The April/May 2014 cover of Petersen's Hunting magazine is a big departure for the popular outdoor publication. It features a striking photograph by Lee Thomas Kjos that is a sleek, graphic image of a raw slab of game meat stuck with a hunting knife, held by a manly, blood-covered hand. There's so much testosterone on this cover that I can feel the hair growing on my chest (and other places). I love it! For added graphic effect the meat is dripping blood, and the hand is covered with hair from the kill. I have to admit upfront that I don't eat meat, so the cover holds no emotional or tasty appeal for me. But it certainly is one of the more memorable, provocative and ground-breaking outdoor magazine covers in recent memory.
The cover headline is "Join the Meat Eater Revolution," with a smart and effective underline that highlights a very interesting story about how foodies, chefs and TV food shows are expanding hunting to a new, younger audience. Like the story inside, the cover seems designed to expand Hunting's reach to a new group of readers. Traditional Hunting covers fall into three categories: 1. a portrait of a high-tech hunting rifle; 2. a photo of a wild animal, generally a buck, bear or wolf; 3. a rugged dude with a gun and dead game. In fact, as I looked back at past issues, I couldn't find another cover of Hunting that didn't feature a gun or an animal.
The April/May cover created by art director Tim Neher is very modern and artful, the kind of design and image one would expect to see on one of the "intellectual foodie" magazines that are mentioned in the cover story, or even someplace like New York magazine. The white background, the shiny, high-detail photograph, and the sophisticated typography all combine for an arresting cover that jumps off every platform. I do question to what extent the bulk of Hunting's readers will appreciate this very contemporary design. My own experience with enthusiast magazines is that their readers tend towards very traditional approaches to content and imagery. I assume that the guns and game style of previous Hunting magazines is popular with their readers, and I'll be very curious to hear the response to this cover.
I have a couple criticisms of the cover typography. First and foremost, Hunting has an unorthodox habit of using the cover image to obscure a good chunk of their cover headlines. They do it here, and have done it previously on the March 2014 "Predator Rifle" and September 2013 "Big Game Forecast" issues. Now, I'm all for pushing the envelope on covers, but I tend to want to see the headlines full and complete for the most effective reading. I also have some beef with one of the secondary headlines, "Grilling Skills That Will Kill in Camp." Generally I think it's never a good idea to reference cooked meat and dying in the same thought, but a bigger problem is that the story is actually a gear guide, with the much funnier and better headline inside "Grills Gone Wild." There may be a grilling tip or two, but to be accurate, as the editors say in the story's subhead, they "field-tested the hottest grills on the market."
More importantly, I think that the typography and design on the cover, separate from the brilliant image, is a little too delicate and under-baked. The light, thin type seems at odds with the overall message of the magazine. I'd prefer to see some bolder, huskier, aggressive typography to match the cover photograph. For that matter, I really miss the old Hunting logo, which was replaced by the current one several years ago. It was very distinctive, had a lot of character and it bounded off the cover. The new logo looks out of place and to my eye would fit better on one of those "intellectual foodie" magazines.
Interestingly, recent covers from competitors also feature close-up still life photographs. The April 2014 Field & Stream shows a huge fish head ("Catch Giant Fish" is the cover headline), and the May 2014 Outdoor Life features a large ax, accompanied by a headline that reads "Great Blade Skills." Both covers have a nice mix of headline styles, color and supporting graphics that are much more energetic and engaging that those on the Hunting cover.
All that said, I really like this cover a lot, and congratulate the editors and visual team for creating such a smart, remarkable departure from their previous work. Regardless of any flaws, this cover is imaginative and graphic, and shows a passion both for rugged magazine-making and the content inside.
Regular readers of Face Up know that I'm obsessed by old school magazine design. Any discussion of outdoors and hunting magazines would not be complete without a mention of the covers of Outdoor Life, Sports Afield, Field & Stream and others from the early days of the 1900s up to about 1960. During that time the covers of those magazines usually featured beautiful, elegant illustrations, done in a suitable-for-framing style. And then there were the men's adventure magazines, which featured heart-stopping images of real men battling nature. There are numerous websites out there now that display these vintage covers, and offer reproductions for sale. Two that I spend way too much time visiting are Magazine Art and Classic Outdoor Magazines.
Testing is not just a good idea, it is paramount to everything you do. Regardless of whether you are trying to build an audience, build circulation, change direction or change focus you need to test to make sure you head in the right direction. However, you need to make sure your test will give you meaningful results and there are some rules that should be followed.1) When testing, only test one element at a time. As soon as you put in another variable, the results of the test will no longer be valid. You will be tempted to test more than one element at a time, but if you do, whatever the results of the test are, you will not know which element triggered the result, so you will have learned nothing.2) To ensure the results are statistically valid, you need to test at least 5,000 names; anything less will not give you a response that you can accurately project. In this day and age of virtually instant response from email blasts there is a great temptation to test âa couple of hundred names to see what happens.â This is not going to work and any results you get, and follow, will lead you in a false direction. 3) If your test consists of 5,000 names, then a response in excess of 50 to 100 orders is what you really need to be able to draw conclusions from that test.4) When you conduct a test, you cannot assume the results of that test can be extrapolated across other platforms. For example, if you get a 10 percent response using one channel, you cannot assume a 10 percent response on another channel to the same market segment. The only real assumption you can make is that your promotion is worthy of a test across that platform as results suggest a positive outcome.We all like to think we know our customers, but in a world that is changing faster than ever before, the chances of messing up are greater than they have ever been. Far better to mess up and annoy 5,000 people on a test than send an offer to your whole file and have it blow up in your face.Many of us have met the editor who cannot understand why we need to send more than one renewal reminder. More and more magazines are now owned by companies that are not print-centric and the editors have been joined by other people of influence who also believe one renewal is enough. Are they right? Most of us know the answer to that one, but that is why we testâto prove or disprove ideas, both good and bad.
March 31 is opening day for Major League Baseball, so I thought it would be appropriate to review the cover of a baseball magazine. And there isn't a better publication to look at than Who's Who in Baseball. It's a thick, 360-page digest-sized annual. It describes itself as "a handy reference guide to batting & pitching stats," and the inside is packed with obsessive line-by-line and team-by-team listings of over 775 major league players.
I may be stretching the definition of a magazine cover this time around, since Who's Who in Baseball is really more of a bookazine, given that it's an annual publication sold at newsstands and bookstores. Like a mini-phonebook, it's printed on cheap newsprint, but the cover paper stock is slick, glossy and heavy. First appearing in 1912, and every year since 1916, this year it will celebrate its 99th anniversary.
Many years ago I worked at Harris Publications, the magazine factory that publishes Who's Who in Baseball. I was given free access to help myself to back issues, and delighted my baseball friends by giving them a series of presents of those very-collectible vintage copies. Ever since, I've been aware of the strong affinity baseball fans have for this little publication, and how it evokes both a passionate love for the game and the heart-tugs of nostalgia.
And nostalgia is the most important component of the Who's Who in Baseball cover design. The basic format of red cover background and black type has been used since the 1940s and the current logo is an iteration of one developed in the early 50s. The present cover design has been static for at least 20 years, save for a little tightening of the logo. In fact, the only basic difference between this year's cover and the 2013 edition are the pictures of the players. The format is so recognizable to readers that the editors feel comfortable covering up most of the word BASEBALL in the logo.
That said, this cover design is clean and well balanced, with a highly efficient organization of material, instantly identifiable photos, and a pop-off-the-newsstand graphic sensibility. There are a lot of lessons here for small (and not-so-small) publications that are looking to develop a consistent graphic brand on a limited budget. One could describe this cover as retro, or a more critical analysis might call it old fashioned. Still, I think it's brilliant and I never get tired of looking at it (they got my $9.95, I might add!).
Nevertheless, as much as we love a good retro cover design, this is a publication begging for a visual branding update. Perhaps Who's Who in Baseball could draw some inspiration from their extensive archives, which are a treasure trove of baseball graphic delights. A little more playfulness, a diversity of graphic elements and a small nod to the 21st Century might not be a bad thing for this cover.
And speaking of nostalgia, Tom Hoffarth at the Farther off the Wall blog smartly pointed out that the current Who's Who in Baseball cover mirrors another cover the publication did 50 years ago, in 1964. The 2014 cover features Los Angeles Dodgers pitching ace and Cy Young Award winner Clayton Kershaw, while the 1964 cover highlighted Hall of Famer Sandy Koufax, another Dodgers pitching star and Cy Young winner. Of course as a New York Yankees fan, I would have rather seen Derek Jeter and Tony Kubek on those covers!
Fans of classic baseball visuals will also enjoy these vintage covers of Baseball Digest, another obsessive sports publication that has been in existence since the 1940s. Actually, there might also be some inspiration there for the editors of Who's Who in Baseball as they gear up to design the cover for the 100th anniversary issue.
I love to celebrateâI am always looking for a good party, and I even moonlight as a caterer for fun. My love affair with the celebratory extends to publishing where I've been working to gear up for The Nationâs 150th anniversaryâthat's 150 years as a continuously published weekly. We've been around since the year that Abraham Lincoln was shot. Pretty wild.What is unique about the majority of publicationsâ anniversaries is that they celebrate a publication mostly rooted in printâmost places didn't have a major online presence until 10-15 years ago. Now that tech has grown so quickly in such a compressed time, it can be quite challenging to prove that old printed content can be still relevant in a digital environment. Successful anniversaries engage with their readers across multiple platforms, including social. They surface archival content with new commentary; they do not just regurgitate content. They remember why they were excited to launch the publication and that they've maintained that excitement through forty, 100, and yes, even 150 yearsâand they remind us. They create editorial products to appeal to all sorts of readers: from the hardcore fan to the occasional retweeter. But most importantly, they package their content in such a way that it deepens the engagement between people interacting with their brands across the board.After perusing a slew of anniversaries, I discovered some terrific and some terrible, even for brands I love. Here is my list of anniversary Doâs and Donâts:Do know your intentions. Are you using the anniversary as a relaunch of the brand? Are you reinforcing an older message? Are you trying to increase subscription sales? Boost overall revenue through events? Or merely paying tribute to a 100-year-old brand? Treat the anniversary like any business planâdo the research and let the objective inform the venture so you don't get stuck worrying about the allocation of resources and prioritization. You should know before you begin.Do know your audience. Are you targeting subscribers only, high-ticket donors, tradespeople, Internet browsers, industry insiders, Christian fundamentalists, Millennials, boozers, shakers, earthquakers? Know this before you start planning. The audience for different aspects of the anniversary may vary, and that's okay: as long as the cord tying the audiences together remains tight. In January, The Sun launched its 40th anniversary issue quietly and offered exactly what it knew would appeal to Sun readers: a free download of the first issue, printed by Sy Safransky in the '70s.Don't assume that subscribers are the end-all, be-all. They're awesome, but they won't be around forever. Consider using your anniversary as a way to entice new readers. Even if they don't subscribe, you're engaging them with your content and cultivating a seedbed of future ambassadors of your brand.Do surface archived content in a meaningful way. Your readers don't want to slog through lists; they expect you to do the heavy lifting for them, and you should want to do this because it allows you to control your message. Curate content, and make it relevant. Use images. Well-chosen photo galleries, especially in a Tumblr-like environment, are shareable magic. Vanity Fair and W both did this exceptionally well. Offer easy share links, and incentivize sharing. Anchor content to a current event or touchstone, and you'll be surprised at how meaningful that is for people, particularly young people on Facebook and Twitter. They won't retweet a story about reconstruction in the South, but connect it to Yeezus, and you get more traction (plus a culturally relevant refresh, which you can repackage in any number of ways).Don't overcrowd your anniversary with junk. Just because it exists, doesn't mean it needs to be highlighted. This is the perfect time to let your editors do what they do best: edit. Do produce an anniversary issue, but don't make it boring. Make it available across multiple platforms, punctuated with images and videos. Sell it at a premium, and continue to offer it as a back issue. Vanity Fair put Kate Upton on its 100th anniversary cover with accompanying behind-the-scenes video footage. And another Upton-friendly pub, Sports Illustrated, celebrated its 50th anniversary of the swimsuit edition with a covers gallery and interviews with former cover models. And use the content to move throughout the digital space, donât keep it insular. The Atlantic had great content for its 150th but I couldnât find anything beyond the issue. Blow it out! Do as much as possible without losing focus of audience and objective.Do create products to sell. Some brands are better suited for this than others, but be creative! For its 125th anniversary, National Geographic sold everything from premium archive access to collectors' editions to maps to week-long excursions.Do leverage partnerships. These could be writers, experts, celebrities, schools, or other likeminded organizations. Nat Geo, a powerhouse of photography, leveraged its relationship with the Annenberg Center for nearly 6 months. List the people who you think or know would be interested in working with you, and use the list. A lot of people will get on board with a brand ONLY during an anniversary or celebration, so know exactly what it is you are asking of them. Ask people to do specific tasksâif you want John Stamos to tweet for you, write the tweets.Do keep it fresh. Do use timelines, but consider different âways inâ to the content. Nat Geo went with famous firsts, but WWD cataloged âmomentsâ to celebrate its 100th. The Advocate enmeshed its own history with that of the greater LGBT community, in many ways because the two went hand-in-hand. New York went with important events. I'd say the best timeline belonged to Wired, which alphabetically cataloged technological and cultural 'hits' of the past two decades (ie: Reddit, Sheryl Sandberg, Science).Do encourage reader participation. In the age of selfies and overshares, people want ways to self-promoteâgive them the platform, even if itâs silly or quick. Esquire is always on the cutting-edge of reader interaction, but it hit the nail on the head with its 80th âLife of Manâ anniversary issue. Not only did it issue its trademark âtrailerâ for the issue, but it gave readers an easy way to become a part of the âLife of Manâ history by uploading a photo and bio to its digital collageâand it donated $1 for every photo uploaded to the United Way.Do make it last beyond the anniversary year. Think about how the content is attracting new people and what you want to say to those people. Are you asking them for money? To become an advocate for your organization? Maintain the anniversary content on the site so that it is searchable. Keep a clear head about future tie-ins. You can celebrate as many anniversaries as desired, but only if you keep it fresh. Don't dilute the message.
As we find ways to get our digital editions opened by our audience on any platform, we also need to understand the level of engagement we have within the digital editions. Below Iâll discuss the various levels of data that youâll need to compile into one report to understand your digital readers and to help your publisher sell the digital edition banners and different ad spots more effectively.What Data Should You Compile?Our digital edition reporting is done via Comscore. Itâs not very user friendly, but with some basic training and patience you should be able to get all the information you need to compile this report. First, start by collecting the number of emails that are deployed with the digital edition link to your subscribers. This includes sents, opens, and click-throughs. Then, download your issue data from Comscore (or whichever reporting system that is linked to your editions). This will include traffic report, platform report, clicks on links by page, page view summary, editorial page report, sponsor banner ad report, plus other data depending whether you have videos or other rich media in the digital edition.âšâšHere are some examples:Email Deployment Stats
This is the report from your email deployment system. Traffic Report: ComscoreThis report comes from the Comscore reporting system. It provides information that is similar to what we are used to seeing from Google Analytics for our Web pages, but for our digital editions. This is one of the most important reports because it gives you an overall picture of how many unique readers are interacting with the digital edition by issue, as well as page views and average time spent per open.Platform Report: ComscoreThe platform report provides data the traffic report has, but it separates the audience by the platform that they used to access the digital editions. This report will tell you the level of interactions you have on different smart devices versus those accessing the issues via desktop browsers.These are just a few of the reports or engagement information that you can compile for your digital editions. The most important thing to keep in mind is that you need to compile what you need to make smarter/better branding or promotional decisions as well as what your publisher needs. It takes a lot of time and effort to keep these reports up-to-date on a monthly basis, especially if you handle multiple brands. At New Bay, we have been able to help our publishers gain more information about our digital audience engagement with these reports which they in turn can use to sell ads. (Many brands have been able to successfully sell digital ads due to this data). On the audience development side, we're able to understand what impacts our increase in unique readers and we're working hard to increase our engagement with every issue.
For those who are wondering, Time Warner Retail did not just lay off its field force. At least, not all of it.With rumors flying, I called a high-ranking executive still with the company. He didnât want to go on record, but he did answer my questions. I had gotten a lot of snippets from a lot of people. People working in agencies who said it looked as if the Regional Managers had lost their jobs; other people in the industry who said the Order Regulation was being outsourced to India.Thereâs a kernel of truth in many of the rumors, but, my source explained, the truth is very simple. The industry is changing, and Time Warner Retail is changing with it.While itâs never easy to lose people, the changes, he explained, were inevitable.âWe followed the trail of business,â he said. With the continued consolidation of the magazine distribution channelâover the past few months wholesalers in Canada, Minnesota, Texas and elsewhere have gone out of businessâa consolidation of field personnel became inevitable. As agencies closed, people at the agency level lost their jobs. Much of the business moved to agencies where Time Warner Retail already had people, who were able to accommodate the shift in retail coverage.While it has reduced its distribution team, my source continued, Time Warner Retail has expanded its marketing team. âTime Warner Retail is more retailer-centric than any distributor," he said. "We put more focus into calling on retailers than any other part of the distribution channel. That is the portion of our business we are building.âÂ Time Warner Retail is also, he said, using technology to manage its business to a degree no one else in the industry is doing. Its MagNet-driven AIMS process enables the company to manage distribution electronically from a centralized location to the wholesaler place of business. Centralized in India?, I asked.Â Time Warner has some employees in India, but the order regulation is not outsourced, was the reply. Some backroom operations might be outsourced, but the order regulation, regardless of where on the planet it is done, is done by Time Warner employees, using MagNet data, making changes in the wholesaler system from their remote location.Â The source did not provide any details on the number of employees let go. âI wonât give you a number,â he said, âbut I will say that we still have by far the largest representation of all the companies in the business. I could probably combine the other three and we'd still have more.Â âAnd any time any business goes through a re-organization, rumors fly.Â Time Warner Retail lost a few long-timers, and that was tough. But weâre in a tough industry. We have to adjust for the changes in the field. But overall, there have been more positive twists than negative.â
The cover of the relaunched Newsweek is one of the best debuts in recent memory (to the extent that a cover for a magazine founded in 1933 can be called a "debut"), with a stunning illustration, bold, simple design, and an elegant printed format that creates a distinctive, memorable look. There has been much hype about Newsweek's return to print, and a good deal of controversy about the Bitcoin cover story, but from both a creative and a brand perspective this cover stands as a highly-successful work, one that hopefully lays the groundwork for continued success for the publication.
This Newsweek cover is built on tradition. The logo is basically a mix of the late 1980s version drawn by Jim Parkinson (which was part of a redesign by Roger Black), and the iteration used on the magazine's last redesign in 2009, before it was sold to IAC. But the type has been tweaked (and improved), and the red background panel made more graphic and modern. The striking illustration by Ben Wiseman is cool and contemporary, but the understated simplicity of the cover headline is reminiscent of the covers of Newsweek (and Time) from the 1960s and early 70s.
The cover design is by the team of Priest + Grace, who are the creative force behind the exciting new Eight By Eight soccer (or football if you live outside the U.S.) magazine, and have previously given creative direction to O, the Oprah Magazine and numerous other publications. For Face Up we usually base our reviews on digital copies of the cover, but for this issue I actually went out and bought a copy. I will say that I searched literally dozens of magazine stands and stores (there still are a couple) in Manhattan before finally finding a big stash at Grand Central Terminal in a beautiful display. I'm glad I got a printed copy, because it comes on an elegant, thick matte cover stock with beautiful, crisp printing that is so rich it almost looks silkscreened.
This is a strong, smart look with lots of character that definitely sets the magazine apart from other weeklies (apparently they're identifying The Economist as their "role model" and chief competitor). Newsweek has been doing a series of weekly covers for their online edition that were very traditional and undistinguished. This is a sharp break from that. Over the years Newsweek tried to differentiate itself from Time by running more photos and less illustration on their covers. Let's hope that this debut illustration is the beginning of a new direction for the magazine's cover look, because it helps gives shape to a very forward-looking design aesthetic.
If there's any hesitation in giving total love to this cover, it's because I wish they had broken more from the traditional Newsweek name and logo and gone for something completely new and different (there was a period in the Jon Meacham-edited era when there was actually a prototype developed with a new format and a name along the lines of NW). It also might have been nice if there was some nod on the cover to the "return of print." Newsweek ended their print edition with the #LASTPRINTISSUE hashtag on the cover, and it would have been fun to see them play with the flip of that somewhere on this one. That seems like a missed opportunity.
I asked Arthur Hochstein, the former Time art director (he created close to 1000 covers for the magazine) what he thought about this Newsweek relaunch. Arthur has also done covers for Businessweek and even did a short stint with Newsweek a few years ago.
Hochstein says, "It's an auspicious debut: the flat, vector-graphic style evokes the posters and graphics of Mad Men. The effect is well done. It cleverly uses the Bitcoin symbol to make a mask; the darker black of the shadow against the slightly-lighter black of the background enhances the effect of the mask being pulled back, to reveal the âmystery man.'"
Newsweek's past covers are woefully hard to find online. When it was owned by the IAC they started a Newsweek Archivist Tumblr page that briefly collected a good series of covers dating back to the 1930s. The page isn't active, but it's still available for viewing online, and contains many choice cover treats.
If some of the recent cover wraps and tip-ons Iâve received are anything to go by, just because something looks good in a PDF format does not mean it will look good when printed on paper. Here are a few tips to make sure your printed matter stands a chance of working.First, consider the type of paper you are printing on because the same design is going to look different depending on your stock. Coated stock usually handles reverse type well, but stock used for tips and cover wraps tends to be cheaper and soak up more ink. Reversing type really means being be able to see the color of the paper stock you are using, but now it means any color out of a dark backgroundâso black and white, black and yellow or black and a light cyan all work well. Using a dark color for the type is dangerous. A tip-on I recently received was totally unreadable because the purple had bled into the black. Remember, using a large reversed area will use more ink and will cost more. If you are going to reverse out smaller type, donât use a serif font unless you are printing on really good stock, the effect will be lost on cheaper stock. And reversing out really small typeâ6 pt or smallerâmakes reading the copy nearly impossible.Speaking of fonts, just because you have over 1,500 of them does not mean you have to use them all at once. Promotions printed on paper are trimmed to size after printing, so getting too close to the edge of the paper can result in some of your copy being trimmed off. Designing work that can be used across several platforms such as websites, email and print is not difficult and is made considerably easier if you give some thought to the final output. You may have to adjust some colors, perhaps some fonts and perhaps some final positions, but this is something designers have been doing for many yearsâthe more things change; the more they stay the same.
Mad magazine's April 2014 cover parody of The Lego Movie is bright, fun, engaging, and perfectly executed, with a smart illustration. This cover not only fits right in with Mad's snarky, wacko cover legacy, but would also feel at home on the front of Entertainment Weekly or Time (without the Alfred E. Neuman character, of course!). It's a grown-up cover on a young person's magazine.
Like many folks my age, I grew up reading Mad, and of course my parents thought it was a corrupting influence and threw out as many copies as they could find. Somehow I kept buying issues and sneaking them into the house, hiding them under my bed. When I look at those issues from the 60s now, they seem very tame compared to the current edition, which is much more risquĂ© in terms of sex and general raunchiness. That level of provocative offensiveness is exactly what appeals to a younger audience!
The basic Mad cover hasn't changed much since the late 60s. They still heavily rely on parodies of popular TV shows and movies combined with the antics of Alfred E. Neuman. The April issue, illustrated by Mark Frederickson and art direction by Sam Viviano, is something of a departure. Recent covers have been rawer, somewhat gross and more juvenile. Mad's February 2014 cover, also illustrated by Frederickson, featured a nasty image of Miley Cyrus and her now infamous twerk. Another cover from last year depicted, in a very rough, cartoony style,Â Alfred E. Neuman peeing on an amusement park water slide (this is Mad, after all). Frederickson is a frequent cover illustrator for Mad, essentially taking the place occupied by Norman Mingo on the classic covers of the 1960s and 70s. He's a highly skilled artist who works in multiple styles and who has a great sense of humor.
I love the artwork on this cover, and I love the way it works as a stylistic whole, parodying both The Lego Movie poster and Lego packaging in general. Rather than just being a funny illustration slapped on to a Mad cover, this is a brilliant, holistically-designed package, complete with Lego logo and integrated typography. It's highly-sophisticated conceptual work. I wish more magazines took this kind of overall care, both with imagery and design.
But wait a minute! Is that a good thing for a magazine like Mad? I called on my resident expert, my daughter Lillian, to get her opinion. Lillian is 13 and a regular Mad reader (I confess to throwing out more than a couple of her copies when I thought they were inappropriate). She's also the daughter of two art directors (her mother, Chris Curry, is the illustration editor at The New Yorker), so she has a good graphic sensibility.
I showed Lillian the Mad cover and her first response was "It's so cute! It looks like the instruction booklet for the Lego sets." However, she then said that she liked last issue's Miley Cyrus cover, because "It's funnier and I get it right away."
If a parent likes a Mad cover, does that make it uncool? I'm curious to see how Mad's audience responds to this gentler, more parent-friendly approach, or whether they prefer the cruder (and admittedly funnier) covers.
If this critique has got you thinking about past covers, be sure to visit Doug Gilford's Mad Cover, which is the essential destination for fans of all ages. Gilford has an archive of every Mad cover from 1952, including illustrator credits and in some cases, back cover artwork (the archival covers included in this story are via Gilford's site). And you can see more of Mark Frederickson's illustration work, including a good number of Mad images.
I don't have a complete new post today, just an updateâbut it's an important one.My last post reported that PMG, distributor to the U.S. military and other locations overseas, had closed its doors for its military, South American, and Hawaii business. The important U.S. military portion of the business was said to be taken over by TNG (formerly The News Group).Today we hear that the agreement with TNG has not, in fact, materialized. As of this morning it appears that there is no finalized agreement to ship magazines to the U.S. military overseas, not with TNG, not with anyone.Publishers are instructed to hold all product directed to U.S. military and to await further developments.
A group of mobile tech companies participating in something called the Mobile Deeplinking Project made an announcement yesterday that you might have passed over. Have you ever opened a LinkedIn Groups update email on your phone and wondered (for the 500th time) why it couldn't just launch the app? Instead it drops you at the login screen in your browser, helpfully suggesting you download LinkedIn's fabulous app. That is the very definition of throwing away vast, profitable amounts of user engagement. How many people are really going to tap-tap-tap their credentials into the teeny browser (again) or manually launch the app and try in vain to find that discussion that first caught their eye? Nearly nobody, that's who.With mobile deep linking, tapping on that interesting discussion thread in your email would launch the LinkedIn app and deliver the exact page you were expecting, i.e. 'deep linking' you to the otherwise impossible to find page inside LinkedIn.So what does that mean for publishers who now see a path to making their apps a viable place to sell ads? If your 'app' is a simple digital replica of your print product, none of this will matter. If you have a useful app that extends your brand, then read on.Let's say you are like CNET and have well-regarded product reviews that millions rely on to make good decisions when purchasing electronics. If you put all those reviews into a well-designed app and promoted it well, you could get lots of people to download it. Then the app will most likely never get opened again, lost among dozens of other unused apps on millions of phone screens.However, if CNET sent out a weekly newsletter that leveraged deep linking, suddenly their app starts getting used, perhaps promoted to users' home screens and regularly updated. Otherwise, all that effort to develop the app will continue to show a crappy ROI.Â It is this new set of standards and best practices that has the potential to put the native app versus mobile web debate to rest. Now apps can be just another, slicker part of the web instead of these islands of awesomeness that are forgotten because they're too much trouble to get to. Publishers will be able to point to engagement data instead of downloads when pitching to advertisers.These standards are open source and therefore a moving target, so there will be some hiccups. But it's all laid out pretty well, complete with code libraries for your developers to leverage. If you have a great idea for an app that you've never built because you couldn't see how to get enough users to matter, this may be the time to revisit that decision.
Now is the time to plan your spring direct mail campaign. And just because you do not currently do one, does not mean you should not be thinking about it.Direct mail is still the only source of new orders that can be projected with any degree of accuracy and until digital marketers get excited at net orders rather than open rates, that always will be the case. The question is: Apart from the usual marketing tools available to help increase response, what else can be done? Direct mail can be expensive, but there are things you can test that might help increase orders and offset some of the cost. If your magazine is on the newsstand, consider increasing the draw in key markets for a couple of issues to coincide with your direct mail campaign. Newsstand sales often increase because people see your magazine on the shelf and decide to give it a try. Do not go crazy here because this will add cost to your bottom line, but sometimes a little bit can get you an awful lot.Also consider giving people access to a digital version of the magazine to check out how great it is. This could simply be your current digital edition or the current digital edition with interactive components relating to the mailingâincluding several different ways people can pay online.Making direct mail profitable is what it is all about, but unless your family name is Midas and you have âthe touch,â chances are you are going to lose money on new business direct mail campaigns. However, the objective should be to lose as little as possible. So, consider testing the automatic renewal option for direct mail orders in your mailing. I am big not a fan of this technique, but more and more I see publishers using an automatic renewal option in their new subscription promotion so it is certainly worthy of a test. But, test this carefully.The more you can do to increase exposure of your magazine the better off you are going to be. As that wise old sage of publishing once said âThe Economist is its own best ambassador, so it is sensible to offer sampling.â Now of course we can sample online which makes sampling even more cost effective, but proves yet again The Economist almost always makes the right decisions.Next time we will look at specific ideas and techniques you can test in your direct mail package to help increase response and will not break the bank.