Comments on: Are magazines doomed, too?

By: ???????????????? | focusec

???????????????? | focusec — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 08:50:14 +0000

[...] Killed the Newspaper? Do Newspapers Have a Future? Are Magazines Doomed, Too? The Future of Magazines, Possibly The Future of Television Is the Future of TV on the Web? How [...]

By: The Future Of The Web: Where Will We Be In Five Years? - motherlister – lists everyone, everything…

Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:32:41 +0000

[...] Are Magazines Doomed, Too? A post from BuzzMachine about the future of magazine publishing. [...]

By: The Future Of The Web: Where Will We Be In Five Years? « Tech7.Net

The Future Of The Web: Where Will We Be In Five Years? « Tech7.Net — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 15:16:21 +0000

[...] Are Magazines Doomed, Too?A post from BuzzMachine about the future of magazine publishing. [...]

By: Gourmet, 86ed « BuzzMachine

Gourmet, 86ed « BuzzMachine — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 15:49:27 +0000

[...] Condé folded Portfolio, I said it didn’t yet presage the death of magazines, only of magazine launches. Well, that [...]

By: Latest magazines news – The Sun Sets On BusinessWeek, | Magazine Discounts

Mon, 07 Sep 2009 02:44:45 +0000

[...] Are magazines doomed, too? BuzzMachine [...]

By: Entertainment Weekly ad with a video-screen glued to the pages | linkthe.com

Thu, 20 Aug 2009 14:08:22 +0000

[...] Are magazines doomed, too? (buzzmachine.com) VN:F [1.5.6_840]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)Related Ways to Take Action: Demand Immediate Release For The MOVE 9 [...]

By: Jeff Jarvis: “Are magazines doomed, too?” | GuteSeiten - curated kiosk & magazine club

Tue, 05 May 2009 22:55:05 +0000

[...] journalism program at the City University of New York’s new Graduate School of Journalism, wrote an interesting article about magazines: “A few years ago, I was asked to speak on a panel at a magazine industry [...]

By: TheWayoftheWeb » Are print magazines a safer bet than newspapers?

TheWayoftheWeb » Are print magazines a safer bet than newspapers? — Tue, 05 May 2009 20:11:17 +0000

[...] reason is that newspaper consultant/critic Jeff Jarvis recently asked ‘Are magazines doomed?‘ in an article inspired by the closure of Portfolio magazine just as publisher Conde Nast [...]

By: William Knight

William Knight — Mon, 04 May 2009 02:30:10 +0000

Given that I spend my working day writing for magazines this article can be somewhat depressing – what will my career be like in 5 years? A common worry for journalists, I guess.

But I loved this line, and, I can’t agree more.

“The challenge for an editor is to figure out ways to enable them to share with each other, to become a platform for that community.”

I might add a corollary, however: it has to be done without utterly changing your focus on your target readership. It’s far too easy to be sidetracked by marginal concerns.

By: Mike G

Mike G — Sat, 02 May 2009 16:23:06 +0000

Both of the genres you think will survive have a REASON to be in print. The pictures are better to look at in big spreads than on a screen. Too many magazines work worse than their online equivalents; the ones that survive will be ones that use print. The very first issue of Wired had a great essay on why they were choosing print over, say, CD-ROM. It’s still true– if you use print well, it’s sensual. But very few do.

By: Patrizia Broghammer

Patrizia Broghammer — Sat, 02 May 2009 06:46:52 +0000

Well, I thought exactly the opposite.
Magazines are in my opinion the best product to go online.
The one that could profit most .
Why?
Because they are mostly, or at least a lot, made with images, beautiful images, and, since we are regressing to be a visual society, this was, is and will be the best way to communicate.
People prefer magazines to books, because reading an article takes a few minutes and that is something you can do always.
You can also just look and then read.
Online or on a reader , a virtual product, means cost highly reduced (no expensive paper, no expensive ink, no distribution or at least low distribution cost).
All of this could be covered by commercials, so that a magazine could be delivered at cost zero and what is cost zero easily finds millions, providing it is a good product.
Of course good means good for the targeted audience…
It is not a matter of what, but a matter of how much (it costs).
I always wondered why NOBODY thought to make a good online magazine…of course free…
And also a good magazine reader…

By: More Print is Dead - Jarvis on magazines « The Book is Dead

More Print is Dead - Jarvis on magazines « The Book is Dead — Sat, 02 May 2009 05:38:49 +0000

[...] to be as regularly used on my iphone as the New York Times app, or stanza for that matter. Anyhow, Jeff Jarvis turns his attention to magazines and concludes that they’re doomed too. Riffing on the death of Portfolio [...]

By: Buzzmachine: Jeff Jarvis on the future of magazines | DAILYMAIL.ME

Buzzmachine: Jeff Jarvis on the future of magazines | DAILYMAIL.ME — Fri, 01 May 2009 07:27:03 +0000

[...] Full post at this link… [...]

By: Guy Love

Guy Love — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:44:47 +0000

Paper distribution is over. This has nothing to do with content and everything to do with the future generations getting all their information feeds electronically. As older generations fade away, no one is lining up to replace them. This causes advertisers to jump ship which leads to revenue collapse and the downward spiral of cutbacks. Have you looked at the magazine rack in airports recently? They are all paper thin with very few ads. I am suprised they are still surviving at this point and expect most of them to consolidate or throw in the towel (along with newspapers) in the next few years.

By: frankwolftown

frankwolftown — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:26:46 +0000

I forgot the link. http://www.viruscomix.com/page453.html

By: frankwolftown

frankwolftown — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:25:58 +0000

Here’s one reason magazines are failing.

By: michael brooke

michael brooke — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:20:36 +0000

Mr Magazine said it best: newspapers are timely, magazines are timeless.

If you are into a specific thing, a magazine, like a book is a reflection of you. As Seth Godin says, his books are momentos. They are keepsakes. This is how I structure my magazine. It’s for a small niche. We keep our readers stoked and surprised and we work with a number of established online communities. That’s right folks, we let OTHER online communities be a part of what we’re doing in print and they let me a part of them on line. It’s a win win. After all, no niche publisher has the time to be doing BOTH print and online. If you try, you usually get both wrong.

The future of magazines is as follows:

small circulation – 10-50,000 max
connected with a specific audience
concentrated – maybe 100 pages max…
ads and content are 100% focused on the subject
very small staffs – maybe 1 to 10 people

huge circulation – 200,000 +
connected with many audiences
somewhat larger than 100 pages
ads and content are wide ranging
much smaller staff than today

in short, you are either a ball bearing (small, leaving a huge impression) or a beach ball, (big, seen everywhere, but pretty much bouncing off people’s conscience)

Ball bearing or beachball…there is no room for something in between…and this is why I am writing a book on this very subject.

By: John Banfill

John Banfill — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 04:55:19 +0000

I started reading magazines years before my parents could afford their first black and white TV. In those days, it was easy to see many examples of what magazines offered that I could not find elsewhere.

I really do not know what a magazine offers that can’t be found faster, better and cheaper online. At the current time what does a magazine offer that is unique and valuable that cannot be found elsewhere?

By: Linux Blog

Linux Blog — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 04:30:16 +0000

It is true that content is king and it decides who will survive and who will vanish. Newspaper should review their position and check out what others make better and adapt it. Classical news printing on paper will be past and only survive in niches. People uses the internet more often and so it is normal that they consume and find news also in internet.

By: Are magazines doomed, too? « BuzzMachine « The Purple Folder

Are magazines doomed, too? « BuzzMachine « The Purple Folder — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 01:09:11 +0000

[...] I hate to be calling doom for yet another medium, but I fear that Portfolio is the better indicator. We’ll see magazines fold and it’s going to be a lot riskier to start new ones to replace them — riskier because, just as on TV and in movies and music, it’s harder to create a blockbuster and consumer magazines depend on the blockbuster economy. Magazines don’t make money until they hit magic numbers of circulation (which comes only after renewals reduce marketing costs) and advertising (which is sold at heavy premiums and that market is bound to suffer both in a recession and against unlimited competition from online). In the U.S. market, subscriptions are so heavily discounted ($1 per issue for a product that can cost $5 or more to print and distribute) and marketing costs are so high (subscriber acquisition can hit $20 or $30) that the risk is only greater. via buzzmachine.com [...]

By: Are magazines doomed, too? « BuzzMachine « Wine by Cush

Are magazines doomed, too? « BuzzMachine « Wine by Cush — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 01:06:17 +0000

By: Are magazines doomed, too? « BuzzMachine « Written by Cush

Are magazines doomed, too? « BuzzMachine « Written by Cush — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 01:03:15 +0000

By: Are magazines doomed, too? « BuzzMachine « The Manilla Folder

Are magazines doomed, too? « BuzzMachine « The Manilla Folder — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 01:02:12 +0000

By: itsthelaw

itsthelaw — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 21:06:05 +0000

The natural fit of a magazine’s built-in community affords their continued existence *as long* as they serve said community on the web. One magazine I worked for saw the importance of posting their “Best” lists up on web. Smart move (and this was in 1999). The magazine’s credibility grew stronger improving ad sales in the magazine (and not the web product) since this was an added value for their audience and clients alike.

And yeah… what was up with that Wired article (and tagged with “Cars”!?). My guess: Conde Nast paid leftovers.

By: Stevenstevo

Stevenstevo — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:41:01 +0000

I disagree completely with the whole sky-is-falling sentiment towards the magazine industry that apparently is all the rage on the weblogs these days. In reality, Portfolio magazine was never a successful magazine, and it was most certainly not a leader in the industry. It was not even one of the top business magazines. Portfolio’s competition was simply too tough, especially among the other business publications: magazines like BusinessWeek and The Economist, both of which are able to deliver more current content as they were weekly magazines and thus put out 4 times as many issues as did the monthly Portfolio. The semi-monthly Fortune magazine is also very successful. The list goes on: Forbes, Kiplinger’s, Fast Company, Inc., etc. Portfolio also had to go up against some high quality newspapers, like the Financial Times, the Wall Street Journal and its weekly newsletter, Barron’s. And don’t forget about magazines outside the business segment. Competition is just as strong among luxury magazines, which I would think also compete heavily for advertiser dollars with female magazines like Glamour. As for the entire industry, if you think about magazines like People magazine, EW, Time, Wired, Cosmopolitan, Sports Illustrated, etc., it becomes pretty obvious that Portfolio was not an industry leader by any stretch of the imagination. I would not even put it in the top 30.

The loss of Portfolio magazine is simply not a big deal. Even if an industry giant like People magazine went under, there are still 30 other great magazines out there. I guess if three or four went down, then that could mean that another 10+ will collapse as well. Still though, I find a worst-case scenario like this to be highly unlikely. As for the claim that there will not be many new magazines coming out, big deal. You can say the same about any other industry. Almost all companies rise and fall with the economy, and companies also require significant capital to get going.

As for the online community stuff, that is all hype. Granted, the millions of users on these sites is an impressive feat. However, neither MySpace nor Facebook has even come close to generating significant revenue. In fact, both have actually lost money from day one. I am not sure why, but there are some people that assume MySpace and Facebook will eventually make billions–all in due time of course. I guess I can wait another 5 years to see if their earnings all of the sudden skyrocket like some say. Kind of hard to do though when MySpace’s owner, Rupert Murdock, says he expects things to get worse for MySpace in the immediate future. The magazine industry is struggling just like any other industry. Newspapers are doing far worse, and the television industry has been hurting pretty badly as well. The sad fact is that that everyone is struggling these days.