Jan
15
2010

The death of magazines. Is it suicide?

According to the New York Times, in 2009, the majority of magazines lost ad pages. Leading the pack were Fortune (down 36 percent) and  Money (down 29.1 percent).

So why are advertisers running from the weeklies and monthlies in droves? Well, one reason is the economy. In this, The Great Recession, advertising budgets are getting cut, and much of what’s left is getting siphoned to other more lead-generating venues.

But the reasons for the exodus from print go much deeper.

Some might say that the death of magazines — in fact, all print — is inevitable. Newspapers, as we all know, are dying quickly because they are no longer able to deliver the news in the most timely and efficient way. Online news sources can do it fast and cheaper. And our daily rags are becoming obsolete.

But magazines are different. They’re less time-sensitive and more audience-centric. Yet, advertisers are seeing less and less value in these publications, too.

Why?

Because magazines are providing less and less value to the readers. Just look at your favorite pubs. They’re getting thinner and thinner. They’re stripping content, firing writers and cutting out features that readers want.

My two favorite magazines (Adweek and Sports Illustrated) are shells of their former selves. Adweek used to contain regional news, review of portfolio pieces, updates on accounts in review, a list of people who’ve found new jobs. It was the Bible of the ad industry. It was something I read cover to cover every week.

Now, when Adweek arrives, I throw it in the trash.

Some might say that because advertisers cut back, the magazine had to, too.

But what if magazines took a different approach? What if they upgraded their content, added new features and gave readers (and advertisers) more reasons to get involved?

What if, instead of giving in to the notion that they have to provide all their content online for free, they made their publication and their website work together?

By enriching your print content, you increase appeal. By increasing appeal, you increase readership. By increasing readership, you increase ad sales.

But it seems that most magazines don’t get this. They’re perfectly content to throw in the towel. Which is really sad. Because it’s a death that can be prevented.

So what do you think?

The death of magazines. Is it suicide?

  • http://buildamovement.com Gary Bostwick

    I agree, Mike, the content of magazines offers us something not often found elsewhere. And editorial boards should figure out ways to not diminish all of their unique content by giving it away for free.
    However, I think there’s another way of looking at why the drastic drop in magazine advertising is occurring. Print is a very expensive medium. And from a cost-benefit standpoint, advertisers may be moving their budgets to media that deliver greater ROI for less.
    The content may be disappearing because the advertisers are disappearing. Not the other way around.

  • Mike

    My point was this: Magazines can reverse that trend by giving advertisers a reason to come back. But they’re doing the exact opposite. They’re cutting content and features in hopes that it will fix the problem. Yet they’re only making the problem worse, by giving readers (and thus, advertisers), less reason to embrace them.

    Those magazines who have not cut their content (People for example) are actually showing gains in ad spending.

    Magazines need to make an investment in the future, be smart about what they give away, and figure out a way in which their online content and print content can coexist.