Comments on: Of "appgazines" and saving newspapers http://www.teleread.org/2009/02/06/of-appgazines-and-saving-newspapers/ News & views on e-books, libraries, publishing and related topics Sun, 22 Nov 2009 03:18:54 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Rich Adin http://www.teleread.org/2009/02/06/of-appgazines-and-saving-newspapers/comment-page-1/#comment-1010550 Rich Adin Sat, 07 Feb 2009 16:01:14 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/2009/02/06/of-appgazines-and-saving-newspapers/#comment-1010550 Perhaps Isaacson whould have editorialized on how to save Time magazine. Like its competitors (with the notable exceptions of The Economist and The Week), the newsweeklies are facing the same problems as newspapers. Also interesting is that (again, with the notable exception of The Economist) magazines have to essentially give away subscriptions to create a guaranteed subscriber base on which to base ad charges, but even that is not helping. Subscriptions to Time, US News & World Report, Newsweek, Business Week, etc. (again, excepting The Economist and The Week) are rapidly declining and magazines are closing their doors or trying to find some other niche they can fill to stay afloat temporarily. Is there a lesson to be learned from the trend contrariness of The Economist? Considering that a discounted subscription to The Economist is pretty expensive for a magazine (approximately $70), especially when you consider that I was able to get my wife a multiyear subscription to Architectural Digest for the equivalent of $1 per year and to Business Week for myself for the equivalent of $5 per year, and yet The Economist grows in both number of subscribers and in number of ad pages -- bucking the trends -- what is it about The Economist that Time and the other magazines lack? (Disclosure, if it matters: I am a long-time subscriber to The Economist -- current subscription ends in 2013 -- and gave up on Time magazine years ago when it changed from news to social gossip.) Perhaps Isaacson whould have editorialized on how to save Time magazine. Like its competitors (with the notable exceptions of The Economist and The Week), the newsweeklies are facing the same problems as newspapers.

Also interesting is that (again, with the notable exception of The Economist) magazines have to essentially give away subscriptions to create a guaranteed subscriber base on which to base ad charges, but even that is not helping. Subscriptions to Time, US News & World Report, Newsweek, Business Week, etc. (again, excepting The Economist and The Week) are rapidly declining and magazines are closing their doors or trying to find some other niche they can fill to stay afloat temporarily.

Is there a lesson to be learned from the trend contrariness of The Economist? Considering that a discounted subscription to The Economist is pretty expensive for a magazine (approximately $70), especially when you consider that I was able to get my wife a multiyear subscription to Architectural Digest for the equivalent of $1 per year and to Business Week for myself for the equivalent of $5 per year, and yet The Economist grows in both number of subscribers and in number of ad pages — bucking the trends — what is it about The Economist that Time and the other magazines lack? (Disclosure, if it matters: I am a long-time subscriber to The Economist — current subscription ends in 2013 — and gave up on Time magazine years ago when it changed from news to social gossip.)

]]>