Politics, media pranks, songs, jokes, and NYC revelry. I'm at [my full name no dots or dashes] at gmail.
I love you guys but this is so wrong-headed. Print has a business model; online still doesn’t, unless it’s a shoestring editorial operation. Radar and Portfolio could never have supported the type of content they published based solely on what they’d make from digital CPMs (ad rates). Why those two went under is an interesting discussion (failure of the editor to realize he also had to play publisher in the first case, and business-optimize his product; a poor choice of editor in the second) but while print is obviously challenged right now, it can still support a cost structure for things ranging from investigative journalism to high-end fashion photography that is totally out of reach for any online enterprise. And there is still demand: people don’t want to read anything long on the Internet, and photography doesn’t offer the same payoff on the screen as on the page. The Internet is for: immediacy, reference, and social interaction, but it cannot duplicate the user experience print provides.
“I would never get my company involved in a print product. That is just a very expensive way of soothing your own ego and feeling important. I can’t see any value in that.”—Rachelle Hruska, In Media’s Hometown: Two Paths and Two Moods. (via soupsoup)That’s a very smart observation from Rachelle - this makes me think of Radar and Portfolio, two magazines that might have had a shot if they’d cut out print when things got dicey and just focused on their terrific websites. Guest of a Guest is obviously optimized for the web, but a few years ago, can’t you can just see someone else wanting to importantly launch a glossy print version with pretty pictures and high-end ads? Understanding where your money is best spent is a mark of a good businesswoman (or man). Unfortunately, there have not been enough of those around over the past few years.
