“I think a writer owes the readers a new way of telling a story.”
—Ken Kesey

As the 15th Drake makes its way across the country this fall, I find myself intrigued by all the recent chatter on the downfall of magazines, most of it coming from new-media pundits shouting their favorite proclamation: “Print is dead!”

I go to bed three or four nights a week reading The New Yorker. My head is on a pillow, the lamp is on, and I am treated to writing that is so good, so well reported and well edited, that at least half the time I don’t even care what the subject matter is. Like a great novel, I am transported—to the halls of the Supreme Court, to the swamps of the Everglades, to China or a remote African village. I read these stories in the hammock out in the yard, or sitting on a plane or a park bench, or in my tent at a backcountry campsite. And there is no way, for me, that a laptop or electronic reader could ever duplicate this experience. No way.

Apparently I’m not alone, which is why sales of e-books are about as popular as automatic flyfishing reels. I’m speaking now not as a publisher or an editor, but as a reader. To declare that print is dead is to declare that reading is dead. Because reading on a screen Just. Isn’t. The. Same.

If we’re talking about technology like Amazon’s Kindle, which allows readers to look up words, change font size, and buy almost any book they can think of in a matter of minutes, then I’ll concede the point: it provides new, innovative, creative ideas. But still, does this girl really look comfortable? I firmly believe in embracing new technology—a belief I back up by constantly supporting and promoting flyfishing filmmakers and on-line innovators. Everything evolves, and magazines should be no different. (Is it ironic that I’m using my blog to make a post about the strength of print?) Regardless of the platform, magazines need to attract and retain readers. And the only way to do that is to produce something worth looking at. It all comes down to quality, and the user-experience. Brian O’Keefe and Todd Moen have made Catch magazine popular by producing a unique, high-quality, creative on-line experience. But I can’t say the same for the majority of blogs out there, or many other forms of media that are competing with print, including cable television.

On July 17th, I received a mass press release from Orion multimedia, with a big headline that read: “Consumers Forgo Magazines.” The release was aimed at convincing fishing advertisers that they should spend their dollars on cable TV instead of print. The first sentence read: “Add magazines to the growing list of things that consumers are doing without.” As proof of this trend, Orion listed Boating, Boating Life, Sport Fishing, Power and Motoryacht, and Power Cruising as examples of how “print publishing has taken a significant hit.”

Now, I can’t say for sure, because I’ve let my subscriptions lapse, but isn’t it possible that Power Cruising and Boating Life are just shitty magazines to begin with?

The next paragraph of the press release contained this gem: “A poor economy means that people are spending more time at home and watching more TV.”

Really? That’s your argument? So let me get this straight: Fishing advertisers should spend their money on cable television, because cable television helps keep people inside, where they can’t use the products being advertised. Nice strategy.

Finally, Orion’s release tells us that, while print advertising is falling, “That doesn’t seem to be the case in the cable TV industry.” Consequently, they add that “Magazine editors have no choice but to simply watch ad dollars migrate to cable television.”

Well, I’m a magazine editor. And I can tell you what I watched. Less than three weeks after Orion sent their suspect press release, I watched the Outdoor Channel—one of Orion’s biggest customers—report a second quarter loss of $878,000, with ad revenue falling 16.3 percent.

True, a long-overdue culling process is certainly taking place in publishing. But critics should be careful about using too broad of a brush when painting a grave for print. Last Wednesday, TNS Media Intelligence released its U.S. Advertising and Expenditures Report. Granted, some of the numbers were bleak. Yet several of this country’s largest advertisers, including Wal-Mart, Campbell Soup, Time Warner, and Clorox, all increased their print advertising dollars from 2008 to 2009. And these are certainly companies with the resources to do their homework on ROI.

In the winter issue of Angling Trade magazine, Kirk Deeter ran a letter from Joe Healy, of Fly Rod and Reel, that was a response to an article that I had written in the previous issue, on why I think companies in the flyfishing industry should support independent filmmakers. Joe’s letter was basically telling advertisers that I was pretty off base, and that they should stick to putting their money in print (which I thought was pretty funny, since I publish a magazine for a living. But whatever.) At any rate, Joe made some good points, and ended his letter with this sentence: “When flyfishing industry folks want to target truly large numbers of new fly fishers and impassioned long-time anglers with their marketing messages, magazines remain the top choice.”

I would agree wholeheartedly with Joe, except that he forgot one word: good. As in, good magazines remain the top choice. What makes a good magazine? Who knows? Ultimately, the market will determine that. But I can give one surprising example that flies in the face of almost everything the print critics are saying: The Economist.

This is the news magazine category we’re talking about. Time and Newsweek these days look like leaflets that should be dropped from airplanes. But earlier this month, when the Audit Bureau of Circulation released its first half report, The Economist announced that its North American circulation had grown 8.5 percent from a year earlier, and that its global circ was now 1,418,013—more than twice what it was ten years ago. Even more impressive, the Economist Group reported that its profits, in large part due to an increase in advertising, grew 26 percent year-over-year, to nearly $100 million.

Last week, FOLIO: magazine, (a publication for magazine nerds), ran an interview with Alan Press, one of the Vice Presidents from the company, asking how The Economist has been able to buck the trend. His first answer: “The Economist’s success starts with the editorial product.”

Bingo.

After Next issue: Why the critics are right. And how print magazines can turn it around.

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (34)

castingoutloud said…

September 27, 2009

Yep it's dead now they want us to pay for on-line content basetards.

Matt Wibby said…

September 28, 2009

Tom.

That was a good read. I completely agree.

The Volfish said…

September 29, 2009

Quality always trumps the quantity arguement.

Tosh said…

September 29, 2009

Sounds good to me.

Julia said…

September 29, 2009

Great article.. I couldn't agree more

Jerry Watson said…

September 29, 2009

As a freelance writer and reader, I agree with you, Tom. The publishing world would suffer less and reap more if they would focus on presenting quality material. So much of what is available for readers out there, no matter what the format or genre, is unmitigated trash!
Print the best and they will come!
Keep up the good work, Tom.
All the best,
Jerry Watson

Thomas Bie said…

September 29, 2009

Thanks, Jerry. And everyone else, for the comments. I appreciate the feedback.
Tom

Shaq said…

September 30, 2009

As a print ad guy employed by one of the only newspapers in the country with an increasing circulation, I anecdotally can say that people still like their newspaper. While I agree, that newspapers aren't "needed", I also think that most of the problems with the papers across the country were their unwillingness to change as the market was dictating. The pro-active papers which saw the change in the market and reacted to it are doing relatively well compared to the dinosaurs which thought ad revenue was just going to keep pouring in. At our paper, we have web content (Free of charge) a true magazine division publishing independant of our paper, and our core product, the paper. Through partnerships with google, yahoo and other online players, we have become their local sales force as well, allowing us to deliver 85% of our market audience to advertisers and in some cases 90% of niche markets, something TV, Cable, and other products certainly cannot and never will achieve. In this case, newspapers as a print product will always be available, the ones who survive the market downturn emerging as the strongest multi-media companies the world has ever seen.

The second big problem with paper companies was the debt they took on when times were good. Is it any wonder that the NYtimes are having trouble when they bought the Boston Globe and part of the Redsox as well as countless other companies that they didn't need? Then when the market hiccupped, the debt was just too large.

Keep up the good work and we'll keep reading, I have to print out the online rags to read them in peace because the laptop just doesn't work on the toilet.

Yagerbomd said…

September 30, 2009

You're all thinking it, I'll write it...laptops in the crapper are simply impractical.

Marc Peruzzi said…

September 30, 2009

Spot on Tom. Need to get back to why magazines were invented in the first place. Beautiful images and timeless content.

Yager' said…

October 01, 2009

Mr. Bie
All kidding aside, The Drake continues to be one of the few bright spots in the world of publishing and THE only fly-fishing rag (IMHO) worth pulling out the wallet. As far as bed time reading - you nailed it; electronic media will never replace kicking back with a high-quality read, be it paperback or magazine, at the end of a crazed, stress-filled day. And, at the very real risk of sounding cliché, when it comes to the mid-week fly-fishing “jones” – this camper's dream trip to the legendary waters of NZ, Patagonia, Key West, and… are always realized within the pages of The Drake.
It is hard to imagine that the quality, “in your face real” publishing that is The Drake will EVER go out of style. Keep up the good fight Drakians.

Richard Baker said…

October 03, 2009

When my kids said that they'd rather read on their laptops, I asked them if they could sit in the tub for three hours and read their laptops. Silence was my response. 'Nuff said.

dbd said…

October 05, 2009

Nice blurb ol' great master-blogger (I soooo want to put something inappropriate here that is fish-related yet childish and immature; something like "great master-baiter" but I won't). I read about a book a week (the kind made from paper), usually in the evening and on weeknds, and there is nothing better than a good book or magazine (i.e., Drake... smooch, smooch, insert brown-nosing here). There will always be a place in our society for GOOD, WELL-WRITTEN paper-based reads. Always.

John Peipon said…

October 18, 2009

Totally relying on electronic media is like bait fishing.

Jose H. Weigand said…

October 19, 2009

Hi Tom,

I could not agree more with you. I work as fishing editor in the main private fishing & hunting tv channel in Spain and can tell you that advertisement in our 13 years life is really poor; the fishing industry prefer magazines for their ads.
On the other hand, as you remark, the only secret of a good selling fishing magazine is simple: quality.

Rgds

Jose

Aaron D, said…

November 02, 2009

Great article. Were all about the digital media, as we created The Disk to showcase digital media!

Bob Log said…

November 04, 2009

Funny since OrionMultimedia just came out with a book on how they invented outdoor television.

Rob F. said…

November 24, 2009

As of today I dont have a laptop next to the can. I have a big old stack of Mags. (Well writen fishing and yes... hunting mags).

Mike Holliday said…

December 16, 2009

Given the state of the economy, every single fishing related advertiser I've spoken with has decreased their ad budget in television while their print ad budget has remained the same. Yet, what we are finding about a flagging economy is that everyone now has more time to pursue the things they deem important because they aren't chasing the extra dollar by working on weekends. That means more people are finding time to go fishing...

As you mentioned Tom, good writing will always compel readers, so it will always be popular. Unfortunately, many magazine employ "specialists" who tend to jump on trends, like the local newspapers who jumped on the short segments USA Today is famous for, while ignoring the simple fact that LOCAL NEWS, and in-depth, feel good local pieces are why people buy and read their LOCAL newspaper...

Esquire Magazine is a great example of the magazine industry’s chase of trends...It used to be composed of the most compelling writing, that as a writer, I read because it improved my own writing skills, but also set the benchmark for what I found to be complete articles...Now, it's full of short, crappy segments, that apply to trends and irrelevant crap that I could care less about, which is why The New Yorker and Vanity Fair are now kicking their ass into the subway...

For those of us who read The Drake and other magazines of similar bent, we are looking for good, creative writing that takes us--even for just the time it takes to read the piece--somewhere...

jerzy zarzycki said…

December 27, 2009

Print will never be dead, only the drivel that some would call today's media. When I switched from chalk to dry erase, my students rebelled, hollerin' something good was lost. There are things that never change.

Ed Maurer said…

January 04, 2010

I agree with you entirely! There is something about the tactile appeal of paper that electronics lacks.

Ironically, my own publications are made possible by the Internet; I could never afford to publish were I tied to paper (read big "sigh" here). Some years ago I was warned off publishing by a well known fly fisherman who is all too familiar with the industry--he said I'd need a couple hundred thousand dollars to bankroll my, at then paper, magazine. We're now online and in the process up upgrading for what is essentially pennies a day, all thanks to the Internet. That being said, I'd happily turn out a print version if it became legitimate.

Electronics has been the great publishing equalizer, even for those who may not deserve it....

Barb Belic said…

January 13, 2010

SWEET READ! 1st Drake I bought was @ a flyshop in Wellston Michigan. Tongue IN CHEEK SWEET READ! I need not say more. Now I have it delivered to my cabin in the woods out on the LITTLE MANISTEE RIVER and Im looking forward to every issue. Cant wait till spring!!!

Todd Fisher said…

January 19, 2010

If you ever need a production artist, I would jump at the chance to work on The Drake.

ron P. swegman said…

February 10, 2010

Print will always have one BIG and decisive advantage over all digital media -- Print can be read even when the power goes out!

Buck said…

February 16, 2010

I would rather have my fishing news in a format I can take with me. Simply for the reason that I might want to reference it on a trip and I do not want to be reliant on electricity or WiFi...

mikeflyguy said…

February 23, 2010

I'm a "downsized" fishing magazine editor (whose primary pub was suddenly eliminated) and was kept on staff until a sister pub, like most, got skinny due to shrinking ad revenue. It would appear that many publishers are either not set up well financially, don't manage well, or perhaps do not have enough interest in their own magazine subject matter, or just plain lack the balls to stick out the rough times. When things get better, the strong and committed will have survived, and they will be able to pick and choose their writers. Thus, the content will sing!

Jed P said…

February 23, 2010

I love my paper! Every morning as the sun comes in the window I sit with my coffee and paper. A combination to get me started. The glare off the screen would not let this be possible.

I read books when I go to bed. Often enough I fall asleep reading and know its time to go lights out when the book slips out of my hand and hits me on the nose. I would not want that with a laptop, kindle or any electronic gadget.

Even reading this, which is spot on, would have been better in print, but I guess we need content for the website

Good writing will always be appreciated, and 60 dpi pictures will never replace to high quality photos of print.

Keep up the good work on the Drake.

Shannon said…

February 24, 2010

The fact these things come up seems to indicate the print guys are at least feeling the seismic activity in their range. Sometimes, just talking about the problems print faces ... is a problem. I am a professional photographer, and I can say with authority that professional photography, in its heyday was insulated by the fact it cost something every time we pressed the shutter button. Now, it costs nothing and everyone calls themselves a photographer - at no real ongoing expense to themselves. Mistakes are simply deleted. Education, content and mastery? People are content with "pictures" these days. The great, and insular, thing about magazines is they cost something. The (exclusively) internet magazines, blogs and sites, in this day and age, cost virtually nothing and pay virtually nothing for their content. And I imagine the majority of us expect less if we didn't have to pay for it now don't we? Put a price tag on anything and our expectations rise justifiably. The day it becomes affordable for anyone to put out a print magazine is the day it's over for print magazines. The last great hope for magazines and newspapers forced out of print and into the internet, in my opinion, is monetizing their content. Good luck with that one.

AKBob said…

February 27, 2010

I totally agree with the way of the world these days about saving money. If you choose to go digital with Drake magazine I'm going to have to run power to the outside shitter and drag my laptop to the outhouse. I'm not saving any money. I enjoy taking the magazine to locations where there is no power.

Stelberg said…

March 01, 2010

I know why I read The Drake and I know why I dont watch the tee-vee. I'm bummin some interweb time from the neighbors to write this. After reading the article in the glossy literature about the transition to digital I am now in a pit of despair. I have no laptop, my cellular phone cannot access the internet. I thankfully have many issues of The Drake and at least I have something to read during my stops in my upcoming move across the country to Oregon. Aww hellfire, I guess Ive to join the modern times eh? If I buy a laptop, it will be because The Drake is online. Are you backed by Apple?

Texas Walker said…

March 02, 2010

HAHA!!

Tom, the funniest parts of this little rumination are the quotes from the morons at Orion, who foist some of the crappiest content imaginable onto the cablenet.

“Magazine editors have no choice but to simply watch ad dollars migrate to cable television.”

Lying in your press release about how great you are is generally considered bad form. Showing how stupid you think your audience is by lying to them and assuming they won't get it is also fairly dumb. Neglecting to mention the elephant in the TV programming room, namely the DVR, and EVERYONE's understanding that 30-40% of ALL shows are recorded, for playback with REALLY fast commercials, is, well, dishonest, but for them, understandable I guess.

Keep doing the thing you do. Quality will out.

dan said…

March 03, 2010

how am I gonna poop now without my latest copy of drake, I dont get internet service in the crapper

Tom Bie said…

March 09, 2010

Thanks for all the comments, everyone. But just to set the record straight... that article in the current Drake about it being the last print issue was A JOKE. I thought it would be obvious what with the Defriending Department references and all. But, clearly, we aren't The Onion. Yet.

Larry said…

March 10, 2010

news papers are dead. books are dying off. magazine sales are dwindling. the art of conversation is all but rotted in its grave by now. words in general are an archaic form of communication.