Comments on: The Death of Vibe And The Future Of Magazines :: A Roundtable with Alan Light and Raymond Roker

By: Chris Force

Chris Force — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 00:29:09 +0000

@Raymond, Yes, ALARM has purposely cut corporate advertising. That’s not to say we will continue to refuse it (there is one corporate ad in our next issue), or that I feel it is detrimental. Like Andy said, no model fits every situation.

For us, the staff and expense it takes to manage corporate advertisers / agencies just isn’t worth it to a mag with a page rate / circ like ours.

Putting that energy into building paid readership with a few very focused events is a better fit for us.

Also, importantly, I make magazines because I love doing it. I love working with the labels and partners that really “get” what we do.

One of the few aspects of my career that feels like a “job” is dealing with corporate advertisers/agencies. Not dealing with them this year has been extremely liberating.

By: social-creature » Music Musings

social-creature » Music Musings — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:23:05 +0000

[...] Won’t Stop: A History of the Hip-Hop Generation spurred a discussion on Twitter (which he re-posted on his blog) musing on the future of magazines, especially those focusing on urban culture. Chang [...]

By: andy cohn

andy cohn — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:48:31 +0000

jeff c., i think we are keeping with the spirit of the name of your site’s namesake!!!!

By: raymond roker

raymond roker — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:40:36 +0000

Damn you, Andy, cutting to the quick. Again.

Thank god for one size not fitting all.

By: andy cohn

andy cohn — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:36:44 +0000

this is all a great and very healthy (and pertinent) discussion, but to me, the bottom line is that there is NO one-size-fits-all methodology or business model here. look at each of the properties covered in this piece and subsequent comment string, and you’ll see a different model in every case. Some are working, some may not be, some are viable long-term models, some may be quick shorter-term fixes… again, my take is that it’s all about the ownership structure, and the coinciding expectations and plans for the business (i.e. stay private and keep/nurture/grow (fader, xlr8r, urb), seek outside investment to expand (vice), sell to larger media company(wired) sell to private equity (vibe, blender) etc…

By: raymond roker

raymond roker — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:53:09 +0000

CORRECTION: But I challenge anybody to say we HAVE NOT pushed the conversation—across race, culture, politics or music—forward

By: raymond roker

raymond roker — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:51:03 +0000

@Chris, I love your model–truly. So, you purposely cut corporate advertising? Was that due to some forces at play that you felt were corrupting? The Mad magazine and Adbusters model can indeed work. I never sought it, personally.

I’m more of a pragmatist than an idealist. URB had corporate advertising back in 1990 (music labels, retailers) and we have it today. But I challenge anybody to say we haven’t not pushed the conversation—across race, culture, politics or music—forward. Or to say that we’ve been a PR vehicle for corporate whims.

So, without being overly defensive, I’d say that you can have cake and eat a little too. But ultimately, your readers will judge you. They can seek out other sources of information to balance your perspective. Media outlets have a responsibility to their customers on both sides of the aisle–readers and clients. If a brand crosses over too far either way, they’ll likely lose.

By: Chris Force

Chris Force — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 01:28:14 +0000

@Raymond Roker, re: Church/State, the division may be old & gone, but that doesn’t make it right. Don’t readers deserve more than to hope for balls?

At ALARM we’ve turned to our readers for support, cutting out almost all corporate advertising, scaling back on newsstand, working more direct pre-qual distro, and raising our cover price by over 40%.

While we’ve lost some circ numbers, our sell-through and new subs have actually increased.

This isn’t the solution for everyone, but for a small outlet with Midwest rents & salaries, so far it has been the right choice.

By: raymond roker

raymond roker — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 20:55:34 +0000

@Grant, as a quick reply re: church and state, I’d say that’s a fading concern. It’s part of the old media reality and boundaries. Most magazines launched in the past decade or so could care less about church and state. And as magazines competed more for survival and attracting ads, it got even messier. Add to that a competitor who sheds most of that church/state responsibility (the Interweb), and you can see how much it all matters now.

Most mags have run edit to secure ads or at least shut a client up. Anyone who denies this is lying or hiding behind nuanced excuses. Sorry. But it’s degrees and, above all, what is the appearance to readers.

We live in a time where no media source represents a hegemonic status. So people can easily go around media sources they deem not credible. So buyer beware. And hope that the outlet you follow has enough balls and honor to put their editorial mission first (or as often as possible).

By: raymond roker

raymond roker — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 20:41:14 +0000

For the record, as a business model, Vice/Virtue/VBS (as John Lee first pointed out above) is an extremely effective enterprise. There are myriad reasons why this has worked for them: from the smarts and gravitas of the owners; to them being the right aesthetic at the right time (ask Dov Charney); to pushing what they believe in, no matter what. Really can’t argue with their approach or success.

I’d say the Fader + Cornerstone are close to this success as well. have no idea on either company’s numbers or margins, but in terms of PR, market strength, etc, they both seem to win solidly.

I’d say that most indie mags, at least in the foreseeable future, will be one of the following models:

1) super lean and streamlined virtual and flat organization with tiny overhead and a very niche product that is distributed primarily outside of large scale channels (newsstands, supermarkets, etc)

2) larger media (15/20+ ppl) and marketing enterprise with multiple clients and offerings

3) some hybrid/smaller version of the two above