Lacey’s Mag Blog

Just another WordPress.com weblog

Why the Book will Never, Ever Die (well, not until the hologram pop-up kindle)

Posted by spacebar127 on March 23, 2009

The Kindle is quickly becoming a popular technology not only with books (Amazon now offers many books in electronic Kindle formats), but also with magazines. Some of the magazines already available on Kindle include The New York Times, Time, Reader’s Digest, and Forbes. But will this electronic imitation of a physical object ever really catch on? More importantly, could it eventually replace books and magazines as we know them?

As far as I’m concerned, the physical form of a book or magazine is irreplaceable. The Kindle can mimic a book’s shape and even its readability through electronic paper display, but it can’t come close to the real thing. Though Kindles may be convenient in some circumstances (they’re light and transportable, can hold a lot of material that would normally be heavy or bulky, and could reduce the carbon footprint of the publishing industry), they also have their disadvantages.

For example, a book never runs out of batteries when you’re at the best part. If you drop a book in the bathtub it’ll puff up and look ridiculous, but it won’t cost $359 to replace. You can put books on your shelves to make yourself look worldly and well-read, but even though a Kindle can hold hundreds of books but it would look lame and lonely on a shelf. Books and magazines can be admired for their covers and design features, but Kindles always look pretty much the same and aren’t great for image-heavy materials.

This Kindle is probably about to be destroyed by a coffee spill.

This Kindle is probably about to be destroyed by a coffee spill.

Could improvements to Kindles in the coming years overcome these problems? Will illegal downloading of books become a bigger problem if Kindle technology catches on? Are books and magazines in danger of ever ceasing to physically exist, or could Kindles and real life books and magazines become complementary to one another?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Canadian Magazine Funding

Posted by spacebar127 on March 17, 2009

The Canadian Periodical Fund (CPF) allots $72 million in annual funding to print magazines. However, magazines with annual circulations below 5,000 may not qualify for this funding under the new CPF. The Department of Canadian Heritage says this is because an evaluation of the Publications Assistance Program (PAP) noted that the hefty administrative cost of managing funding for small periodicals is ultimately not cost-effective. Furthermore, funding caps of $1.5 million will be applied to larger, top-end magazines under new CPF guidelines.

masthead

The result of these funding changes is that groups of small magazine staff are growing concerned and disgruntled. If the CPF cannot be convinced to lower the circulation cut-off line, then the consequences could be devastating for small Canadian magazines. Small magazines are crucial for disseminating cultural material to Canadians, and with the introduction of these CPF constrictions many such publications will suffer and even fold completely.

Are these changes fair, or is the funding environment for Canadian magazines skewed towards large-scale publications? Will the choices of the CPF eventually lead small magazines to fade out of existence, or will they persevere? Can a magazine be successful with only an online presence (ie. Masthead) or is a print element also necessary?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Magazine Circulation Going Downhill

Posted by spacebar127 on March 7, 2009

This article discusses overall declines in magazine circulation from 2007 to 2008; however, the cause of this phenomenon is not outlined, nor is it even mentioned. The article is simply a declaration of bad news, with statistical information from ABC to back it up.

These declining numbers mean that Canadian consumer magazines sales are suffering. The article does point out that although circulation losses are the norm, some magazines are still able to boast positive numbers – particularly Hello! Canada and More, whose circulation stats have risen substantially. Unfortunately, overall numbers mean the consumer magazine industry faces distressing declines in audience interest and willingness to spend money, issues which will need to be further explored if these magazines are to survive in the coming years.

Perhaps audiences are losing interest in the current nature of consumer magazines, and these telltale ABC numbers may necessitate some changes to the industry as a whole. Do branding and marketing efforts need to be enhanced, or could interactive and consumer-driven online efforts be the force that will save Canadian magazines? What factors are causing these declines, and how can magazines respond and improve their circulation numbers?

Watch this video to learn more about integrating magazines and the internet, and how this integration can help increase interest, branding, and circulation:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

In the Doghouse: Breed Discrimination

Posted by spacebar127 on February 23, 2009

When a Labrador Retriever named Charlie bit my 7-year-old brother’s face, my family and I learned that the organizations responsible for dealing with aggressive animals are flawed. The dog had already been reported once for biting another child, yet even after our repeated complaints to Animal Control and the Bylaw Office he still runs loose. This experience led us to wonder: what if Charlie been a Pit Bull or a Boxer? If that had been the case, he likely would have been put down regardless of his history or motivation. The reasons for this breed discrimination are plentiful, but may be unfounded.

My brother's post-Charlie face. Surgery was later required to remove scar tissue.

My brother's post-Charlie face. Surgery was later required to remove scar tissue.

Breed Stereotypes 
Often, dog breeds that are regarded as inherently aggressive can be sweet and gentle, while those seen as cute and harmless may very well have vicious streaks. How a dog is raised plays an important role – an abused or poorly trained animal, regardless of its breed, is more likely to bite than one that has been brought up with care, respect, and obedience training.

Some breeds
 do, in fact, exhibit what seems to be a genetic predisposition to aggression. However, because of their cute appearances and lesser sizes these breeds may not be the ones we typically fear. For example:
  • Papillons: intensely loyal to their owners, possessive to the point of hostility
  • Chihuahuas: dislike children, prefer adult company
  • Toy Poodles: bite for self-defense purposes, may perceive playing as an attack
  • Cocker Spaniels: can suffer from a genetic disease called “rage syndrome,” which causes them to spontaneously attack even their owners
Alternatively, stigmatized breeds such as Boxers, Bulldogs, and Rottweilers can often be playful, gentle, and good with children. Generally, if raised properly most dogs will only bite a person if provoked or motivated by some external source

Media Influence
Why, then, is a clearly aggressive dog like Charlie allowed to remain at large while other dogs are condemned to wearing muzzles because they might bite? Perhaps the media are to blame for this phenomenon, since stories about stigmatized breeds are shocking and therefore more highly publicized. In the same way that people are more afraid of shark attacks than airplane debris falling from the sky (though you have a higher chance of being killed by the debris), media coverage of certain events can skew public opinion. Click here and here for some examples of publicized Pit Bull attacks. On the other hand, perhaps these types of attacks are in the media not because certain breeds are necessarily more vicious than others, but because they have more physical potential to cause serious damage. 

Pet vs. Owner: Who is to Blame?
As discusssed in the second article above, another controversial issue is whether the dog or the owner is at fault when an animal harms somebody. As exhibited by the following video, pet owners can have a heavy influence on their dog’s behaviour:

 

The dog in this video is obviously dangerous, but his owner is at fault for training him to act that way. However, some well trained dogs may bite unexpectedly if they are provoked, have a sore spot, or even just if they snap at a fly and accidentally get a mouthful of their owner. You never know how a dog may react to certain stimuli, regardless of its breed. In such cases the owner is not necessarily at fault, but they are still responsible for their animal’s actions. Further details about owner responsibility can be found in the Dog Owner’s Liability Act, which unfortunately deals mostly with Pit Bull-specific information but also includes some general legal guidelines. 

Overall, the key is to be reasonably wary of any breed before you get to know and trust individual animals. If any of the opinions stated in this article clash with your own, please feel free to step in and tell me how things look from your perspective. Do you feel that certain breeds are genetically inclined towards aggressive behaviour regardless of upbringing? Should some breeds require muzzles in public? If so, do they need to be muzzled because they’re prone to violence, or because their physical power alone is dangerous? Do media representations create an unfair bias, or do some types of dogs really attack more often than others? Tell me about your own thoughts and experiences, good or bad. New ideas, information, and stories are always welcome and appreciated. 


Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Web2.0 Online Magazine Analysis

Posted by spacebar127 on February 4, 2009

Scientific American
http://www.sciam.com/

Scientific American’s online component features many of the social and participatory features of a web2.0 site. Visitors to this site can use the bookmarking options to keep track of content, allowing them to re-visit and share their favourite articles. The Scientific American website also features an RSS option, allowing users to receive free updates on the latest headlines as they happen. RSS lets users subscribe to sections of the magazine without having to check the entire site every time they’re looking for something subject-specific. Scientific American also has a newsletter option, offering users to choose from different categories of newsletters to be received by e-mail. The blogs, podcasts, and active discussions available on this site allow users to interact with content on a whole new level, letting them hear and respond to others’ opinions about the articles. Overall, the web2.0 tools on this site let users make choices about the magazine’s content rather than just reading it.

The bookmark option on this site is valuable for industry professionals because it tracks the number of people who have bookmarked the articles, allowing publishers and editors to determine which articles are valuable while also giving marketing staff crucial numbers about readership. The newsletter option provides advertisers with user information and also allows them to send announcements and special offers to customer e-mails based on their selected areas of interest. Another tool offered on this site provides users with mobile access to the magazine’s content, which benefits the publisher and editors by giving readers even more chances to access and share the magazine’s articles. The blogs, podcasts, and active discussions further this sharing, making the magazine content into something that users interact with on a personal level, and therefore appreciate and remember more than would be possible with simple print articles.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Reviews | Leave a Comment »