Husni Vs. BoSacks - The Whole Experience vs. the Hole Experience

The following terrific exchange is from Samir Husni's Blog. It is clearly part of an ongoing and and very public debate between myself and my good friend Samir. If you ever get the chance to see us do this in action, please do not miss it. It has always been the highlight of any event or trade show we have been invited to attend. I kid you not.

Captain Renault: What in heaven's name brought you to Casablanca?
Rick: My health. I came to Casablanca for the waters.
Captain Renault: The waters? What waters? We're in the desert.
Rick: I was misinformed.
Casablanca (1942)


The Whole Experience vs. the Hole Experience
Posted by Samir Husni
http://mrmagazine.wordpress.com/
My friend Bob Sacks discovered a major gap in his e-paper experience. For years he has been predicting the future of mass reaching magazines and books to be on-line or through some usage of an electronic device such as the Sony Reader or Kindle. Well, Bob had the chance to put his predictions to practice and lived to write about it. He summed his e-reader, the Kindle, experience as such:

·The Ebook experience is excellent and enjoyable. It was book like and yet had features that no book has.
·The Enewspaper experience was fair. With a newspaper the expected visuals, photos and charts were non existent and that colored my reading and my expectations.
·The Emagazine was a complete flop.

To say I told you so will be entirely unfair. But, what I have been saying for years is that the new technologies are yet another way to spread the word and to have content delivered to readers and viewers. It is a new way and not a replacement or even a substitute. Each media must present the entire whole experience on its own. No media should be made to be like this or that. If we are working so hard to invent a medium that looks like paper and feels like paper, why bother? We have paper, so there is no need to reinvent the wheel.

Well, folks, click here to read Bob's entire review of the Kindle and enjoy the "hole" in his "whole" experience.

BoSacks Reply to "The Whole Experience vs. the Hole Experience"

Samir;
The fact that the magazine experience was a dud in the Kindle does not mean that the digital magazine experience cannot be achieved. It can be and it will become a wonderful experience. There are many flaws in this first generation e-paper reader, and all of those flaws are based in the design elements. But first we must acknowledge that the e-paper reading experience was excellent. The fact that Amazon stripped out the design elements from the files supplied does not mean that they can't and won't be included. If that is your only argument, you are very misinformed.

The digital magazine is alive and well. It grew over 115% last year, with at least 15 bona fide suppliers, and is expected to grow exceptionally for years to come. That growth is not based on epaper, but when the next generation of e-paper is available in 2011, the growth will be astronomical. It is fair to ask the question, WHY? There are many reasons - ease of use, connectability, newsworthiness - but perhaps above all is cost. Have you been tracking the cost of making magazines? These crippling costs combined with horrific inefficiencies of distribution will force publishers to offer better quality and more targeted print products at extremely high price points. The only answer for most of the magazine world will be digital editions. No, print is not going to go away. But it will not be the dominant information distribution vehicle. The publisher, the advertiser nor the reader can afford the print only world.
by BoSacks March 13, 2008 at 5:32 pm

--------------------------------------------------
My Dear Bob
Here you go again . . . putting words in my mouth, well putting words on my blog is more accurate . . . The debate is not whether digital magazines are well and alive, or whether e-paper will be here or not . . . The debate is about a new form of media which is being born to add to the rest of the media and not to REPLACE them . . . The digital magazine experience like Monkey magazine and other is a completely different experience than reading Maxim in print for example. Different media, different audiences . . . each and every medium, new or old, born or yet to be born, must try to create a complete whole experience and not just a "hole" in the experience . . . Whether print, broadcast, digital or whatever the new technologies will bring, if that medium does not create a complete wholesome experience with its audience it will be doomed . . .
All the best my friend,
Samir

------------------------------------------

My very dear friend Samir:

Write this down. You are correct about digital magazines having the ability to be different than print magazines. It can be very different, as is Monkey, or it can be a simple replica of a printed magazine. Most likely digital magazines will be fully media enriched, to take advantage of the new electronic medium that they ride upon, and to maximize the media possibilities. Your original position of shear enjoyment was that in my report on the Kindle epaper platform it was not a very good magazine experience. No it wasn't. But it will be, and my point in our exchange was that when that does happen correctly it will be as an epaper platform with full digital magazine functionality.

So to sum up this wonderful and informative exchange, you agree that digital magazines are and will be successful. You don't agree that epaper and digital magazines will someday replace the majority of printed magazines.


I'll go you one giant step further, my research with media Ideas ( http://www.media-ideas.net/ ) points out that the market for printed periodicals will further decrease by 15% through 2016 in North America and Europe (0.7 probability). And that within twenty five years, only 10% of the paper-based magazine industry will remain (0.6 probability).

Atlantic Assures Fans It Hasn't Sold Its Soul

Atlantic Assures Fans It Hasn't Sold Its Soul
Britney Cover Is Relevant to Venerable Title's New Aims -- a Hoped-for Return to Profitability
By Nat Ives

NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- Longtime readers of The Atlantic are likely to do double takes when they see Britney Spears on its next cover -- a rarified piece of media real estate more often occupied with subjects such as Pakistan's A.Q. Khan, the biological basis for morality, the human qualities of George Washington or, in 1996, "Why Americans Hate the Media."

Britney Spears will land on the cover of The Atlantic.

At 150 years old, The Atlantic remains an intellectual journal of public affairs and culture. But owner David Bradley also wants it to end a long spell in the red. So in the past year it poached Justin Smith from The Week to become its president; committed to moving its ad-sales team from Washington to New York while integrating digital and offline efforts; abandoned its online pay wall to lure more visitors; placed new emphasis on events including the Aspen Ideas Festival; and commissioned a magazine redesign.

Now the Britney cover story is bound to attract new attention to The Atlantic. The magazine maintains that the issue's editorial is not driven by Mr. Smith's ambitious five-year business plan, the redesign or any of the rest -- but it arrives at a time when The Atlantic's pages and newsstand sales are down, while celebrity titles are still going stronger than any magazine category.

Same perpsective
James Bennet, editor of The Atlantic since March 2006, said the Britney cover flows from the same rich artery as every Atlantic piece, and not just the Marilyn Monroe or Humphrey Bogart stuff from decades back. He also meant cover packages such as the exploration of possible pre-Viking contacts between the Old and New Worlds or the 1999 cover story on new theories of infectious disease.

"We are focusing The Atlantic really on what it does best, I think -- which is bringing its intelligence to bear on really important subjects, the most significant subjects in politics, business and the broader culture -- and making provocative arguments," Mr. Bennet said.

The title has undoubtedly caught new wind lately with high-impact pieces such as last December's "Why Obama Matters" and the March issue's "Marry Him," about settling for "Mr. Good Enough." The Britney feature, for its part, is a serious look into her hangers-on and the businesses that they build on her back; if it happens to help reverse The Atlantic's recent 5.4% decline in newsstand sales, so much the better.

But will core readers and advertisers stay true?

This is the question for magazines on the remake. The answers, especially amid the broader media-world transformation, can be brutal.

Subscriber revolt
Britney is "not anything that would interest me," said Richard Adin, 60, a Poughkeepsie, N.Y., business owner who said he's read The Atlantic for about a decade and holds, as the title confirmed, a subscription through 2016. "If I were looking at it on a newsstand I wouldn't buy it. It's bad enough when Britney takes up space in my New York Times."

Reader's Digest, another venerable brand, recently tested its longtime readers with a new logo, the first back-cover ads in 85 years and a design intended relate to younger readers. Nothing was done casually. "We carefully considered the reaction of our many older readers, because they're valuable to us," said Eva Dillon, president and group publisher. "Once you become accustomed to something, you don't like to see it change."

Rishad Tobaccowala, the ad guru in charge of the Denuo Group, said he trusts The Atlantic to handle pop well. "I believe it's in their core wheelhouse," he said. "But over time it's also consistent with them making their magazine current and compelling with today's trends."

Magazines' covers are still their most public face, however, so Britney's prime Atlantic position will draw notice from several sides. When Howell Raines was executive editor at The New York Times, many reporters resented his push for more pop-culture news, such as the front-page Britney feature "Schoolyard Superstar Aims for a Second Act, as an Adult" in October 2002. Even Vanity Fair, a magazine explicitly fascinated by stars and starlets, caught darts when it put Paris Hilton on the front.

The Economist has made its feeling on Britney covers clear: harrumph. "If she re-emerged as the head of the World Bank, we'd consider it," Editor in Chief John Micklethwait joked last month in a MarketWatch column lauding his magazine's sober judgment.

New goals
The Britney piece easily meets Atlantic editorial standards, said Mr. Smith. But its pop-culture hook happens to be relevant to the magazine's new aims, such as that hoped-for return to profitability or even simple ad-page growth.

Ad pages at The Atlantic have slid in recent years, dropping 1% each in 2007 and 2006 after a 12.6% drop in 2005, according to the Publishers Information Bureau. By comparison, the U.S. edition of The Economist, which competes for some of the same readers and advertisers, posted an 8.5% gain last year, a 1.1% increase in 2006 and a 1.9% slip in 2005.

"We think the brand's relevance has a broader appeal than the current footprint," said Mr. Smith. "You could argue that doing a story on the celebrity economy and the new paparazzi economy is a broadening of the footprint."

Here's hoping Mr. Adin, the Atlantic subscriber, continues to find what he likes -- despite Britney's April beachhead. "If it's one issue, I don't care," said Mr. Adin. "If this is the new direction, they may as well just call themselves one of Rupert Murdoch's tabloids."

BoSacks Speaks Out: Review of the Kindle

BoSacks Speaks Out: Review of the Kindle
Publishing Executive Magazine
By BoSacks
http://www.pubexec.com/story/story.bsp?sid=92800&var=story

This is a review of the Kindle Epaper reading device. There are by necessity two parts to this review - the review of the Kindle and the review of the Epaper. If I were reviewing a new state-of-the-art MP3 player, I wouldn't have to describe to you the inherent value and functionality of music, what it is and what it does - you already know. Everybody is familiar with music and it requires no descriptors on my part. Not so with epaper and epaper devices. Both are new to the public and both require understanding and explanation.

I have read three novels, two magazines and one newspaper on the Kindle. (I thought a page-turning series of an original pulp fiction giant was the right choice for reviewing an Epaper device. I chose Edger Rice Burroughs' John Carter of Mars series. Mr. Burroughs was a product of his time and, as such, was clearly a racist and a staunch sexist. But those attributes aside, he could sure tell a fanciful and exciting story.) My reactions to the three publishing types are as follows:

The Ebook experience is excellent and enjoyable. It was book like and yet had features that no book has.
The Enewspaper experience was fair. With a newspaper the expected visuals, photos and charts were non existent and that colored my reading and my expectations.
The Emagazine was a complete flop. All that was delivered was straight text in ebook format. What distinguishes a magazine from other formats, among other attributes, is the design element. The Kindle magazine experience is completely devoid of style and design. This is either an oversight by Amazon or just plain uninformed laziness. I will assume that they received appropriate XML files from the magazine publisher, which should contain all the elements of proper magazine and page construction. Just a little more effort on someone's part and the magazine reading experience would have been better. Now is the time for publishers to start to strategize how they will reconstitute their franchise into a pleasant epaper experience.

Epaper in this device exceeded my expectations. Epaper, just like real paper, does not have under-panel, background lighting. In fact it has no light emission at all. It works on the ambient light or reflective light available in the room you are in just like real paper. The refresh rate or the time it takes to change pages is no longer and perhaps quicker then the time it takes to turn a traditional page. The type was crisp and wonderfully variable. With the ease of two flicks I had a range of font sizes at my command. The substrate background was acceptable, but could be brighter and whiter, more in line with the Sony Ereader.

The bottom line in this review of the Epaper experience is a resounding success, and it will only continue to get better.

The rest of the tale is the actual functionality of the machine called a Kindle. This, too, will improve over time and is not a bad submit for a first edition. But I do have some issues with the design and instrumentality. Unlike some other reviewers, I did not find the Kindle ugly, but neither is it of a completely compelling design like the iPod. The Kindle comes with a quaint querty keyboard that was easy to use and necessary to have for the purchase of titles while on the road. It also comes equipped with a nice pocket book sized 6-inch E-ink display, 256MB of internal memory, which they say and I believe, holds 200 books. It is also equipped with an easy to reach scroll wheel and a standard mini USB port. It has a 3.5mm headphone jack, SD slot for extended external memory, and is connected for downloads via cell towers that transmit data over a network called EV-DO data. I am being specific about the data delivery because in my case I live in a rural area of New York. Here I have spotty cell service, but no EV-DO data, so in order to get my Ebooks delivered via the data network, I had to drive 13 miles to a town with greater population and therefore greater cell service. Once in range, the 5 books I ordered downloaded in seconds.

Another great feature is the inboard dictionary. At any time you can use the scroll wheel to highlight a sentence and the dictionary provides you with information about any complex words on that line. It was both useful and functionally easy. You wouldn't believe it but John Carter of Mars has an even more extensive vocabulary than Bosacks. I kid you not.


I have two major gripes about the Kindle. In the designers' zeal to make it easy to turn pages, they made it too easy. There is little room on either side of the kindle to hold the Ereader comfortably without accidentally changing pages either forward or backward. This made for an annoying experience of continually having to flip back. The other area of needed improvement was the leather cover/carrying case. The Kindle is not secured in the case. It just rests there and slides out much too easily. Call it paranoia if you like, but I was constantly worried that this $400 plastic device was going to drop out of the case and drop on the floor with a crunch from it and a yowl from me.

With all that said. I loved the overall experience of Epaper and this new device. I would bet that the revised version will fix all the mechanical idiosyncrasies, and I will be more than happy to report on that when it becomes available. But right now the Kindle version 1 is sold out, and that bodes well for Amazon and the fledgling Ebook industry.

BoSacks Readers Speak Out; Time, Newsweek, Teens and Google U

BoSacks Readers Speak Out; Time, Newsweek, Teens and Google U

Subject: Re: Time Vs. Newsweek: Battle Of The Print Dinosaurs
Bob: To paraphrase Montaigne, whether poring over TIME or N/W on the bathroom throne, or reading all the Oscar Gossip online, we are still sitting on our ass. The author reminds me of the spoiled creatures who write reviews of new vehicles for car magazines, wondering why the manufacturers offer limited GPS options, or could find only 6 more horsepower than last year.

Didn't TIME deliberately pare their circ base to contain costs and get more right with ABC? I can't imagine that they would have lost so much more readership proportionately to N/W in an even race on level ground. As logical references go, it is non sequitur.

Yes, I read more news online, and eschew gossip as best I can, but I haven't cancelled my subs to newsweeklies. They offer perspective, and insight, maybe because they have to be good and be right between the event and the print deadlines. 3.2 million readers are counting on it and paying for the privilege.
(Submitted by a self-diagnosed dinosaur, retired)


Re: Time Vs. Newsweek: Battle Of The Print Dinosaurs
Not in a million years will I pick up a print copy of these two magazines, but I'm in love with Newsweek.com!!!!
(Submitted by an Online Production Manager

Re: Time Vs. Newsweek: Battle Of The Print Dinosaurs
Bo- I'm not sure if my attitude is tainted as a publisher or not. I used to love both titles. I would read both on a regular basis. Now I find I almost never read either. Why is that? The internet? I couldn't really say. I continue have great respect for both houses, but my addiction and their usefulness or my lifestyle/needs have changed.
(Submitted by a multi-title Publisher)

Re: BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Snakes, Music, Publishing and Reading
This is a sad commentary about how the printing business has turned into the "business" of printing. Many of the big printers today--except for the one that sprouted out of the cornfields in the Midwest--are run by MBA suits who don't know anything about it. To them, a magazine or catalog is just another widget to be counted and counted, and they push and push, to produce more and more, with less and less. At the end of the day, they are only concerned with showing a profit since that is what will ultimately feather their pockets. So in order to achieve that, they shut down plants, lay off employees, and in the process, they have destroyed the business. With that goal achieved, the MBA suit walks away with a multi-million dollar bonus in his pocket. "What a world, what a world."
Submitted by a Senior Production person)

The inside baseball character of replies to replies can get tedious, I know. So this will probably remain between you and me, and that's fine. While Senior Production Person makes some valid observations, I believe he misses the point and wanted to run my POV by you.

Yes, MBA's and similarly soulless types pocketing obscene amounts of money is an offensive reality. But it is the nature of American business, not just the American printing business. Change it if you can and more power to you. But Wall Street might be a more fruitful starting point than Printer's Row.

As to the continual push to print more and more for less and less, my fellow reader puts the arse before the torse. Could it be that the amount of money that Senior Production Persons will pay their printer might have something to do with this state of affairs? And perhaps the overall nature of the marketplace? "Mmmmm, could be." (Bugs Bunny - American cartoon rabbit and personal role model). Ben Franklin, patron saint of American printers, got it only 2/3's right when he enumerated the things in life that are certain. Actually, there are three: death, taxes, and lower printing prices. There is less, and the customers want more. So, we do more with less.

As for the outrage over the fact that, "at the end of the day, they are only concerned with showing a profit," well, duh! The same is true for the beginning of the day, noontime, and the commute both ways. The first condition necessary to doing a good job is having a job. Whether you are a CEO, a production person, or a pocket feeder, that means contributing more than you are paid. That means making a profit. Call it feathering your nest or feeding your family. Either way, there is nothing shameful in it. In business, it is a moral obligation. That obligation can be met humanely or inhumanly but that is a question of execution and personal responsibility. The goal itself remains honorable.
Submitted by a Printer)


Re: U.S. teens stumped by history Survey
There's absolutely no question that the liberal arts, including history, are essential to every student's education. But this story suffers from serious flaws.

First it offers no points of comparison. Do today's teenagers know less history and literature than teenagers did ten years ago? Do today's teenagers know less history and literature than people in their 40s or 50s?

Second, the survey methodology certainly influenced the results. Who among us is willing to focus carefully when answering 33 multiple choice history questions in a random phone call from a stranger?

Finally, which of the results indicates "stunning ignorance?"

-Half of the respondents knew the dates of the Civil War.
-Three quarters knew when Columbus sailed.
-Three quarters correctly identified Adolf Hitler.
-40 percent were familiar with Ellison's "The Invisible Man."
-Half were familiar with Job.
-80 percent were familiar with "To Kill a Mockingbird."
-Virtually all identified Martin Luther King from his famous speech.

Would we expect any random group of American adults to score much better?

This story is cut from a well-worn mold . In a few months we'll hear how ignorant American students are about geography. Then another group with an axe to grind will find another subject in which American teenagers are woefully underinformed. Common Core, the organization behind the survey, owes their extremely important cause less sensational and more serious treatment. And we're as "stunningly ignorant" as the kids we're snickering at if we swallow this stuff without thinking about it first.
Submitted by a Publisher)

Re: Google U
"It is quaint that people speak of separating dogma from education. Dogma is actually the only thing that cannot be separated from education. It IS education." - G. K. Chesterton
In his Google U essay, Jeff Jarvis (the creator and original Managing Editor of Entertainment Weekly, whose early version of that title was hipper and more insightful though perhaps less commercial than the magazine's current iconic incarnation) has discovered home schooling. Welcome aboard!

As the failure of the model enforced by the government schools and the culture at large becomes more obvious to more people the collapse of that model becomes more and more of a likelihood; a consummation devoutly to be wished. I'll take Mr. Jarvis' comments as a positive sign, especially considering his track record for getting in front of cultural trends.

The educational system as it currently exists does not, cannot, and will never provide actual education. According to the model of its founder, John Dewey, it provides indoctrination for the production of usable, lead-able citizens. According to the wishes of the teacher's unions, which appear to be modeled on the coal miners, it provides gainful employment for life for anyone willing to keep paying their dues and pass along whatever drivel is put in front of them. According to the pleasure of academics and administrators, it provides a cocoon safely insulated from the demands of the real world and protects their phoney baloney jobs. For politicians, it provides another means of access to taxpayer dollars and a power base built on spending those dollars. But education? Sorry, wrong number. . . .
Submitted by a Printer)

Re: In men's magazines, a question of size
Bob; With the seemingly perpetual increases in paper and postal costs, the next major "universal" trim-size reduction (from the current 10.5" short-cutoff) will be the aptly named "handbag" size. Unfortunately, there is not currently a "natural" press-cutoff within the U.S. web-offset world to deliver this product efficiently. I know this because we looked at producing such a product. It is my understanding that the current U.S. titles -- produced at the handbag trim size -- are printed on short-cutoff presses. The oversized sigs (i.e., at 10.5" + trim) are sent to the bindery...where the book is trimmed to the smaller 9" trim size. This is a huge -- and expensive -- inefficiency/waste. For my project, which was ultimately tabled, the other option was to look at a rotogravure scheme. Alas, the relatively small print order did not justify this.

It is my prediction that the handbag trim size will become a viable option -- and viable press platform -- in the not too-distant future. This will occur when one (or more) of the major magazine publishers "challenges" one (or more) of the "Big 3" -- RRDonnelley, Quad Graphics and Quebecor (?) World -- to convert a significant portion of their press platform to a 9" trim-size press cutoff...in exchange for a very robust portion of their titles/print order. Only a large -- and committed -- publisher volume would justify the significant investment that this would represent to any one of the printing Big 3. Could another candidate (e.g., Brown Printing), beyond the Big 3, emerge to seize some of this "new" trim size volume? Maybe...but less likely. And one of the Big 3 already has its hands full with financial challenges.
Submitted by a Dirctor of Operations)

BoSacks isn't cheap but he can be had for free

BoSacks isn't cheap but he can be had for free
Hear/See Bosacks Live for Free in NYC

Friends, I have cajoled the powers that be at the Publishing Business Conference & Expo on March 10th through 12th in the New York Marriott Marquis Times Square to offer my readers free admission to see one of my lectures and hang out with fellow publishing executives. The free pass also includes entrance to the mighty exhibit hall.

In my opinion the exhibit hall alone is worth the price of admission. Since I started my career I have absorbed an enormous amount of information at various publishing exhibit halls by talking to the vendors and seeing the latest and greatest "things" available. You have heard me say before that the future is here now, but it is not widely distributed. Well, the future is usually at the exhibit hall first.

So, you get all that and it's free, and you get to see me, too. I am giving three lectures in two days. Come and see Bo live and in person.

The sessions I am giving are listed in the brochure as:


E-Paper and the Future of Publishing
Focus: Book & Magazine
Monday, March 10, 2008, 10:00 AM to 11:00 AM

Industry veteran, guru and "Profit Prophet" Bob Sacks (aka BoSacks) will present a lively and critical look at e-paper in its current forms, including a hands-on exploration of Sony's Reader and Amazon's Kindle, and their current and future impact on book and magazine publishing. Sacks will also share his insights and predictions on what you can expect from e-paper in the not-so-distant future.

Or:

5 Key Future Magazine Trends to Plan for
Focus: Magazine
Tuesday, March 11, 2008, 3:00 PM to 4:00 PM

The periodical publishing industry has entered a new period of change. There is much uncertainty today about how the magazine will evolve, how it will be paid for and how it will remain relevant. We look at the 5 key issues that will affect our industry over the next decade and provide actionable advice to help keep publishers prepared in defining their own future.

· David Renard : Co-founder, mediaIDEAS
· BoSacks Co-founder, mediaIDEAS

Or:

Keynote Panel: Magazine Publishing in the Digital Age
Focus: Magazine
Tuesday, March 11, 2008, 8:30 AM to 10:00 AM

What publishers should be doing now.
· Steve Palm : President and CEO, NewBay Media
· Robert Sacks : Co-Founder, mediaIDEAS
· John Sateja : Senior Vice President for Information Products, Consumer Reports
· Rich Zweiback : Executive Director of Manufacturing, Lebhar Friedman
· Ned Borowsky :President and CEO, North American Publishing Co.


All you have to do is register your name at this URL and use the discount code: BOSACKS08 http://www.publishingbusiness.com/

If you need any help or have questions send an email to my buddy Matt Steinmetz at msteinmetz@NAPCO.com Regardless of what you hear about other editors, Matt is OK in my book.


Two more items that might work for my readers:

If you are interested in going to the whole shebang They will offer you their lowest conference rate -- discount code: BOSACKS200 ($200 off Full Conference Pass, pay only $595)

Or, you want to just attend the Digital Magazine Symposium, chaired by Peter Meirs of Time Inc fame, $75 off -- discount code: BOSACKS75 ($75 off Digital Magazine Symposium, pay only $120)

Requiem for Old-Time Radio

BoSacks Speaks Out: I'm not sure why I chose to send out this article. It is not about our industry or at least not directly. But it is about the decline and inevitable diminishment of a big part of the media industry. And that recognition is important. Not that it is about us, put perhaps that there are lessons to be learned so that it doesn't become us.

"Ronald Reagan has held the two most demeaning jobs in the country; President of the United States and radio broadcaster for the Chicago Cubs."
George F. Will (American editor and news commentator b.1941)

Requiem for Old-Time Radio

Hit hard by the music world's fragmentation, it's handicapped in making a Web transition
by Jon Fine
BW Magazine

I remember what we now call "terrestrial radio" with ridiculous fondness. I recall huddling with it long past bedtime, the volume set low, hoping to hear something I loved. Thus the truism of how radio is the most intimate medium: You're in bed with the lights out, the music and the DJ's voice going straight into your brain, the images created are yours alone.

I remember, with terrible pangs of longing, my first days as a college radio DJ. Doing a 3 a.m. to 6 a.m. slot in a small town in Ohio, even if, during those still and wintry nights, I could have been the last living person on earth for all the people who were actually listening.

All of which testifies to how old I am. Realities of the music world-the explosion in both expression and availability, first on independent labels and now everywhere, thanks to the Internet-began overtaking commercial radio stations well over 20 years ago. (I feel profoundly sorry for anyone whose musical universe is limited to the shrunken playlists of commercial radio, given the bounty available elsewhere.) There was a complicated blood bond that budding music geeks of the 1970s and '80s formed with radio, which today seems quaint. You loved radio for first opening up a world; you hated it for falling behind what was actually going on.
That's the emotional aspect of this medium, which almost certainly has more songs written about it than any other. Or at least it's me acknowledging my complicated feelings about it. The market is less sentimental. Rush Limbaugh may still mint millions, but a private equity firm that ran stock analyses of key publicly traded media companies in the past five years found that the worst-performing sector was radio, which managed the neat feat of underperforming newspaper companies. (This helps explain why radio giants Clear Channel (CCU) and Cumulus (CMLS) are in the process of going private.)


"THE MODEL IS BROKEN"
Flat industry ad revenues began a steady slide into negative territory beginning in May of last year, and January's decline was 6%. But monthly falloffs in local advertising, which accounts for around two-thirds of radio revenue, began surfacing regularly in '06. (These figures come from trade group Radio Advertising Bureau, which tracks the top 150 U.S. markets.) So much for thinking radio's losses might have been early indicators of recession. "It used to be a leading indicator," says Marci Ryvicker, a Wachovia Securities (WB) analyst who covers radio. "The model is broken. The negatives you saw in 2006 had nothing to do with the economy." She's expecting radio revenues to fall at least 1% in '08, and don't forget that this is despite sky's-the-limit campaign spending we're seeing this election year.

"The biggest failure of many broadcasters is understanding how much the environment has changed," says Clear Channel Radio CEO John Hogan. Clear Channel, long a flash point for listener anger over homogenized and overformatted airwaves, has beaten the industry's revenue performance in the past two years. For 2007, though, Hogan concedes that this meant his company's revenues dropped only slightly.

As with newspapers, small-market radio stations have been insulated from their bigger brethren's woes. And radio still boasts the odd trump card, formats that make up in uniqueness what it has lost in monopolized distribution: morning zoo DJs, rush-hour drive time, the Limbaughs of the world, and local talk. But of all major consumer media, radio is the least suited to an online transition.

Industry executives fiercely deny this point, but consider the landscape. Newspapers' ills are well-documented, and I've had much sport with them in this space. But the local paper's Web site is almost always the dominant local online entity. Newspapers churn out tons of original content daily. Radio is built to a large degree on music it doesn't own and syndicated talk shows. Both are available in countless venues online, which means radio Web sites have less unique stuff to attract audiences. And stations aren't structured like newspapers. While their profit margins are much higher-try 40% and up-they also have much smaller news organizations and fewer bodies to create new content that can be slapped up online. Ryvicker says radio companies that are doing well in the Web are getting 1% to 2% of revenues from it. Hogan says Clear Channel Radio will get 5% of revenues from its 1,005 Web sites "very soon" but isn't there yet. (Radio executives also extol the revenue potential of radio stars turning up on cable, à la Imus, or on local TV, but few can make that leap.)

By comparison, the big newspaper companies get about 8% of total revenues online, according to public companies' comments and an analyst tracking the industry. It says something about radio that a commonly cited star example of its online efforts is the not-for-profit npr.org, which has Web traffic growth most companies would envy. (HD radio, a newish technology that opens up spectrum on the dial for more niched music offerings, requires consumers to buy equipment and is considered a revenue nonstarter even by some industry executives.)

And another thing: I haven't even mentioned iPods or satellite radio.

U.S. teens stumped by history survey

U.S. teens stumped by history survey
By Sam Dillon Published
Fewer than half of American teenagers who were asked basic questions about history and literature during a recent telephone survey knew when the Civil War was fought, and one-quarter thought that Christopher Columbus sailed to the New World sometime after 1750, not in 1492.

The results of the survey, released Tuesday, demonstrate that a significant proportion of American teenagers live in "stunning ignorance" of history and literature, according to the group that commissioned it. Known as Common Core, the organization describes itself as a new, nonpartisan research and advocacy organization that will press for more teaching of the liberal arts in American public schools.

The group argues that President George W. Bush's No Child Left Behind law has impoverished America's public school curriculum by holding schools accountable for student scores on annual tests in reading and math but in no other subjects.

Politically, the group's leaders are strange bedfellows. Its founding board includes Antonia Cortese, the executive vice president of the American Federation of Teachers, the union that is a powerful force in the Democratic Party, and Diane Ravitch, an education professor at New York University who was assistant secretary of education under George H.W. Bush. Its executive director is Lynne Munson, a former deputy chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities and former special assistant to Vice President Dick Cheney's wife, Lynne.

"We're a truly diverse group," Munson said. "We almost certainly vote differently, and we have varying opinions about different aspects of educational reform. But when it comes to concern that all of America's children receive a comprehensive liberal arts and science education, we all agree."

Today in Americas
Clinton and Obama clash on health, trade and rival tacticsSurgeon accused of hastening patient's death to retrieve organs soonerWarrantless searches removed from legislation in MexicoIn the survey, 1,200 17-year-olds were reached by telephone in January and asked to answer 33 multiple choice questions about history and literature, which were read aloud to them. The questions were drawn from a test administered by the U.S. government in 1986.

About a quarter of the teenagers surveyed were unable to correctly identify Adolf Hitler as Germany's chancellor during World War II, instead identifying him variously as a munitions maker, an Austrian premier and the German Kaiser.

On literature, the teenagers fared even worse. Only four in 10 could pick the name of Ralph Ellison's novel about a young man's growing up in the south and moving to Harlem, "Invisible Man," from a list of titles, and only about half knew that in the Bible, Job is known for his patience in suffering. About as many said he was known for his skill as a builder, or his prowess in battle, or his prophetic abilities.

The history question that proved easiest asked the respondents to identify the man who declared, "I have a dream." Ninety-seven percent of teenagers correctly picked Martin Luther King Jr.

About eight in ten teenagers, a higher percentage than on any other literature question, knew that Harper Lee's novel, "To Kill a Mockingbird," is about two children affected by the conflict in their community when their father defends a black man in court.

In a joint introduction to their report, Cortese and Ravitch did not directly blame the No Child law for the dismal survey results, but argued that the law has led schools to focus too narrowly on reading and math, thereby crowding time out of the school day for history, literature and other subjects.

"The nation's education system has become obsessed with testing and basic skills because of the requirements of U.S. law, and that is not healthy," Cortese and Ravitch said.

A string of studies have documented the narrowing of the American public school curriculum since Bush signed the U.S. law in January 2002. Last week, the Center on Education Policy, a Washington research group that has closely studied the law's implementation, estimated, based on its own extensive survey, that 62 percent of school systems nationwide had added an average of three hours of math or reading instruction each week, at the expense of time spent on social studies, art and other subjects.

But the Bush administration and some business and civil rights groups warn against weakening the law, arguing that students need reading and math skills to succeed in other subjects.

Snakes on the Plains

BoSacks Speaks Out: I just love a good headline and because of that I had to send this out. It is also an interesting question about " Truth In Journelism" in this article. I leave it up to your good judgement. Is this a headline story? Is this any kind of story at all?

"After my screen test, the director clapped his hands gleefully and yelled: "She can't talk! She can't act! She's sensational!""
Ava Gardner (American film Actress of the 1940s and 50s who, despite her renowned beauty and sensuality, successfully resisted being typecast as a cex symbol. 1922-1990)


Snakes on the Plains?
BY Allan Mutter
http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/


The morning got off to a nasty start for ophidiophobians in Oklahoma City when they opened Friday's newspaper to see a headline sprawled atop page one warning: "Big snakes could slither into state."

The problem with the alarming spread in The Oklahoman - replete with the headshot of a frightening-looking Burmese python - is that the danger of a snake invasion is really quite remote, as the newspaper's own story makes clear.

So, why did the Oklahoman play this non-story in the sensational fashion it did? I left a phone message for editor Ed Kelley and, so far, haven't heard back.

But I did have an interesting conversation with zoologist Gordon Rodda of the U.S. Geographic Survey, one of the scientists whose research formed the basis for the story. Here is what he said:

The USGS undertook a study of what climates in the United States theoretically could support the spread of a growing population of non-indigenous Burmese pythons that have taken up residence in the Florida Everglades. The areas warm and humid enough to support the non-poisonous constrictors could include Oklahoma, depending on how global warming shakes out over the next 100 years.
"But, if the implication in the newspaper story is that it is going to happen next Thursday, that's irresponsible," said Gordon. "It is a very dramatic way they portrayed it."

The particular irony of the Oklahoman's story is that it was so thoroughly reported by staffer Josh Rabe that no reasonable editor could have inadvertently misconstrued its significance.
In but one example, Josh quotes a local snake expert as saying it is "just absurd" to fear a Burmese python invasion in Oklahoma. "If you put one out in the front yard on a day like today," said snake breeder Bob Clark in a week when low temperatures were in the mid-20s, "you would have a snake-sickle by the end of the day."

To be sure, an onslaught of Burmese pythons would terrifying. The snakes can grow to lengths of 20 feet and become as fat as a telephone pole, says Gordon. Although the creatures are not poisonous, they instantly wrap themselves around their prey, squeezing the life out of the victim before gulping it down.

Although the snakes are capable of traveling as far 20 miles in a day, Gordon can't imagine them bellying all the way from Florida to Oklahoma City. "It is unlikely they would keep moving long enough in the same direction, given the randomness of their movements," he explains.
If the danger is negligible of telephone poll-sized Burmese pythons slithering 1,500 miles from the Everglades to Oklahoma City, then why would the newspaper have played the story in the way it did?

"With newspapers," says Gordon, "it's their business to make a big deal out of things."

Is it any wonder why four out of five people don't trust the media?

Quebecor Prez: Bankruptcy Protection is a 'Great Place to be Right Now'

Quebecor World Mag Prez: Bankruptcy Protection is a 'Great Place to be Right Now'
Grosman at PRIMEX: Magazines need to urge readers to pay more.
By Joanna Pettas
http://www.foliomag.com/2008/quebecor-world-mag-prez-bankruptcy-protection-great-place-be-right-now
ST. PETERSBERG, FLORIDA-Three weeks after his company filed for bankruptcy protection, the president of Quebecor World's magazine print solutions business, Doron Grosman, addressed the crowd as a keynote speaker at IDEAlliance's 2008 Print Media Executive Summit (PRIMEX), held at the Renaissance Vinoy Hotel here.

Grosman began his speech with a status report on the company. "We are in creditor protection, which is a great place to be right now. We have billions of dollars of financing. From an operations standpoint, we're in good health," he told the crowd of printing, paper and publishing production executives, many of whom applauded his candor and willingness to speak under the circumstances.
Grosman said the company is in its situation because it paid a high premium on several acquisitions, with a debt of $250-300 million a year.

"Maybe our situation is a wake up call for our entire industry," he said. "If a $6 billion company can be in this situation, what are the implications?"

Grosman said the lesson learned is to put the value back into the value chain. One way to do this, he said, is to give printers more access to magazine staff beyond production into the sales, editorial, circulation and marketing departments. Understanding their concerns would provide printers with insight into what readers want. "At this point, it's not necessarily focused on revenue generating but on cost cutting. A more balanced perspective would make a great difference."

Along these lines, Grosman also suggested asking readers to pay more. "Magazines need to be repositioned as premium products," he said. "Right now, they are a unique product with commodity margins." Contributing to this, he said, is a lack of standardization. He suggested there be fewer options in ink types, paper weights and trim sizes-a somewhat controversial suggestion among those gathered.

One audience member asked if he meant that all magazines should be the same size, to which Grosman answered, "No, but there should be three or four. We are burdened by the complexity of all those sizes. Does it make a difference?"

Grosman also suggested more technical collaboration even as magazines compete commercially; approaching recent newsstand shifts as a chance to challenge "legacy thinking" about distribution practices; and shortening the contract negotiation process between printers and publishers to consolidate energy and time.

Chris Anderson Whipped by Long Tail

Chris Anderson Whipped by Long Tail
Says Ad Industry Actually Gets It
Posted by Andrew Hampp
http://adage.com/adages/post?article_id=125021
Chris Anderson is his own worst enemy. The editor in chief of "Wired" and the author of "The Long Tail," the most-cited marketing book of the last two years not written by Malcolm Gladwell, was asked at the end of his keynote speech at the Radio Advertising Bureau conference in Atlanta which sector of the media industry was succeeding in making a business out of the long-tail, that niche-heavy part of the business where there are no major breadwinners and loaves for everyone.

"The curse of my own book is that my biggest competition is the long tail," he replied. "[I compete] with 1 million blogs and social networks and micro engagements." His own industry, the publishing world, has "not really figured how to do it yet," he said. "We can launch web properties that are successful but very expensive, we have not figured out how to scale it down to very narrow competition."

The TV networks aren't doing very well, either, and for similar reasons. "They don't scale down to narrow audiences," he said.

But guess who Mr. Anderson thinks has made a boon out of the long tail? The advertising industry, of course. "In a strange way, the advertising business is the best example of an industry going down the long tail and finding a lot of growth and stability down there, to the surprise of everybody."

But it's no surprise as to who Mr. Anderson thinks is leading the pack. "That Google model, recognizing there was a latent demand for small advertisers with a small narrowly targeted audience, and the ability for that to be monetizable" is what the ad community has been able to execute the best, he said. "Google recognizes that in part with pay-per-click, in part with very low-cost advertising and content sites with an acquisition method that's basically software-driven, it's allowed the little guys whose sales force are now approaching them."

----------------------------------------

Dennis to launch new digital mag
Stephen Brook, press correspondent guardian.co.uk
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/feb/12/pressandpublishing.digitalmedia
Dennis Publishing is following up its digital lads' magazine Monkey with the launch of consumer technology title Gizmo.

Gizmo, a free fortnightly digital magazine, launches on March 11 and, like Monkey, will be delivered to readers' inboxes.

The new digital offering will mix elements of magazines, websites and video to review and demonstrate products. Gizmo will target ABC1 men aged 25 to 45.

Gizmo: 'will create desire for the products featured' Dennis Publishing will target Gizmo at its database of 1.5 million male magazine readers of its titles such as PC Pro and Mac User, Computer Buyer and Custom PC.

"Delivered directly into consumers' inboxes, Gizmo will create desire for the products featured and will bring a genuinely new format to the category," said Bruce Sandell, the head of new product development at Dennis Publishing.

"The brand will be focused on immediacy, interactivity and innovation. We are bringing together the achievements in publishing Monkey, our digital expertise and Dennis's heritage in the technology sector to successfully launch Gizmo."

Ross Burridge, reviews editor at Dennis's PC Pro, and author of the Ultimate Guide to HDTV and Home Entertainment, has been appointed Gizmo's editor.

"We're bringing an exciting mix of broadcast, online and print to readers desperately in need of clarity," said Burridge.

"By bringing products to life directly on the page, you no longer need to trawl the maze of websites and magazines to find out what's really going on in the world of consumer technology."

Someday There Will Be People Who Don't Know There's a Print Version

BoSacks Speaks Out: As most of you know, I have been debating Samir Husni for years about the future of printed magazines and the ascendancy of the age of digital reading. It will be a generation, perhaps more, before print evaporates to an unaffordable collectors-only medium. But until then it is not an either/or situation. Printed niche publications will rise and prosper before they, too, fall pray to the inexpensive lure of commoditized epaper electronic distribution, also known as el-cid. So it is no surprise that we find the following quote in the article below:
. . . . Someday there will be people who don't know there's a print product."

"The time to repair the roof is when the sun is shining."
John Fitzgerald Kennedy (American 35th US President (1961-63), 1917-1963)


Time Editor: Someday There Will Be People Who Don't Know There's a Print Version
Stengel: 'We want people to be addicted to the magazine.'
By Bill Mickey
http://www.foliomag.com/2008/time-editor-someday-there-will-be-people-who-don-t-know-there-s-print-version

Time magazine's managing editor Richard Stengel opened the Direct Marketing Association's 22nd annual Circulation Day event today in New York with a keynote that largely addressed the magazine's relationship with the Web site. Recounting the last year and a half, Stengle noted the magazine's redesign, ratebase reduction, the new publication date and the Web site's expansion into a product that stands out as a separate, 24/7 news site.

Broadly, Stengel said the magazine needed to regain its status as a vital read, in a way that vaguely echoed the luxe leanings of other high-end publications. "We have to become a more premium product with beautiful paper and photography," he said. "Each medium needs to do what it does best. A magazine should be something you're addicted to."

The Web site, too, had, to Stengel, become static. "We were a traditional magazine Web site. We decided we should be a 24/7 news Web site."

While the two products should be complementary halves, Stengel added that they nevertheless offer two very different perspectives on world news-and lately have been downplaying the opportunities of driving the audience from one platform to the other. Focus groups revealed that readers didn't necessarily appreciate the callouts in the magazine to go to the Web site to see more information on a particular story, he said. "Why are we doing that? It doesn't make sense," said Stengel. "They should be two separate audiences. Someday there will be people who don't know there's a print product."

In 2007, the rate base reduction, a cover price increase and a redesign of the magazine contributed to the second most profitable year in the magazine's history, said Stengel. "It was during a time that we thought was going to be a transition year."
Raising the cover price by $1.00, Stengel said, increased newsstand profitability but also caused sales to contract "a little." Indeed, according to the recently released Fas-Fax report, single copy sales for the second half of 2007 fell to 107,277 from 133,084 in the same period 2006-a 19.4 percent decrease.

Stengel said that print has largely ceded breaking news to online and, as a result, has become the more analytical of the two platforms. "There's no news that breaks in print anymore," he said. "Print takes the facts and adds insight. Online is for the 'what' and print is for the 'why'. The magazine puts it in context and that's why we see them as complementary brands."

BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Why Do Good Magazines Die?

BoSacks Readers Speak Out: Why Do Good Magazines Die?

Re: BoSacks: Why Do Good Magazines Die?
I agree with your premise, below. My first job was with House & Garden and it was a heady time, with editors who had tremendous style and clout with the reader and the retailer and a publisher and ad sales staff who were nearly mythic in their ability to convince the advertising community that the House & Garden brand was essential to their media schedule.

The key here was the fact that the "brand" was presented as unique, and advertisers understood clearly what the brand meant, in terms of the emotional connection and importance it had to readers.

I wonder if that was the way the magazine was still being presented to the ad community - and if the reader also understood why they needed to have the magazine as well?

Many magazines believe that just because they have a product that comes out every week, or every month, etc., and appears on the newsstand, or in their customer's mailbox, that they have a "brand". That couldn't be further from the truth!

I think that unless and until the magazine moguls understand that each magazine needs to do what their own best advertising customers wouldn't step foot out the door without doing - and that is to make it clear what is unique, compelling and competitive about the magazine - and what the emotional connection the magazine uniquely has with the reader - we're going to see a lot more titles, old and new, go under. A magazine should be a brand, not a commodity.
(Submitted by a President and CMO)

Re: BoSacks: Why Do Good Magazines Die?
Yes, this is truly astounding. You have to wonder, "What were they thinking?!" They couldn't even sell the old lady onward to someone who saw an opportunity? Must be nice to be that fat, dumb and happy, but if I were a Condé Nast shareholder I'd be screaming bloody murder.
(Submitted by a Publisher and COO)

Re: BoSacks: Why Do Good Magazines Die?
Wow Bobby, taking on the Conde behemoth - you go boy!!
(Submitted by a Senior Publishing Consultant)

Re: BoSacks: Why Do Good Magazines Die?
Bo, the main reason of H&G closing is how Conde Nast manage circulation and advertising. All the income is based on advertising pages and just a little amount on circulation. If H&G had a "good paid circulation", like People or US Weekly, probably it would not had been closed.
(Submitted by a Senior Magazine Rep)

Re: BoSacks: Why Do Good Magazines Die?
Your comments about the unfortunate impact of the influence of youth are spot on. In support of that statement I offer an article in the latest issue of Scientific American discussing something called myelin. Myelin is the white matter underpinning the gray matter of the brain. To the best of my rather basic understanding, the gray matter is a network of firing neurons performing data processing tasks and is, more or less, present at birth. White matter is the infrastructure that, among other things, determines the quality of one's decision making. Myelin, and the advanced decision making abilities it imparts, is not even all there until one reaches his mid-20's. 'Nuff said.
(Submitted by a Printer)

Re: BoSacks: Why Do Good Magazines Die?
Bo, I agree with you and your analysis, and I loved the title of your piece. I think the industry is just damn confused. The big guys, which I am not, don't have any more of an idea where this industry is headed then I do as twenty nine year veteran publisher of four smallish titles. Actually I think I am in a better position to survive the content wars than the so called giants of the industry. I know my readership and they know me. Can any Conde publisher say that? I doubt it. My readers pay me a very fair price for my work and my titles on the newsstand or as a subscription. Can they say that? I doubt it.
(Submitted by a Publisher)

Publishing Evolution From Linear Thought

BoSacks Speaks Out: The following was forwarded to me by one of our illustrious readers. I think it is a very provocative article for publishers to ponder. Has the digital age and evolving digital methodology changed the way we think, read and solve problems? Has this re-wiring of thought from historic linear logic to endlessly streaming tangential bits and bites changed us for the better or the worse? Is this a missing link in moving magazines from the printed page to the digital platform? At this point I have more questions than answers, but I think if we can frame the correct questions to probe, we can find the appropriate solutions and profitable business models as well. What do you think on this subject?

"Answers are not obtained by putting the wrong question and thereby begging the real one"
Felix Frankfurter (American Jurist, 1882-1965)

The Evolution From Linear Thought To Networked Thought
by Scott Karp
http://publishing2.com/2008/02/09/the-evolution-from-linear-thought-to-networked-thought/
I was thinking last night about books and why I don't read them anyone - I was a lit major in college, and used to be voracious book reader. What happened?

I was also thinking about the panel I organized for the O'Reilly TOC conference on Blogs as Books, Books as Blogs - do I do all my reading online because I like blogs better than books now? That doesn't seem meaningful on the face of it.

Then I read this really interesting post by Evan Schnittman at the OUP Blog about why he uses ebooks only for convenience but actually prefers to read in print.

So do I do all my reading online because it's more convenient? Well, it is, but it's not as if I don't have opportunities to read books. (And I do read a lot of Disney Princess books to my daughter.)

But the convenience argument seems to float on the surface of a deeper issue - there's something about the print vs. online dialectic that always seemed superficial to me. Books, newspapers, and other print media are carefully laid out. Online content like blogs are shoot from the hip. Books are linear and foster concentration and focus, while the web, with all its hyperlinks, is kinetic, scattered, all over the place.

I've heard many times online reading cast in the pejorative. Does my preference for online reading mean I've become more scattered and disorganized in my reading?

I've also spend a lot of time thinking and talking recently about how understanding the future media on the web is so counterintuitive from the perspective of traditional media - about the challenge of making the leap from thinking about linear distribution to network effects.

After reading Evan's post and struggling with the convenience argument, I read this Silicon Alley post speculating on a possible lack of demand for ebooks, despite the Kindle reportedly selling well. If I'm such a digital guy, then why do I have no interest in ebooks?

I was eating some peanut butter last night . . . and then suddenly something clicked. (Don't know if the peanut butter caused it.)

What if I do all my reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I'm just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed?

What if the networked nature of content on the web has changed not just how I consume information but how I process it?

What if I no longer have the patience to read a book because it's too . . . .linear.

We still retain an 18th Century bias towards linear thought. Non-linear thought - like online media consumption - is still typically characterized in the pejorative: scattered, unfocused, undisciplined.

Dumb.

But just look at Google, which arguably kept our engagement with the sea of content on the web from descending into chaos. Google's PageRank algorithm is the antithesis of linearity thinking - it's pured networked thought.

Google can find relevant content on the web because it doesn't "think" in a linear fashion - it takes all of our thoughts, as expressed in links, and looks at them as a network. If you could follow Google's algorithm in real time, it would seem utterly chaotic, but the result is extremely coherent.

When I read online, I constantly follow links from one item to the next, often forgetting where I started. Sometimes I backtrack to one content "node" and jump off in different directions. There are nodes that I come back to repeatedly, like TechMeme and Google, only to start down new branches of the network.

So doesn't this make for an incoherent reading experience? Yes, if you're thinking in a linear fashion. But I find reading on the web is most rewarding when I'm not following a set path but rather trying to "connect the dots," thinking about ideas and trends and what it all might mean.

But am I just an outlier, or just imagining with too much peanut butter on the brain some new networked thinking macro trend?

Then I remembered - or rather arrived at in nonlinear fashion - a contrarian piece in the Guardian about an NEA study that bemoaned declines in reading and reading skills. The piece points out the study's fatal flaw - that it completely neglected to study online reading.

All Giola has to say about the dark matter of electronic reading is this: "Whatever the benefits of newer electronic media, they provide no measurable substitute for the intellectual and personal development initiated and sustained by frequent reading."

Technological literacy

The only reason the intellectual benefits are not measurable is that they haven't been measured yet. There have been almost no studies that have looked at the potential positive impact of electronic media. Certainly there is every reason to believe that technological literacy correlates strongly with professional success in the information age.

I challenge the NEA to track the economic status of obsessive novel readers and obsessive computer programmers over the next 10 years. Which group will have more professional success in this climate? Which group is more likely to found the next Google or Facebook? Which group is more likely to go from college into a job paying $80,000 (£40,600)?

But the unmeasured skills of the "digital natives" are not just about technological proficiency. One of the few groups that has looked at these issues is the Pew Research Centre, which found in a 2004 study of politics and media use: "Relying on the internet as a source of campaign information is strongly correlated with knowledge about the candidates and the campaign. This is more the case than for other types of media, even accounting for the fact that internet users generally are better educated and more interested politically. And among young people under 30, use of the internet to learn about the campaign has a greater impact on knowledge than does level of education."

What I'd be most curious to know is whether online reading actually has a positive impact on cognition - through ways that we perhaps cannot measure or even understand yet, particularly if we look at it with a bias towards linear thought.

Is there such a thing as networked human thought? Certain there is among a group of people enabled by a network - but what about for an individual, processing information via the web's network?

Perhaps this post hasn't been an entirely linear thought process - is that necessarily a bad thing?

BoSacks: Why Do Good Magazines Die?

BoSacks: Why Do Good Magazines Die?
By Bob Sacks
Publishing Executive Magazine
Chuck Townsend, president and CEO of Condé Nast Publications, said in a statement, "Our investment in House & Garden throughout the years has been substantial, and we no longer believe it is a viable business investment for the company." Well, that is surely his call to make, but the public death by hanging of an old and cherished lady of publishing with a fan base of almost a million paid copies a month sets the stage for a review of what constitutes "success" in the magazine world, and, I think, makes a case for the impending doom of megalithic publishing empires.

House & Garden also had about 800 advertising pages per year-better numbers than many of its competitors can boast, and dream numbers for almost any publisher in this day and age. If I had those stats, I guarantee I wouldn't pull the plug, but rather find the leakage in the revenue stream.

I will assume that the operating costs were, from Condé Nast's perspective, too high to handle for long-term sustainability. But what the heck does that mean? To me, it is proof positive that they haven't the slightest idea what it means to be entrepreneurial. The time is now, if ever, for all publishers to focus on the entrepreneurial side of our business.

Sure, there is tough competition out there, and some of that competition is in the house of Condé Nast itself. So, what? What better way to command the market than to establish a beachhead with your own titles? And that's the thing-large corporations can't/don't/won't be fast, smart and agile. The fire of quick action is not in the belly of the corporate beast. And in today's world, corporate speed means life.

Condé Nast has everything a publisher could dream of: 100 years of positive branding, and a sweet printing contract based on high-volume, multi-title efficiencies and paper being purchased as cheaply as by anyone in the business. It also must have had a flexible publishing perspective, one that could adjust with the economy and economics of the times. If the economy is slipping, then so glides your editorial message to your constituency. House & Garden had almost a million paying readers, just waiting for its insights and instructional visions.

I also think youth contributed to this murder. It's an old publishing tale of buyers and planners who are too young and in the earliest parts of their careers, who don't yet have the tutoring to look beyond the numbers. These youngling buyers need the experience of years and the mentoring advice of seasoned professionals to look at the magazine business in a different light than other media. We are not an iPod. We don't claim to be one. We are not a download. We are print, and we have tremendous worth. We can reach market segments that are as yet untouched by the Internet. This will not last forever, but it is true for today for many titles.

The lesson here is one of choice. Chuck Townsend and Condé Nast chose to capitulate. Without all the facts, I think it was unnecessary. They could have taken this title in any one of a dozen other directions. Even though it was a competitor to some of Condé Nast's own titles, I believe the death was a revenue blunder. They angered a million paying subscribers and left millions of dollars on the table with no place to go but elsewhere.

I'm not saying that there are no titles that deserve a quick death. Many do. But this wasn't one of them.

Bob Sacks (aka BoSacks) is a consultant to the printing/publishing industry and president of The Precision Media Group (www.BoSacks.com). He is publisher and editor of a daily international e-newsletter, Heard on the Web. Sacks has held posts as director of manufacturing and distribution, senior sales manager (paper), chief of operations, pressman, cameraman and corporate janitor.

BoSacks Speaks Out: "Fork in the Road: Which Direction for the Publishing Industry?"

BoSacks Speaks Out: "Fork in the Road: Which Direction for the Publishing Industry?"
By BoSacks
As I have published here before, I am a principal partner in mediaIDEAS which investigates and provides original research reports with actionable advice and analysis for the publishing/media industry. I have asked for and received permission from mediaIDEAS to send to my readers a small portion of a recent research paper whose conclusion after a detailed analysis was that full color flexible e-paper display will be available to the market by 2011.

The report goes on to say that publishing magazines and books incorporating high quality color artwork such as those involved in the fashion/design/art sectors, and looking to develop digital editions, need to carefully monitor developments in electrowetting display technology . . . Planning for this event is critical to the future profitability, and even the existence, of such publishing companies.

The reason I asked for permission from my business partners to release this portion of our Call to Action is that I believe it is critical for our industry to fully comprehend the technologic reality on our door step. We are on the threshold of a new digital age. As publishers we can adapt and prosper or wither on the vine of antiquated protectionism and dysfunction.

On February 7, 2005 I debated Samir Husni at Primex hosted by IDEAlliance in an event titled "Fork in the Road: Which Direction for the Publishing Industry?" After the debate I was asked an excellent question from the audience. I was asked how long till publishers have to start really paying attention and worrying about e-paper. My answer was that five years from that time epaper will be real, functional and a necessary item on any publishers business plan and watch list.

As a futurist with an impressive track record of prescient predictions under my belt for the last 35 years, I am sad to report to you that I was wrong. Yes, wrong. It didn't take five years but rather three years for e-paper to be available to the general public. And the technology is growing at an exponential rate. Look around you and read the writing on your Kindle, which is currently sold out and backlogged. E-paper is here and it is not going to go away. The report from mediaIdeas and my own research is correct. Publishers must be . . . . planning for this event as it is critical to the future profitability, and even the existence, of such publishing companies.

This is not and should not be a fearful transition. Everything stays the same except the actual reading platform. The paginated (metered), well designed, and edited magazine experience is the same. The same writers, editors, artists, and mostly the same publishing staff will be required to "manufacture" magazines of the future. I would also add that it is not an either/or scenario. There will no doubt be both a printed version of magazines and an e-paper version available to the general public. The question will come down to one of cost and reader preference.

Just this morning I've completed a review of the Amazon Kindle. As an experienced e-paper reader the future is clear and the current arguments about the future of e-paper are as relevant as the old discussion of whether or not film-based printing will ever be replaced by CTP (Computer-to-Plate). I'm sure we all agree that was indeed a very juvenile argument. As much as this sounds like bravado, I was right then and I'm right now. I will go further to say that someday, perhaps less than ten years from now, the e-reading experience will be more preferred by the majority of the reading public than the inefficient, costly, environmentally unfriendly, and extremely dated current magazine methodology. Are we there yet? NO! But you can bet your bottom dollar that we will get there. And if you don't believe and prepare for it, it will be your bottom dollar.