seymour Hersh, Robert Fisk and Charles Glass.

Peter Wilby addresses the competing complaints in his New Statesman column:

The claim of unfair media treatment is a comfort blanket. The American right argues that the media in the US are dominated by “liberals”; the American left that they are full of White House lackeys. No British government I can remember thought the BBC gave it a fair hearing. New Labour insists it has no true supporters in the national press. James Delingpole, of the Telegraph/Spectator stable, has made a cottage industry out of claiming he hardly dare reveal his “unfashionable” right-wing views. My fellow NS columnist John Pilger swears the media suppress news of western atrocities and marginalise views like his; I have written in his support.

I still think Pilger has the better case. But we are all a bit like footballers griping about biased referees. Shouldn’t we drop it, and just get on with the arguments?

Wilby is unlikely to get his wish, and it’s a good thing. This sort of debate will arise from time to time and it’s important that we’re reminded occassionally that the view of society that journalism provides is closer to a prism than a mirror.

-

New research on consumers eying newstands

Posted by Alyson Fixter on 20 April 2006 at 15:54
Tags: Magazines

Researchers have fitted “x-ray specs” to supermarket shoppers to track their eye movements as they approach the newsstand.

The study, carried out by Dipsticks Research, aims to find out how consumers “navigate�? around the newsstand, at what point in their shop they buy magazines and how effective newsstand promotions are.

The results will be revealed at the Magazines 2006 conference next month.

-

Former Times correspondent will edit Marie Claire

Posted by Jeffrey Blyth on 19 April 2006 at 09:38
Tags: Journalism, Marie Claire, Times, United States

A former New York bureau chief for The Times has been appointed editor-in chief-of Marie Claire, the Hearst-owned American version of the French beauty and fashion magazine.

Joanna Coles replaces Lesley Jane Seymour, who has been editor for almost five years.

Coles, after leaving The Times in 2001, worked for New York Magazine, first as articles editor and then features editor. Eighteen months ago she joined More, the Meredith magazine for women over 50, as executive editor. She was a popular and respected editor.

Coles will take up her new job in May. Hearst has made no official comment except to announce Seymour is leaving the company.

One of the oddities of the unexpected change is that Marie Claire was recently nominated for an award at next month’s National Magazine Awards, its first nomination for at least five years. Also Marie Claire’s circulation, under Seymour, grew thre per cent in the second half of last year to a total of just under 1 million, plus another half million newsstand sales.

-

Chinese ban on new foreign magazines

Posted by Jeffrey Blyth on 10 April 2006 at 11:31
Tags: China, Journalism, Magazines, United States

Rolling Stone has really hit the Great Wall. The government in Beijing has decided that the magazine cannot publish a second issue of its Chinese edition – because it failed to get proper approval for its front cover and title.

In fact Beijing has imposed a moratorium on all new foreign magazines on topics other than science and technology. That – says the Wall Street Journal – is a big blow to media companies that were seeking to cash in on China’s booming ad market.

It’s a particular set-back to life-style magazines. Titles that have already got approval have been assured they can continue publishing This should include the Chinese edition of Vogue, which was launched last September.

Sports Illustrated, which announced last month it hoped to launch a sports magazine in China sometime soon and says it has concluded a partnership with a Chinese company is optimistic it will get the go-ahead.

As for Rolling Stone, an official in Shanghai said curtly “It doesn’t exist anymore.?

Previous Posts

-

Advertisement

E-mail Newsletter Signup

-

Advertisement

-

Advertisement