So after my rant last week about the editorial content and how its driving down the future of a lot of niche publications, I thought I might offer my opinion as to what I would do if I were a publisher of a mag… after all I don’t want to be part of the problem I want to be…. yeah you get it.
So without further fluff (no hypocrisy here) this is what I would do to make my mag a winner:
1) Cut back my publication to a quarterly book with 200-250 pages of thick beautiful paper. At least 2 solid photo essays per issue and 3 well researched editorial pieces with great photo or illustration support (one piece per readership demographic preferably). It won’t be over designed… sometimes the best design is minimal after all.
2) What will I redesign? My website… Easy to navigate, special content created just for it because I will be printing quarterly. Wordpress based would work nicely (GraphPaper Press is doing some cool stuff)… and it would be a great place to put news and all those fluffy reviews that fill the magazine currently. Other QUALITY content too, like videos, behind the scenes and others, that support the editorial will be there, but lets not fool ourselves; no need to try and compete with the video production houses… our content is always going to look B grade compared to theirs. What I can do is tell the story of the magazine, our contributors, and stay current. What else? Separate the crap from the good stuff… its kind of hard to decipher right now.
3) Foster relationships with contributors that realize that doing editorial isn’t going to be the sole way of feeding a family, but it will be a way to experiment, have work to show off (it’s going to look awesome on my nice paper and minimal design), and work with some of the best athletes and creatives in my industry.
4) I’m already packaging my web and print packages for advertisers but I will show them that we aren’t doing things the way they have been done in the past. Just because another magazine has more subscribers (because they are giving their magazine away) doesn’t mean people read it, respect it, collect it, and leave it on their coffee table for months. I don’t give a shit what those survey’s say… they show who responds to surveys… not who reads and looks for my magazine to hit the news stands. I used to do that with my magazines… my friends did too. If this recession has showed us anything, fluffed up numbers aren’t worth jack.
5) Because my Editor will have more time, she will be able to seek out the new talent and work with the established pros. They won’t be so strapped for time from micromanaging details, writing features/editorials/tips/ etc for every issue they can actually do the jobs an editor is supposed to do.
6) I will speak openly and honestly with my readers. I’ll only print it if I believe in it, not because I need to put some fluff between some ads that nobody looks at without a questioning eye right now.
That’s sounds like a good place to start… what do you think?
tk
Two good examples of what you are suggesting are:
Rouleur (rouleur.cc)
The Ride Journal (http://www.theridejournal.com/)
They might seem expensive, but that’s just until you have a look at the quality.
/thomas
Hi Tim
I couldn’t agree more with you last couple of posts. I’ve noticed the decline in quality outdoor publishing purely through what I chose to read/buy these days, there’s very little out there I’d chose to spend my money on and very little that really inspires me anymore. The stuff that inspires me to do something, what ever it is is the one that gets left on coffee table…..I’d be happy to see/help a change.
Stew
so when does this new magazine go to press?!?!? seriously…
…I think I like the sounds of it. I think I’d like the looks of it. I think I’d like to write for it. I think I’d hate to be the sales guy trying to bring in ad revenues in competition with publications that “has more subscribers (because they are giving their magazine away)”.
You’re placing a lot of faith the ability of your advertisers to have balls and pay more for something that has a lower impressions estimate next to it. That’s a hard sell if you’re talking to a marketing director tasked with doing more outreach with less resources (as they all are in the current business climate).
So, in reality, what you’re asking is for folks to recalibrate the standard by which they value their marketing buys. How you gonna do that? Blog post #3?
I like it.
Part of this may be refocusing on trying to get *readers* to pay for good content, rather than subsidizing (or giving away) the content in order to look better to advertisers.
When the reader is the market again (not the advertisers) maybe we’ll get better content? I’d rather pay $20 for a good magazine than $5 for crap.
I think a big part of the web-side of the business will be the hype, the teaser (ala pre-release of BtS footage). Almost every product in our society gets pre-hyped to encourage consumers to buy.
But magazines for the most part just hit stands and try to sell on the strength of one cover shot and some cheezy headlines.
What if web content would get readers salivating for the next issue the way that consumers now salivate for the next Harry Potter book, or iPhone, or CGI movie? What if teasers were going viral on YouTube for 3 months before publication of the next issue?
This also speaks to the quarterly publication model-> give us some time to get excited for the next issue.
pw
TK,
Give some serious thought to starting a publication. So far there is only one good publication dedicated to Climbing on the market that I personally consider, quality. They share similar values with your opinions, but yours sounds a little more polished.
Some of the ideas and feature you described could be found in the former Alpinist Magazine (alpinist.com). Thanks to TK for the premise and T. Boesgaard for recommending more good reads – kdr
SO DO IT ALREADY!!!! ….you have one of your first loyal readers right here…
Nice ideas… I would be down to help out no doubt!
of note:
“Fly Rod & Reel magazine plans to “break away from the pack,” says associate publisher Joe Healy, by increasing their page count to a minimum of 100 pages and switching to higher-quality paper and perfect binding we decided it was time to invest in quality The magazine will be published five times in 2010 and quartlerly thereafter.
link: http://www.midcurrent.com/news/2010/01/fly-rod-reel-ups-quality-goes.html
Re: Thomas Boesgaard’s comment.
The Ride is a perfect example of what Tim is projecting in this blog post. It’s almost as if Tim looked at “The Ride” and then wrote about it!
But Tim, before we get too carried away…right from “The Ride” website:
“We are not in this to make money, just to give something back to the world of cycling.”
And that is the rub to all of this. The magazines that are out there are there to make money. Sure the Alpinist is great (as kdridge points out) but we know what happened to them a year or so ago. I know, they’re “BACK!”…but unless something changes, they’ll end up down the same path.
So, as Pete Ward states above, I too love the idea. I’d even check out your magazine. But at the end of the day, it won’t make money and that, unfortunately, is what the publishing world comes down to these days.
Good luck!