The argument against the magazine industry’s sustainability generally goes like this: People now want their information on-demand, in short quantities, and from hundreds rather than dozens of sources. But one very important factor contributing to the industry’s demise is not often recognized. Magazines – lumbering machines that move at a snails pace – are just not equipped to remain relevant in a world that moves at lightning pace.
NY Magazine’s fashion blog The Cut points to the example of Top Shop, which was supposed to open in NY mid-October. In September, the company announced a 6-month delay, setting the new date for sometime in March. Online media, including blogs, all reported on the news. But now, October issues of many major magazines – which closed their pages months ago – are reporting about this month’s (nonexistent) Top Shop debut.
Is there a new model of print magazine that could overcome these issues? Is it the model of JPEG, which takes its cues from internet contributors? Or perhaps the environment is bad for large corporate-owned magazines, but not so bad for smaller independent publications. In any case, if magazines continue to become more and more irrelevant in today’s world, the traditional model won’t be around much longer.

Facebook
Twitter
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon



I think this is an interesting perspective, however not one I completely agree with.
Magazines shouldn’t be trying to compete with blogs – they play different roles in peoples lives i.e. blogs don’t work when you want ‘me’ time (which is growing in scarcity, therefore increasingly important). Nor do they have the portability that the printed page has i.e. at the beach.
Likewise magazines in their current form shouldn’t be competing with the same stories as blogs, but investigating the reason why Top Shop’s delays occurred, the reaction and so on.
So while I agree that magazines replicating content on blogs is a slippery slope I do believe that there is a role that they can play in a complementary sense, rather than being competitive. competitive sense.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:35 pm