Forum Moderators: open
In a broad retrenchment, Time Inc. announced yesterday that it would cut nearly 300 employees at its top magazines, including the most profitable publication, People, as it moves to invest more in its Web sites.
on a somewhat related note, pew research just came out with a study showing trends in sources for political information that indicate the growing importance of the internet:
[mercurynews.com...]
...web-first policy for BMJ. The British Medical Journal (BMJ) has... pledged to use its online offering as the hub of publication. Tony Delamothe, deputy editor, said: "Until now, most articles had to roll off the printing presses before making their way online."By the end of this year we hope that all articles will be published first on bmj.com. No more news stories or editorials published ten days after the event, or educational articles drifting gently out of date while queuing up to be printed."
Source: Journalism.co.uk [journalism.co.uk]
Methinks 2007 represents the proverbial "interesting times" for anyone and everyone involved in "traditional" publishing - myself included.
Syzygy
Methinks 2007 represents the proverbial "interesting times" for anyone and everyone involved in "traditional" publishing - myself included.
Me too. I come from the traditional printing and promotional products side and I've seen the trends since 1990. In fact, I've helped most, if not all of my clients make the transition both with their internal operations and their Internet properties.
We don't need paper anymore. Trees are a precious resource. ;)
We don't need paper anymore.
I wish that was true. The digital revolution may have affected some publishers but I'm receiving more paper than ever. It's as if paper is fighting back, saying "here - look at me!"
I think there is generally much more interest in information and control processes, which has a spinoff effect on the traditional media. And books, I believe, have never had it so good. Plus, more computers means more desktop printers.
The magazine biz and the web can work together very well for publishers. TV is what has hurt magazines, but now TV is in trouble with video on the web and magazines are looking to take over that niche. If you have millions of channels to watch, how are you going to decide? Done carefully, magazines can drive audience to video on the web. That's a tremendous ad base and, hopefully, some of the TV ad revenue will return to slick paper (and their video web sites).
Magazines and the new web are made for each other. But, these firms don't need the editorial staff they did in the past for print to make this happen.
Granted, not everyone sees this, but there are some that do.
Lately I've been getting many bargain magazine offers in the mail - as low as $10 a year for major magazines that used to cost $20, $30 or more a year. This seems especially true in the finance and general news sectors where there are many free articles available on the Internet.
A few months back I got an email from one of the U.S. major magazines asking about pricing to use the content for one of my sites. To me that's a danger sign because it means they are eventually going to become a competitor in that area.
