The “death of print” is a concept of recurring speculation. However, at present, it is just that, mere speculation. Magazines, paperback books and newspapers are still very much alive. Society has indeed become fully engrossed in the digital age and soon today’s youth, known as the “Digital Generation,” will be tomorrow’s leaders. This Digital Generation has grown up with far less print on paper and far more web surfing, text messaging, and emailing. In their eyes, everything readable can be found online. Digital is a way of life and is thus, changing the life of the print industry. For this reason, various newspapers and books have sought to represent themselves on the web as well as in print. This gradual transition has even furthered the assumption of print’s demise. Magazines, however, have yet to convert their monthly publications into a virtual experience. Their demise seems far less likely, possibly because the passion behind this medium is a force to be reckoned with. Though the magazine industry needs to change, it will not die.
History is evidence that magazines have no reason to cease existence, as their downfall has been questioned before. Approximately 30 years ago, society was considered to be in the Golden Age of Magazines. The industry itself was launching close to 150 to 200 new publications per year (Husni). This period is also considered a rebirth of sorts after the threat of television in the 1960s, which was predicted to wipe out print altogether. No such death occurred. The 1980’s were also a time of technological advancements that questioned the survival of print, alluding to talk of magazines on CD-ROM, videocassettes and DVDs. Yet, no change arose. Even with the inception of the Internet, magazines have pursued. In fact, “for every magazine that shut its doors in 2008, at least 20 new magazines were born” (Husni). However, now more than ever, innovations of 2010 appear to be giving the industry a real run for its money.
Indeed, technological advancements practically demand change. iPads, iPhones, reading tablets, and the like, beckon the transformation of material represented in print to be represented digitally as well. These devices enable immediacy and the “anytime, anywhere” ideology of wireless Internet. Moreover, such inventions have opened up alternative avenues for advertisers. As ads generate the majority of magazine revenue, this has begun to cause real problems within the industry. Less cash flow translates to job cuts and, at times, the termination of entire publications. Furthermore, the cost to advertize digitally is far less than that necessary in print. Rachel Wimberly, author of “Magazines aren’t dead yet: print products,” stated that “if a print ad costs a dollar, chances are the same ad online will go for 25 cents”. However, advertizing agencies have not pulled away from print entirely. Rather, they have begun to spread their coverage upon multiple mediums like digital and face-to-face advertizing. As Don Pazour, Access CEO and President stated, “’there are still profitable magazines, and magazines provide excellent databases of readers that relate to magazine brands’” (Wimberly). Nevertheless, as technology expands and advertisers invest less and less in print, the industry will indeed need to begin to seek revenue elsewhere.
The previous publishing model which relied mainly on ad sales and very little on reader’s purchasing power for revenue will not subsist in this day in age. Thus, it is the publishing model that is dying, not magazines themselves. “Success needs to be measured by finding customers who count and charging them for the content of the publication” (Husni). With this change, the focus should shift from quantity of ads sold to quality of material generated. In turn, this will inspire superior journalism and higher excellence from issue to issue, sans the distractions of numerous make up ads ads and scantily clad denim models. One need only analyze the types of magazines which have already closed to see that chasing advertisers and going after quantity instead of quality, is not the answer. According to a list compiled by Advertising Age, by and large the most recently deceased publications were either created solely for market-share or advertising purposes. Author Gabriel Sherman from Big Money.com points out that when the housing market inflated, many “shelter” titled magazines were born and when the “financial bubble peaked in 2007…Conde Nast launched Portfolio, its business [titled publication].” In addition, many companies in search of further avenues for ad sales began spinoffs of popular magazines like Conde Nast’s Men’s Vogue and Heart’s Cosmo Girl, both of which have come to a close. Hence, the answer is to focus on the delivery of quality material from publications readers have grown to love, trust, and rely upon. This model has been tested and proves to be successful with the likes of Cook’s Illustrated, Highlights for Children, and Consumer Reports, each of which do not accept a single ad and yet, circulate up to one million or more copies. Of course, advertizing for additional revenue will not disappear entirely, but the portion from which magazines rely on such sales needs to shift in order to continue to survive.
Additionally, the impact magazines have made upon our culture is yet another reason their fatality seems highly unlikely. They symbolize so much more than bound and printed matter. Magazines mean photo shoots, interviews, runway shows, journalists, celebrities, publicity events, and all sorts of glitz and glamour that society has grown to obsess over. For many involved or those aspiring to get involved, the industry is a way of life. For example, take a look at such popular films as The Devil Wear Prada or the real-life documentary of Vogue editor, Anna Wintour, titled, The September Issue. These two films, amongst countless other books and TV shows, captivate audiences with tales of “the magazine life”. For women in particular, magazines have become more of an accessory, like a purse or a scarf, than a disposable wad of paper. Very seldom does one read and then immediately dispose of a magazine. There is an undeniable connection between readers and this material object. A good issue is a keepsake, like a photo album interspersed with advice and interesting stories pertinent to today’s pop culture. As journalist Gabriel Sherman put it, “Magazines are emotional products. They are objects of aspiration, passion, and desire... [which] still offer an unsurpassed ability to marry literary ambition with deep reporting, photography, and visual design. ” Devout readers feel a bond with their favorite titles. “In this new media age, people talk about the importance of transforming readers into ‘communities’“ as social networking sites like Facebook have done (Sherman). This cultivation of community is something that magazines do best and thus gives magazines ever more of a fighting chance.
Furthermore, the proud and passionate leaders within the magazine industry have chosen to stand up against any preconceived notions of termination. In March of 2010, five premier companies (Townsend, Conde Nast, Hearst, Time Inc, and Wenner Media) began a campaign called “Magazines, The Power of Print” endorsing the lasting strength of magazines, as well as consumer devotion to the medium. In addition, the campaign has a dense web database composed of up-to-date industry statistics and reports, all of which are intended as ammunition against naysayers. Statements like ‘ during the 12-year life of Google, magazine readership increased 11%’ appear as PR pages for the campaign. A favorite ad, featuring a picture of Olympian Michael Phelps, reads “we surf the internet [and] we swim in magazines…[but] people aren’t giving up swimming, just because they also enjoy surfing.” Such ads have run in nearly 100 magazines, and reached nearly 112 million viewers each month. Clearly, this industry and its leaders aren’t going anywhere without a fight (http://powerofmagazines.com/).
Yet, even devoted magazine advocates agree that avoiding digital media entirely would be a mistake. According to Gordon Huges, CEO and president of American Business Media, in May of 2008, “‘Digital [was] a $4.5 billion industry, and…is growing at 20 percent [a year]’” (Wimberly). At this rate, digital has the chance of exceeding print by 2011, indicating it is clearly a force to be reckoned with. Consequently, the most beneficial thing magazines can do is view change as an opportunity. The truth is, at present, online representation is expected. They should consider blending digital media with their print. For example, a current event, which would take at least three weeks to come out in magazine, can be represented online the very day it occurs. “As a result, [the monthly] print version will focus on feature stories and provide more in-depth problem-solving solutions” to the most important online content (Mayer). Big name publications like Cosmopolitan have already adopted a model that intertwines online and offline media quite successfully. Articles from previous issues, daily horoscopes, food recipes, and various other topics of interest are archived on the site. Nothing online repeats what follows in print, but rather, the two complement each other. The web depiction only enhances the Cosmopolitan image and provides further entertainment to diehard fans.
Moreover, editors should continue to entertain the idea of digital publications, which can be sold like music, books, movies, and television on sites like iTunes and Amazon.com. In the near future, these digital publications may be just as successful as their print counterparts. Their creative possibilities are endless, as they can be enhanced with video footage, sound, and even link to additional sites with further information on presented topics. And quite frankly, if the industry does not develop such electronic interpretations themselves, an outsider who does not lawfully have the right to do so, will. The last thing the industry needs is an illegal downloading nightmare like that of Napster and mp3 music files. As the saying goes, if you can’t beat them, join them.
The only, undeniable flaw in print is its environmentally wasteful nature. “According to the PAPER Project, the magazine industry consumes approximately 35 million trees each year” (“print is dead. Long Live Print”). It also takes a great deal of energy to then transport magazines to each and every subscriber, newsstand, grocery store, and the like. PC Magazine stated in 2009 that 2.9 billion of the 4.7 billion magazines printed and delivered to retailers are never even read. Furthermore, another issue, more relevant issue will be out the next month, making last months print seemingly disposable. Thus, it stands to reason that “[g]oing digital is going green” (“Print is dead. Long Live Print”). Perhaps, the industry should scale back the amount of issues produced or consider giving back to the environment. Donating revenue to plant a few more trees wouldn’t hurt anyone.
Regardless of what does occur, there will be no drastic, sudden change. At present, alternative technologies are far too expensive for the average citizen. A specialist on the subject, informed journalist Barbara Quint that “[p]articular household [facilities can] accommodate reading print publications while the same facility would not so easily accommodate a laptop computer” (Quint). Most people can afford a $3.50 magazine, but not everyone can toss out $600 plus dollars for a new iPad. Author, blogger, and expert in the field of publication, Steve Laube, uses the introduction of the electronic reader to point out that since its inception, the volume of books sold digitally is still less than 1% of all editions sold. He further asserts that even if “e-books have 100% growth in the next year…they would still comprise [only] 2% of all sales” (Laube). As previously mentioned, there’s no need for immediate alarm.
The statement “Print is dead” is shocking at the very least. To those involved in the magazine industry, this bold statement fosters panic and fear. It leads to the loss of jobs, the mortality of life long ambitions, and the death of an industry that once made so many, so very happy. Though change is unavoidable, panic is pointless. The industry is indeed going to change, as is every industry. Society changes, times change, and so will the facilities that cater to our inhabitants. Such is the cycle of life. But, no entity that has had as big an impact on human existence as the magazine industry, should simply die, disintegrate, and disappear forever more. Magazines will only die if let them. As ASBPE’s past president Roy Harrris stated, “When travelers are told to turn off all electronic devices on the plane, they can turn on the magazine” (Husni).
Bibliography
Anonymous, FEEDBACK. (2010, April). Adweek, 51(14), 48. Retrieved October
11, 2010, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 2018766491).
Batista, Elisa. (2003). Paper trail not dead yet. Wired,
Retrieved from Konrath, J.A. (2010, May 21). Is print dead? [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ja-konrath/is-print-dead_b_583959.html
Ben Bagdikian. (2004, March). PRINT WILL SURVIVE. Editor &
Publisher, 137(3), 70. Retrieved October 11, 2010, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 575970021).
Husni, Samir. (2009). It's the publishing model-non-print-
that's dead. Publishing Exec, 1. Retrieved from
Harbison, Niall. (2010, January 19). Why traditional media
and print industry are dying and 5 things that could save them. Traditional Media, Retrieved from http://www.simplyzesty.com/traditional-media/traditional-media-print-industry-dying-5-save/
Konrath, J.A. (2010, May 21). Is print dead? [Web log
message]. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ja-konrath/is-print-dead_b_583959.html
Laube, Steve. (2010, January 21). Is print dead?.
Retrieved from http://www.stevelaube.com/is-print-dead/
Magazines, the power of print campaign [Web log
message]. (2010, September 23). Retrieved from http://www.workbook.com/blog/1618
Mark Fitzgerald, & Jennifer Saba. (2007, August). WHO SAID PRINT IS
DEAD? Editor & Publisher, 140(8), 18-20,22-24. Retrieved October 11, 2010, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 1319508801).
O'Rourke, P.. (2010, June). Not Dead Yet. The Weekly Standard, 15(36), 10,12-
13. Retrieved October 12, 2010, from Social Science Module. (Document ID: 2059364421).
Print Is Dead. Long Live Print :Print businesses aren't dead, but they do need to
change. Printing should be reserved for archival information you'll hold onto for years instead of days.. (2009, January). PC Magazine, 28(1), Retrieved October 11, 2010, from Research Library Core. (Document ID: 1650440681).
Quint, B.. (2008, January). Why Isn't Print Dead ... Yet? Information
Today, 25(1), 7-8. Retrieved October 11, 2010, from ABI/INFORM Global.
(Document ID: 1410305511).
Sherman, Net to newspaper: drop dead. (2005, July 4).
Business Week, Retrieved from http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_27/b3941024.htm
The future of print. (2000, December). American Printer,1 226(3), 11.
Retrieved October 12, 2010, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 66599816).
Twenty truths about magazines. (2009, October 14).
Vic Nathan Barkin. (2006, December). The Future of Print. In - Plant
Graphics, 56(12), 10-12,18,20. Retrieved October 11, 2010, from Arts Module. (Document ID: 1182471731).
Wimberly, Rachel. (2008). Magazines aren't dead yet: print
products. Buisness and Company Resource Center, Retrieved from http://ZB5LH7ED7A.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Magazines+Aren%27t+Dead+Yet&rft.jtitle=Tradeshow+Week&rft.au=Rachel+Wimberly&rft.date=2008--0-5-&rft.issn=0733-0170&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=18&rft.spage=4&rft.externalDBID=TRDW&rft.externalDocID=1484708831
Thank you for writing this post. This has been something I've been trying to reinforce with all the aforementioned naysayers for a long time. What I love most about this post is your attention to the fact that this is a downfall of a publishing format and not the downfall of an industry. People need news that is reliable and professionally created, and we are only now seeing the ways in which innovation will allow us to control professional content and charge for it. As more digital publications begin to see the true enhancement and potential that is given by the advantages of internet-based publishing, I agree that we will see the advent of a new media climate. This climate will be tremendously profitable and far more comprehensive than our previous newspapers of old.
ReplyDeleteBottom line, thanks for this post, I'm a fan.
Your mention of the Ad Age survey on recently defunct publications caught my eye. From what you’ve said, it sounds like the asset bubbles in stocks and real estate bled into the publishing industry in a big way – so much so that giants like Conde Nast and others opened up entirely new publishing lines catered to these temporary bubbles. I would be curious to see the economics behind this, and whether they got out of the fad quickly enough to keep their profits (my guess is they didn’t, and were blind-sided by the bust as much as anyone else). Is it common practice for magazine publishers to expand so vociferously during the boom stage of economic cycles? I wonder about the size of the “ad hoc” publishing industry, that is, the hypothetical segment of the publishing houses that re-order themselves to cater to fleeting lifestyle trends driven by temporary economic good-times. On the other hand, it’s entirely possible that I give the magazine industry too much credit, and that they’re merely making the same bad investments other industries make during explosive growth periods – and that the eventual losses are similarly spectacular.
ReplyDeleteOn another note, I wonder about your claim that, under the new business model, “[T]he focus would shift from quantity of ads sold to quality of material generated.” It sounds like the gist of your argument is that, while previously the industry could count on high-volume ad sales, the growth of digital has cannibalized ad sales to such an extent that the magazine industry will need to adjust by…producing better material? This doesn’t sound so much like an innovation in the business model so much as a show of desperation by the publishers. “We can’t convince the advertisers to give us as much money anymore, so our plan is to make our product better so more people read us and our sales jump up enough so the advertisers come crawling back.” If that’s the plan, I’ll certainly be curious to see exactly how the product improves.