A Time You May No Longer Embrace: Magazines are for The Byrds
One of the side effects of having been a teenager in the ‘80s is that I now often associate classic songs with old commercials that either featured them or else completely rewrote their lyrics in order to suit the ad (e.g. “Sittin’ on the dock of a bay drinking Hires”). Because of this, the first time I heard the song “Turn, Turn, Turn” by The Byrds it wasn’t on the radio or a stereo, but instead it was on TV in a commercial for Time Magazine. (If I’d had hippie parents, this of course would not have been the case.) Anyway, as the lyrics to that song state (that is, as Pete Seeger adapted some words from the Book of Ecclesiastes):
To everything - turn, turn, turn
There is a season - turn, turn, turn
I thought of this yesterday as I read an article on the Folio website about comments made by Time Magazine’s managing editor, Richard Stengel, that he delivered earlier in the week at the Direct Marketing Association’s 22nd annual Circulation Day event. Stengel, in addition to talking about how Time needs to remain a vital brand, acknowledged the challenges and opportunities that a digital world presents. In fact, he went so far as to admit that, if print’s not dead right now, it will be one day, saying “Someday there will be people who don’t know there’s a print product.” Of course, for all of the readers that the Web has siphoned away from Time Magazine, whether it’s because of RSS readers that collect headlines from various sources, or else online-only outlets like Salon and Slate, this fate — for many publications — has already arrived. Or rather, people know that there’s physical product but they eschew the printed item for its online equivalent. And as this happens, like in that song by The Byrds, yet another thing turns, changes, and ends.
Illustration: Joseph Cornell, Untitled (Bird Box)
6 Comments so far
Leave a reply
That is a good observation. However, after spending some time on e-books found on Project Gutenberg and other free sites, I find printed books more gentle to the eyes than their online counterpart. That is, I can spend longer hours reading through the pages of a book than reading through a computer screen without straining my optic nerves.
Or, I should just listen to the free audio books instead.
It’s printed NEWS that is declining NOT print. Usually your examples and indicators about the end of print are news related. Duh, current events are better served instantaneously online.
And speaking of news: Newsreels ended at the movies when TV came along, but people still went to the movies. People still went to the movies when VHS came along, and EVEN when DVD came along. Why? People enjoy the experience of the theater. They don’t need to get the news at the theater, it’s not practical or necessary. Current events don’t need to be printed either, however this doesn’t mean people don’t want print anymore.
You seem to be unaware of the IMMENSITY of personal publishing, non-corporate international magazines and the cheapness of high quality printing. This area of print is BIGGER than ever before in HISTORY.
I see that you like CAPITAL letters. I think that’s GOOD. It makes me really understand your POINT. Seriously, though, the Internet is indeed killing Time Magazine. You think this guy would have said what he did if the Web wasn’t breathing down his neck? And people DON’T like going to the movies, which is why DVDs are so popular. The thing saving Hollywood right now is precisely the sales of DVDs; it’s not the box office. And, as the editor of Time was saying, one day the website will be where they make their money, not on the printed magazine. And I think that’s INTERESTING.
I think you need to read more magazines on the movie business, ‘cuz I’m not sure where you’re getting your data. DVD’s are doing more for saving small independent movies, but people are still paying to see Hollywood spectacles on the big screen. And downloading is causing more of a dent in DVD sales than movie ticket sales for precisely that reason.
See, we just have a whole different way of looking at things. Time should be killed. But what I was saying is I agree with you as relates to news and current events. But magazines and publishing will continue to flourish, and the good thing is, independent publishing is what will succeed the most in the future.
You seem to think old people, and people afraid of change like printed matter. I myself am totally immersed in the internet and new media, but still love books, magazines and comics. You don’t take into account that people like the experience and editorial art of bound paper. That is not going to end anytime soon.
It’s not an either or situation. What is happening is more about symbiosis between print and publishing. Thats what I find INTERESTING.
The internet is not killing Time Magazine, the need and ability to adapt to changing method of exchange is. When the media no longer needs a middle man for distribution and sales, the name becomes a brand, which is little more than a filter telling the reader what they are looking for. Time Magazine’s asset, then, will be the filter of credibility. If they are to evolve, essentially, into a reliable e-zone format, their accrued reputation for credibility is what will carry them, not how many pages are printed.
As there are no constants in expression in media or language, one cannot expect any serial publication, fictional or factual, to last in a specific format eternally. Time Magazine’s medium may be dying, but the concept behind Time Magazine could simply evolve into something better for the planet, for its readers, and for the changing global culture that is developing out of the electronic content. Allt hey have to do is successful market on the credibility of their brand.
As for eye strain in the new media, i.e., the computer screen. I am typing this on my laptop using enhanced magnification, which can be done on most Macbooks by holding the -ctrl- key and scrolling up against the track board with two fingers. It only takes a little more effort in PC operating systems. I love to read works from Project Gutenberg this way when doing research online, but for a few seconds extra work, one could just as easily grab most text, drop in in a text editor, and then boost the font there.
Bookjive says “I find printed books more gentle to the eyes than their online counterpart. That is, I can spend longer hours reading through the pages of a book than reading through a computer screen without straining my optic nerves.”
I strongly recommend getting trying out an e-ink device like the sony reader or amazon kindle. The experience of reading a book on those devices is no different from that on printed books. There is no eye-strain since the screen is not back-lit.
While the web is changing the way we do a lot of things, it’s getting a lot of help from other contemporary technologies. In the case of e-books, it’s the electronic ink.