Posted by Rachel Landes
I love the Internet. You love the Internet. We all love the Internet.
But I also love magazines.
So why is it that so many critics today say I can’t have both?
The argument over whether or not the Internet is killing magazines can be likened to a soft-serve ice cream machine as far as I’m concerned.
Magazines, in this instance, are touted as perhaps vanilla—traditional, plain and boring (although I vehemently disagree). The Internet, or the chocolate, is multi-dimensional and a little more exotic.
What cynics have forgotten about, though, is the swirled cone. Twirled to perfection, the vanilla and chocolate are amicably situated side-by-side.
Thanks to magazine industry heavy hitters, a print campaign is now in place to cleverly dispel the rumors that their beloved industry is dying. And that swirled cones are definitely the way to go.
Entitled “Magazines: The Power of Print,” the effort is a series of ads that provide straightforward statements on the actual nature of the industry. Magazine titles are strategically used in place of plain text throughout the statements.
As a magazine student, I’m overjoyed to see the presidents and/or chairmen of Hearst Magazines, Meredith National Media, Time Inc., Condé Nast and Wenner Media pipe up. Maybe now mag students can take a break from answering the relentless question of why on earth we would be studying a dying trade. We’re studying it because it’s not dying. It’s evolving.
So the real question is: are you a vanilla, chocolate or swirl cone? What will it take for people to realize magazines are still extremely relevant? (You can start by directing them to this informative list of stats.)