john st. unignorable - Blog the book of john

By: Michael Brooke
At: 15:51pm | November 22, 2011

Hey Lorrie

While the iPad is indeed magic, it doesn't really create anything "magical" in terms of money rolling into publishers bank accounts. My last check was under $200 (for October) and apparently I am doing WELL as an iPad publisher. I can't speak for the big guys like Conde Nast. But I can disclose one thing: our print revenues are up. WAY UP.

Here's another thing to consider: I cannot count ONE single person who came up to me and said "WOW! I am so thrilled that my photo is at your Concrete Wave Magazine website and in the iPad edition of your magazine!" Not one. However, hundreds of folks have been stoked out of their minds to see their photo or their friends photo in Concrete Wave.

I can't speak for newspapers, but I know personally I read all my news either off my Mac or iPad. So, yeah, newspapers are probably going to have a difficult time. But then again, I live in a very focussed world - unlike newspapers which have to cater to many types of advertisers.

I publish a coffee table magazine that leaves a deep impact on a very specific audience. Advertisers pay to reach this audience because they understand their message is being delivered to PASSIONATE readers who are HEAVY USERS of the products.

People keep it, refer back to it, cut it up and put photos on their walls (or school lockers). People use it spread word of mouth about something (a product, an event or someone featured in the mag). Some folks, believe it or not, actually USE MY MAGAZINE to communicate ideas. Ideas that just wouldn't flow as easily if you jumped around everywhere showing people a screen.

The medium IS the message, Lorrie and saying print is dead is so wrong. Print is dead for some, but for others, it is tremendous way to stay connected, to spread ideas and to really dig into what it means to be alive.

Before you proclaim the death of print, spend some time over at the adcontrarian blog.
Or contact me, and I'll put you in touch with some of my advertisers and readers...

By: Marissa Schroder
At: 16:24pm | November 22, 2011

I have to agree with Michael, Lorrie. The whole “print is dead” argument doesn’t hold much water with this specialty publisher. The last 12 months have been our best ever for print sales – by a huge margin. I know a number of other specialty publishers and my magazine’s growth is by no means an isolated case.

Interestingly, my advertisers are placing less and less importance on online advertising – having seen virtually no response from it despite making a valiant attempt over the last few years. With online ad click-through rates sinking to virtually nil, it’s no wonder they’re returning to a medium that for whatever reason, still delivers.

I regularly get calls from advertisers who indicate that they’ve had people register for their events because of an ad placed in our magazine. I have never (not once) received a call because someone registered after seeing a banner ad on a website.

It should also be noted that not a press release goes by that the agency does not ask me if it will be in the print edition of the magazine. Apparently they still see significant value in something that makes it into the print edition.
I might go so far as to say that the value of print has increased with the volume of un-vetted writing and information that is available online. Anyone with an opinion can publish something online – no matter how off base.

There’s no question that newspapers are struggling – with information changing by the minute it’s easy to understand why the web makes more sense as a delivery vehicle. That said, in my world specialty mags are thriving.

By: Brian Light
At: 20:43pm | November 22, 2011

So we have this headline statement "Print is Dead". That isn't right. Some has died and a new age approaches but if we are going to play the prediction game mine is that many will buck the trend as traditional habits hold some ground.
On the other hand, I also predict he is on to something with the Tablet.
I think Publishers with good content need to get on this and get on it fast.

The joke today is that kids think books are tablets that don't work. Magazines may be next.

By: Lorrie Zwer
At: 06:27am | November 23, 2011

In response to Michael and Marissa:

First, thank you both for your comments.

Second, please understand that given a very tight word limit I couldn't possibly add all the counter points I would have done to my own argument. I grew up with books and magazines. I'm an English Lit. major. I have, for my entire life, collected some form of print material or other.

My post was based around a pretty recent revelation for me. I've owned an iPad since it first debuted, but resisted reading on it primarily because I've always collected books and magazines and (used to) think that they're all important artifacts. However, facing a house move, I started by subscribing to a couple of magazines via their apps: GQ and the Economist. Then, I bought a couple of e-books.

What I think is this: there will always be room for print. The medium is extremely important to some people and I agree with this. The resurgence in vinyl sales (associatively) supports this. But this won't be commodity print. It will be high quality, well produced print that people want to hold on to. I look at the success of Monocle magazine or niche publishers like Taschen or Phaidon as my benchmarks.

However, I do think that commodity print is going away. I can't believe that people need (or increasingly want) to buy paper versions of disposable media. Do readers really need to buy print versions of People magazine? Or GQ? Or even the Economist? The paper quality of these magazines is so poor that the publishers are basically encouraging their readers to consume and dispose quickly.

I don't bother mentioning newspapers because aside from a couple 'papers of record', e.g., New York Times, their staffs have been decimated and really there's no real need to go anywhere other than the internet for news. I don't think readers need to pay a publisher for the same Reuters or AP stories they can get online.

I think I've addressed your comments. I would be interested in checking out the work that you both currently do. Can you please email me titles to lzwer@johnst.com?

Best,

Lorrie

By: Suzanne SotoDavies
At: 07:47am | November 23, 2011

As the publisher of Silver and Gold magazine, which focuses on the world's largest demographic (the adult 50+) I too have to disagree that "print is dead".

Although tablets and websites may be more "convenient" for finding information out quickly, the truth about magazines and newspapers, with regards to Silver and Gold's readership demographic is this:

a) the mature adult (50+) makes up for 86% of AVID magazine and newspaper readership. These folks aren't dying any time soon, and as predicted by the Stats folks, they will make up half of our population globally in the next few decades.

b) of these, the 'older' micrographic within that demo (65+) is still traditional about holding the publication of preference in their hand: curling up to read it late at night in bed, and early morning with their coffee, visiting the restaurant for a brunch (they dine out 3x per week on average) and flipping through the newspaper.

c) the 'younger' micrographic within the demo (50 - 65 let's say, although i'm not a big fan of stereotyping any group), are on the computer so many hours per day, that the last thing you're bound to see them do is curl up on a computer or pad at night. Yes, agreed that these are the fastest growing group of people joining social media (dabbling) and buying tablets for reading everything under the sun (but still dabbling on a daily basis), they still do not replace their preferred publication over a computerized system.

The day i stop receiving flyers at my door at home, will be the day i will "MAYBE" wonder if print is dying off... for now, i have personally cancelled my local newspaper delivery because it contains more flyers than local news. Clearly an indication that print is not dead... (Then again, at one point we all thought moccasins and fringed leather jackets were a thing of the past...)

By: Gloria Hildebrandt
At: 08:19am | November 23, 2011

Great discussion you've started here, Lorrie! You're hearing from a lot of publishers of independent, special-interest magazines based in Ontario, Canada here, because we've been sharing your blog post.
I agree with you that frequently printed, disposable publications can & perhaps should be in digital form, and that high-quality publications with long shelf lives belong in print.
As for results for advertisers, even our little magazine that focuses on the not-well-known Niagara Escarpment area, has shown tremendous growth in ad sales this year. We find that the unenlightened or misguided ad prospects have faith in digital tech only. They create fabulous websites or Twitter & FB their brains out, only to see not much happening. And while they like to be mentioned online, they really sit up and take notice if they make it to our print edition.
The main difference between the two media is simple. You already have to know about digital content to see it, or be looking specifically for your subject & then have it appear for you, while a print mag can introduce you to content that you never heard of, never thought about, never ever even knew you were interested in. But if you have it put into your hands in a thoughtful, attractive way, you become fascinated & act on what you see.
Readers tell us this happens with ads they see as well as our editorial features. Which is wonderful for our advertisers.