Thursday, April 01, 2010
Why Graydon Carter thinks print is dying
Just read an interesting opinion piece by Graydon Carter titled “Print is dying… really?” What makes it interesting most of all isn’t so much Carter’s analysis – it’s more or less the same “TV didn’t kill radio” analogy paired with “just create great magazines” that we’ve heard many times before – but that he seems to be proving the wrong point.
The piece begins by separating “reading” from “search-and-find” – not a bad thing to do – and goes on to defend people’s continuing desire to read in-depth, well-researched, well-editing stories. But where it fails is in defining what it is, exactly, that makes print magazines the best format to deliver those stories. In fact, Carter even goes so far as to point out (contrary to common wisdom) that long-form journalism is popular on vanityfair.com. And his conclusion?
"If print journalism’s business model is changing, our only move as editors is to double down on delivering what our readers have always wanted from us: compelling stories and iconic photographs. And it won’t matter if they’re read on a laptop, a cell phone, or on paper."
So, print isn’t dying… except that lots of people will read magazines on formats other than paper.
Don’t get me wrong – if print magazines are dying at all, I expect them to die a very slow death, and as we in the industry know, it’s more likely to be precipitated by declining advertising revenue than by drops in readership (on average, at least). But if we want print to survive, we need better arguments than this.
So let’s discuss. What really makes magazines unique?
The piece begins by separating “reading” from “search-and-find” – not a bad thing to do – and goes on to defend people’s continuing desire to read in-depth, well-researched, well-editing stories. But where it fails is in defining what it is, exactly, that makes print magazines the best format to deliver those stories. In fact, Carter even goes so far as to point out (contrary to common wisdom) that long-form journalism is popular on vanityfair.com. And his conclusion?
"If print journalism’s business model is changing, our only move as editors is to double down on delivering what our readers have always wanted from us: compelling stories and iconic photographs. And it won’t matter if they’re read on a laptop, a cell phone, or on paper."
So, print isn’t dying… except that lots of people will read magazines on formats other than paper.
Don’t get me wrong – if print magazines are dying at all, I expect them to die a very slow death, and as we in the industry know, it’s more likely to be precipitated by declining advertising revenue than by drops in readership (on average, at least). But if we want print to survive, we need better arguments than this.
So let’s discuss. What really makes magazines unique?
- Kat Tancock
About Me
Kat Tancock
 |
Most Recent Blog Comment
 |
|
| I'm there says: | |
breesir, to answer your question, the reason magazines don't have dedicated web editors is quite sim... |
|
My wife and I co-publish new "how-to" type jewellery making magazine and with a background in electrical engineering it was kind of scary to get into this new venture when all I read was that print magazines were dying. Four issues later, I now have some perspective on the subject and I am of the opinion that print mags as an industry is going nowhere, it will simply be reshaped by being comprised of a smaller set of core interest publications. Let me explain...
A digital version or e-mag will never replace the feel, portability and versatility of a print. It is very cumbersome for an artist to carry their computer from the kitchen to they studio, or for a woodworker to bring his desktop into his dusty workshop. This has been proven to us by several of our clients who were pro-green, or just wanted to see what the mag was going to be like, and migrated from our digital edition to our print...They want the mag in their hands.
Mags targetting the how-to and hands-on crowd will represent the new core of the print mag industry in my opinion while the MacLeans of this world will eventually move to complete digital services.
I liked the analogy to the "TV killed the Radio"...The Radio is still there, it just got reshaped.
The biggest challenge we print publisher face in my mind, is how to convince advertisers to come on board.
My 0.02
Softness: Magazines fold and bend. They truly are perfect for reading on a couch, on a crowded subway car, in bed, in the bathtub. This physical quality doesn't get enough credit.
Reflected light: It is easier to read long-form journalism with reflected light rather than projected light. I access long-form journalism on the web, but almost always print it out to read.
Dirt and water: You can spill marmalade on your magazine while reading it at breakfast. Big deal, wipe it off. It gets sprayed with water in the bathtub, no problem. Sand at the beach? Shake it out. Electricity and water/sand, not a good mix.
Reproduction: It's true images can look great on a screen. They look equally great in print, especially combined with great graphic design. The visual impact of a newsstand is powerful.
Archive: I bought a copy of the Maclean's Winter Olympics special so my kids will have it in 40 years, just as I've inherited my mother's special issue collection. No one is going to the Vancouver 2010 web site in the year 2050, if it even exists. Yet the Vancouver Olympics will be an important memory for my kids.
Rip it out: I still get value from ripping out magazine pages and showing them to colleagues, putting on the fridge, bringing to the store.
Anticipation: What will the next spread reveal? What secret will I learn in the cutline? What insight awaits in the next article? The best magazines deliver surprises. There is delight and potential drama with every turn of the page.
I can love my Blackberry/iPhone/iPad, AND my magazines. And newspapers, for that matter.