Jump to content


This site uses cookies. By using this site, you agree to accept cookies, unless you've opted out. (US government web page with instructions to opt out: http://www.usa.gov/optout-instructions.shtml)

The new style of magazine


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 dirac

dirac

    Diamonds Circle

  • Board Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,474 posts

Posted 17 September 2002 - 10:23 AM

General media stuff. Do the hot new magazines actually qualify as magazines? Simon Dumenco comments on the apparent decline of traditional magazines, with, um, actual content:




http://foliomag.com/...zines/index.htm

#2 Calliope

Calliope

    Gold Circle

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 805 posts

Posted 17 September 2002 - 11:37 AM

There was an article in yesterday's (I think) NY Times on "Lucky" magazine and how it functions and looks like a catalog.
I still think the internet is replacing the magazine and the newspapers. Magazine content, sometimes by the time it hits newstands, is "old news", unless it's not regionally geared and even then it's sometimes "old"
There's far too many of them competing for consumer $

#3 dirac

dirac

    Diamonds Circle

  • Board Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,474 posts

Posted 17 September 2002 - 02:53 PM

Well, historically, magazines have always been "old news," the point to them being that you could get in-depth coverage of events and culture that you couldn't obtain from a daily. I'm not sure if the death knell is tolling just yet, but we are in a period of transition. Lucky is presented as a catalogue -- it doesn't pretend to be anything else, which is a form of honesty, I guess. Dumenco's point is that the successful young magazines are doing that without actually saying so. And when you look at recent events at New York magazine, the trend toward consumer-oriented coverage seems to be moving from InStyle to titles associated with actual content.


So far, there are things the Internet can't handle. The online magazine Slate, for example, tried in its early days to post lengthy critical and analytical articles of the kind you'd find in The New Republic and The New Yorker. They had to desist, because people going to Slate were looking for a quick fix, and articles like that are hard to read online; you have to print them out, and people don't have the patience.

#4 Calliope

Calliope

    Gold Circle

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 805 posts

Posted 17 September 2002 - 03:09 PM

Well, I think maybe not in format, but definitely content, the internet is far easier, though somewhat unreliable.
take this site for example, I read reviews here far in advance of any publication and b/c they are "voices" who's criticism I've grown to appreciate and trust, I'd pay for a site like this as opposed to say a printed publication.
(p.s. Alexandra, you don't have to take that literally :)


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Help support Ballet Alert! and Ballet Talk for Dancers year round by using this search box for your amazon.com purchases (adblockers may block display):