Mr. Magazine

Is it a case of good editors thinking alike or is it the distance that separates Des Moines, Iowa from Atlanta, Georgia that caused the two magazines to have almost identical covers? Well, wait there is a catch to the identical covers… one came two years before the other (maybe the distance it takes to travel on foot from Des Moines to Atlanta)… Well the folks at Atlanta Homes & Lifestyles were not amused when they saw this month’s cover of Traditional Home. They wrote in their blog:

The staff of Atlanta Homes & Lifestyles had a deja vu moment this week when we spotted the September 2007 issue of Traditional Home magazine on the newsstand and arriving in our mailboxes. It is an almost exact copy of a cover we published in October 2005, a whopping two years ago!
The similarities are endless: the image itself, with the exception of a pear they added to the tabletop (nice touch!), as well as the composition of the cover. The bold “before & after” blurb and typeface are the most shocking likenesses. The producer of the story was Atlanta-based Lisa Mowry.
This is not the first time for a Trad Home repeat. A similar image from the cover of AH&L’s June 2005 “Color” issue appeared on Traditional Home’s May 2006 cover. Again, almost identical.
If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery….

Well, indeed imitation is the sincerest form of flattery…

I know what people say about free advice, but while recovering from sinus surgery the news about the two million cut in circulation at Reader’s Digest and the plan to sell the back cover of the magazine to advertisers sent me back to the early years of Reader’s Digest and to the prototype issue and first issue of the magazine. I do not know whether it is the hospital connection that brought to mind the link with Reader’s Digest beginnings (DeWitt Wallace conceived RD on his hospital bed in France) or the recent news, but in any case I went to my magazine collection and pulled out the prototype issue and first issue of RD from Jan. 1920 and Feb. 1922 and guess what? I found the cure for all the ills of Reader’s Digest today. DeWitt Wallace referred to RD in his prototype issue as the “Pocket University” which “will enable you to keep yourself educated in the truest sense; it will yield immeasurable satisfaction in giving you a sense of being well-informed and well-read.” Wallace’s plan for the magazine was to be “of 100% Educational Interest— no fiction, no advertisements, no articles on purely transient topics and no articles of limited or specialized appeal.” His wife Lila defined the nature of such articles in the introduction to the first issue. She described the articles in RD as such: “Each article of enduring value and interest — today, next month, or a year hence; such articles as one talks about and wishes to remember.” Elsewhere in that first issue the editors wrote, “No articles of purely momentary interest — every article a worth while one, worthy of a permanent place in the storehouse of the mind.”
It is amazing as I flip through the pages of Reader’s Digest today I can’t but ask, Is there anything left from the magazine concept that the Wallaces created? Is any of the articles “worthy of a permanent place” in the reader’s mind? To save Reader’s Digest one only needs to go back and read those two issues from the 20s… the concept is still applicable today as it was then… The problem is not with the circulation or the advertising. Reader’s Digest problem is in its content. Be true to that mission statement of the past and bring back that “Pocket University” and you may see the cure of most of the ills of the magazine. John Travolta and the cures of back pain will not do it. Almost all the articles in the July issue of the magazine are of “purely momentary interest.” Once more it is the problem with the content and not the medium. I hope someone is reading, because I know the Wallaces are turning in their graves as they see what happened to their beloved magazine. It is not too late to save “The one magazine that is preeminently worth keeping– and binding– for future reference and enjoyment.” So says the words of the founders in their prototype issue. They are worth repeating.

Jackie Leo, Reader’s Digest editor-in-chief, responded to my blog with the following e-mail (I have asked Ms. Leo’s permission to publish the e-mail since it is my policy not to publish any e-mails sent to me unless I receive permission from the sender)… What follows is Ms. Leo’s response to the blog:

Samir: For someone as enlightened as yourself to publish such a naïve and inaccurate blog about RD was really stunning. We’ve known one another for a long time, and I can assure you that this rate base cut has everything to do with magazine economics and nothing to do with the magazine’s content (I challenge you to name another publication that has 8 million paid subscribers). I also wonder why you think the Digest didn’t cover the same subjects we now cover. They did–the only difference was that they condensed other magazine’s writings in most cases instead of creating original pieces, which is what we do now, for very obvious and good reasons.

You also seem to forget that the Wallace’s drove their extraordinary circulation through the use of the famous Reader’s Digest Sweepstakes, a practice that is no longer followed.

Had the Wallace’s lived to see the explosion of television channels, the Internet, the rise of Google, the speed with which information and ideas travel, they would have had two choices: Reflect the cultural shifts in the society by evolving the magazine and staying in the center of the mass market, or, reduce the circulation to that of, say, The Virginia Quarterly and hope that people would still want to read it.

One more point: if you don’t think that an outstanding medical breakthrough report on the causes of and the solutions to back pain does not have enduring value, then you’ve never bent over to pick up your i-phone and felt the unbearable agony that millions of Americans suffer every day.
If you’d like more information about RD, please call me.

In a very short press release Bauer Publishing announced this afternoon that it has canceled the launch of Cocktail Weekly that was planned for Sept. 24, 2007. The complete press release follows:

BAUER PUBLISHING CANCELS LAUNCH OF COCKTAIL WEEKLY
Englewood Cliffs, NJ (July 9, 2007) Bauer Publishing today announced that it has canceled the launch of COCKTAIL WEEKLY. Today’s announcement reflects the uncertain conditions in the single copy marketplace.

The magazine that would have been the first of its kind on the newsstands (think Cosmo on a weekly basis) was the second casualty today after Jane magazine’s news that its August issue will be the last (See here Radar magazine’s breaking news on Jane). Is it the newsstand’s climate or is it the publishing climate that is causing all these closures. I have advocated at the recent PBAA meeting the need for publishers to rethink the advertising driven publishing model in this country and go back to the circulation driven model, but I guess it will take time and few more casualties before the industry starts rethinking its practices. The question is do we have the time? Well, only time will show…

The publisher emeritus of our local paper Mr. Jesse Phillips once told me that he refers to his paper The Oxford Eagle as “refrigerator journalism.” When I asked to elaborate he said, “You know as in all community newspapers our job is to reflect and record all what is happening in town. Your son scores a soccer goal; we take his picture and put it in the paper. You buy the paper, cut the picture out and put it on the fridge for all to see…” I thought back that this type of “refrigerator journalism” made great sense and it still does. The good community newspaper still covers all the activities of the kids in town and stills provide a printed forum for all those stories and pictures to be cut and taped to the fridge door.
The reason for this lengthy introduction is the recent increase that I have noticed in the number of magazine titles sprouting in different communities around the country sporting pictures of social events. Page after page of parties, social events, and charity balls, etc. which showcase the movers and shakers in towns all across the nation. From a small town the size of Oxford, Mississippi to a major metropolitan town the size of Las Vegas, Nevada magazines are being published to provide a printed record of all the activities taking place in town…the catch is that all these activities are aimed at the elite and the rich and famous. It sort of reminded me of the above talk with Mr. Phillips. These magazines are nothing but “refrigerated journalism” for adults to see and be seen. Just pick any town U.S.A. and you will see one of these magazines. In most cases they are distributed free and they give you a quick glimpse at the lifestyle of the elite of the town. To give credit where credit is due, the leader of this trend is Ocean Drive magazine that was started more than ten years ago and is still going strong. Who said imitation is not the best form of flattery.
By the way, a journalist recently asked me if I consider these publications journalism. I immediately said no, they are anything but journalism. Like gossip and celebrity publications they join the ranks of other media outlets, but for the life of me I cannot consider them journalism. To me journalism, true journalism, is everything and anything that have a direct impact on you, your life, your home, your money, your country, your world, etc…. you name it.

The beauty of technology is in the way it helps us create new media and new ways of delivering content. From the days content was delivered via the newspapers to the current days of the world wide web. Each medium served and continue to serve the needs, wants and desires of its audience. When television was invented it was called radio on the screen. When color was added to newspapers they were not called newspapers with color. Same is true with the rest of the advancements in print technology and other major advances in the tech world. The reason for this lengthy introduction is to pose the question regarding the so called “magazines on line.” Are they really magazines? Do they meet the real definition of a magazine? Or are they a new medium? The more I watch and read (note the word watch) these magazines on line (Watch Monkey or People test issue of its on line and judge for yourself) the more I feel that I am watching a television program with captions. It is a hybrid between the two media: magazines and television. So why don’t we call a spade a spade. It is a Telemag short and simple. We did that with the magazines that look like books, we called them Bookazines or Mooks. Calling the magazines on line what they really are will solve a lot of definition problems and will introduce a brand new addition to our world of media. So, as of today I will start referring to the so called “magazines on line” as Telemags. They are not magazines and they are not television. They are a new world of hybrid media that found yet another way of delivering relevant content to a relevant audience through a relevant medium. Telemag it is and I hope you will agree.

“That was then but this is now. What are you going to do about it?” writes David Sullivan in The Inksniffer. A very informative and good article about focusing on the present status of our media situation. David notes the fact that the future receives a lot of ink in the media but not the present. David calls for a new newspaper organization. He writes, “We need to form a new trade organization: Journalists Who Believe in Printed Newspapers. JBPN isn’t much as an acronym, so someone else can do better.” I echo his call for a similar magazine association. One that takes care of all magazines, big and small, with or without ads, and one that updates the definition of a magazine that is written by the post office and not the people who create the magazines.Read the entire piece by clicking here.

Now that the boxing match between Bob Sacks and myself at the PBAA’s 21st Convention is over, both of us have written about the stuff we’ve observed, learned, liked and disliked at the convention. To join the debate read Bob’s observations here and my observations here. Both of our comments are lengthy, but I will leave it up to you to judge the worthiness of both. Enjoy and again thanks to the PBAA for a great convention.

BoSacks Speaks Out: Why the Newsstand is Dead
www.bosacks.com

I’m still on the road today after Thursday’s big event, but wanted to report in about the successful Periodical and Book Association of America Convention in Philadelphia. I have been to a few PBAA conventions and I always find their focus and energy to create the strong and necessary dialog and idea exchanges between publishers and distributors a noble cause. In my opinion, there are too many important issues that have long been left unanswered, unattended to, and other wise left to linger and rot. The PBAA attempts to correct that general industry oversight.
The big debate between Samir and myself, if I can judge by the ovation at breakfast the next day as a clue to its success, went very well, and I am hoping to receive some unbiased reports from readers as to which side was more convincing. If you were there please send me a report.
Another highlight for me was a conversation and presentation with some Russian distributors. It was a terrific hour of exchanges and insights.
That’s some good news of the event. The bad news is that I have seen a damning demonstration of the death of the newsstand in a forum on the last morning. This panel had a national distributor, a national wholesaler, a national retailer, and a publisher. I applaud the open dialog and for that I am very grateful. We need more conversation, not less, about supply-chain and you have to start somewhere. But, why here?
The disconnect for me was amazing and not in a good way. Not if you are hoping for new ideas and the creativity necessary to drive our businesses out of their lengthy doldrums. Although I paraphrase, the conversation went something like this:
We acknowledge that the ship is sinking, but, dear friends and business partners, it is sinking very slowly. We take great pride that we have been sinking slowly for fifteen years. We are adrift on the seas and sales have been flat for so long that flat is starting to look good, something like up, only different. And flat is good, isn’t it?
Do you know that when the wholesaler described an interesting and well-thought-out program of efficiency in the newsstand arena that successfully reduced wasted product, yet convincingly provided real data of same percentage of sales, someone on the panel, I don’t remember who, was angry that such an operation was even being discussed, let alone put into operation. Yes, that someone had the nerve to say openly the tired, old, mantra, “lower the draw, lower the sale.” To that I say, fine, buddy – you go down with the ship. I’m getting off the Titanic and creating a newer, more stable, efficient business model. Anyone that tells you there absolutely cannot be improvement in the print-ten-copies-and-sell-three model is leading you towards a big iceberg in an increasingly digitized sea. Get off now or get off later, it’s your decision, but I guarantee you are getting off that ship or sinking with it.
So, this is the death of the magazine newsstand business right before our eyes. The collusion on the stage of non-aggressive thought, the inability to recognize the icebergs, the captains yelling, damn it all, this business is the Titanic and nothing can sink this ship. BoSacks says this ship is headed in the wrong direction and needs to turn mighty quickly.
Would you entice your children to join an industry, any industry, that is barely treading water for a decade and a half and has completely lost the ability to detect up from down.As I sat there at the breakfast table, I was shocked at some of the inflexible positions and the thought of clinging on to the same business models that have keep us stagnant and without growth for over fifteen years. Yet as annoyed as I was, here was a panel that was attempting to discuss problems long kept in our dark boiler rooms in the bottom of our perspective ships. Here were some industry professionals, in an open forum seeking answers, and in front of their peers. They must get some real credit for that. They agreed to meet again and with that perhaps there will be progress. I can only hope for it.
This industry needs new ideas, new distribution models, greater efficiencies and above all else appropriate leadership for the times. We need captains that are willing to turn the ship and not hit that damned iceberg head on. Only an insane person keeps repeating the same thing over and over again expecting different results. So, I’m asking the industry at large, are you insane or just getting paid too much.
Upton Sinclair said it much better than I, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it”.
Continued Success
Bob Sacks