Will Online Content Replace the Written Word

[GB72]

Honest question here that I have thought about a little and sprung to mind with the thread on the new GM YouTube Channel.

In your opinion is there a danger of online content making the need to buy GM or other magazines redundant. Look at what is available for free online, you have the YouTube channel with gear reviews, interviews and tips, you have the forum, facebook at Twitter for opinion, comment, competitions etc and you have the internet in general for news as the company PR machines often have all of the pictures and information all over the interweb before there is any chance of a magazine article being written.

It is great that GM produce all of this content for free and that it is there at your fingertips but does it ever make you think about the need to spend your £4 a month or buy your subscription. After all, I no longer buy a newspaper as the content is all available for free and the content (other than opinion) tends to be out of date before it is even printed.

As far as GM is concerned, I am a luddite and I like to sit there with a magazine and read it but then again I am only just converting to e:readers etc. So, at my age I value the hard copy magazine and will continue to subscribe but I can also see younger or more tech savvy people being more than willing to get their dose of golf news and views online without the need to pay.

 

[Hacker Khan]

I think some people will always want a physical book/magazine to hold. But as that generation dies off then I suspect the printed word will become more obsolete. Although I do seem to remember reading that sales of physical books have increased as well as sales of e books together. But I may be wrong. Also I am sure I saw that the subscription to the printed GM includes the on line version. But if you just want the on line version you have to pay the same price. Which seemed a bit daft to me.

I suspect the publishers would like to move on line as it costs less to produce, therefore more profit, and it is more immediate so GM can react to The Open the day after, as opposed to 4 or so weeks after in the print magazine. Then again they have to think of new content on a daily basis, as opposed to once a month.

 

[jimbob.someroo]

I think all of the print media are in danger at the moment. I work in an industry which suffered hugely when people moved towards digital content (Music) and we've had to adapt to change. It's taken us a few years but we're finally 'winning' the battle and turning profits again.

As a result, a lot of people from Music have been recruited to work in print to try and help them prepare better than we did for the switch to digital. Particularly with regards monetising their business models.

The big advantage GM and other golf mags have (at least for now) is that there is still a culture of getting your mag, reading all the articles over the month, going back to the mag every other day or so to re-remember something you read. It also has (generally speaking) an older audience than the music industry. 40/50/60+ year olds who have bought golf mags for 20+ years are unlikely to change their habits. They may just add in some digital features such as the odd instructional video as well as their usual magazine.

I think GM is being smart by creating digital editions of the mag and I (and many in t'media) think this is where the next generation of 'written word' will be based, probably in 10+ years when more people have smartphones/ipads/kindles etc than don't. I can genuinely see a time in 20 years when magazines no longer exist as 80%+ of the population will have one of the aforementioned devices.

 

[GB72]

I was not thinking so much about the digital edition of a magazine as this is just another way of consuming media at the same cost. What I was looking at more was the free and unsubscribed content that is available online. Is there a danger tthat the qualiry and quantity of free articles and information available could make you question whether it is worth paying for a digital or hard copy magazine. As I said I used to buy a paper every day but ican get most of the content free online so no longer do.

 

[Hacker Khan]

I suppose it depends on what value you place on the information in a magazine and what you want it for. It's pretty obvious you can get every tip/hint about playing golf on the internet for free now to a very high standard, e.g. Mr Crossfield and various others. Or you go to see a pro. So I would argue the value of the rest of the information in the digital/printed copy has to be seen to be high enough to make people buy it.

So if a magazine invests in high quality journalism that brings a different perspective and offers insightful, informative and I like to see amusing comment, then I think they will survive. But if all they are doing is rehashing press releases and most articles are thinly disguised adverts then no, I don't think they will as people will not want to pay for that. IMHO of course.

 

[CMAC]

Never! :smirk:

 

[Hacker Khan]

I do think that at least one of the 3 major golf mags will not survive in printed form for too long as digital becomes more prominent.

I have no idea of the sales figures, but I am sure both Golf World and Today's Golfer are both published by the same company. And I can never really see too much differentiation between them to justify paying 2 lots of journalists from the same company to write about golf for 2 magazines. Unless they use the same journalists who write for both mags.

 

[duncan mackie]

monthly magazines have always struggled with their split between providers of 'news' and the editorial/other content. IPC have long realised this.

some magazines have already gone, more will go, and the only uncertainty in my mind is the future relationaship between advertising and both paper and online content managers. The latter is a shifting sand that will prove a huge 'battleground' over the next 10 years and will reset the roles of the magazines, the retailers and probably the manufacturers.

 

[Hacker Khan]

I think GM is being smart by creating digital editions of the mag and I (and many in t'media) think this is where the next generation of 'written word' will be based, probably in 10+ years when more people have smartphones/ipads/kindles etc than don't. I can genuinely see a time in 20 years when magazines no longer exist as 80%+ of the population will have one of the aforementioned devices.

10+ years? I would have guessed it would be less than that before more people (who read magazines/papers) than not have access to some kind of electronic device to read them. I read a bit ago that in India more people have access to a phone than do a toilet. I admit these are not smart phones, but that stat did surprise me. Then again I am not sure if it was to highlight the amount of phones in India, or the lack of toilets. Or possibly both.

 

[jimbob.someroo]

10+ years? I would have guessed it would be less than that before more people (who read magazines/papers) than not have access to some kind of electronic device to read them. I read a bit ago that in India more people have access to a phone than do a toilet. I admit these are not smart phones, but that stat did surprise me. Then again I am not sure if it was to highlight the amount of phones in India, or the lack of toilets. Or possibly both.

Yer, I think (I could be very wrong) but just based on a straw poll of people I know / related to, probably less than half have either an iphone/ipad/kindle. Millions more have smart devices now than did previously in the UK but we're still not at a point yet when we can make a full switch to digital.

For example, I'm still fortunate enough to have 4 grandparents and not one of them, or any of their friends have an iPad /iPhone, yet all of them regularly purchase magazines of some description (golf / fashion / gossip).

However, many 50 year olds I know do have some sort of access to these devices. I think in 10 years, even more of the people born between 1960-1970 will have these devices. Then there will be a much smaller minority without which will enable more media outlets to switch fully to digital.

Just my opinion, happy to be proven wrong.


Super-edit. So this news story (http://www.techweekeurope.co.uk/news/over-half-of-brits-use-a-smartphone-61935) says that half of people in the UK have smart phones. However, that's still 30+ million people without a device. Admittedly some of these with be outliers in terms of age, but that's still a large chunk of people without. And 'smartphones' include blackberry's which many people use for work. I wouldn't much fancy trying to read a mag / watch videos on the small screen on my work bb. I still reckon we're a good few years off the majority of UK media consumers having a smart device they are comfortable using in place of a magazine / newspaper.

 

[bluewolf]

Great thread Greg. I work in the Newspaper print industry and the decline is amazing. Approx 10% per year is a conservative estimate!! The age of an average newspaper consumer is rising steadily.

Another thing to consider is the fact that its not just the cost of production that is the problem. It's the cost of transport around the country.

 

[GB72]

Great thread Greg. I work in the Newspaper print industry and the decline is amazing. Approx 10% per year is a conservative estimate!! The age of an average newspaper consumer is rising steadily.

Another thing to consider is the fact that its not just the cost of production that is the problem. It's the cost of transport around the country.

Newspapers really must be struggling. I can get my up to date news from the BBC website throughout the day and then most papers have their commentary online the next morning for free so I really do not see any need to buy one. To make life easier, the sporting commenators tend to post a link to their columns on Twitter in the morning so they are handed to me on a plate.

The point that I was getting at was the increased level of free content that magazines publish on the net. Gear reviews, tips, interviews, pictures, competitions, they are all on the web pages of the various magazines so, as there is so much free content on the net, surely some could look at that and think 'this fills my golfing needs for the month so why do I need to pay for the hard copy or digital magazine'. GM is maybe an exception in that there are still loads of interesting articles, interviews and editorials in the magazone every month but if, for example, the main thing that you buy the mag for is the tips and gear reviews then much of that is free on Youtube.

 

[JPH]

You get the Metro and Evening standard free every day all over London and elsewhere presumably so that probably doesn't help newspaper sales either

 

[MikeB]

I no longer advertise in magazines as I can get better returns through internet adverts & especially through sponsoring enthusiasts forums. Books will always have a market but magazines will be dead in 10 years.

 

[DappaDonDave]

Online will rule all once high speed Internet is very very cheap and all devices use it as standard o a almost unlimited level.

I love reading my ipad magazines with the embedded vids etc

 

[Crow]

The sad thing is, what happens to the historic record?

Finding an old magazine is just as interesting as a new one, looking at the changes in attitudes, equipment, etc.
How long will old "copies" be available on line, and can you trust them to be unedited from the day they first appeared?

This is particulalrly true of pictures, hard copies of historic or family pictures survive in a drawer and can be viewed easily, digitals often don't get looked at more than once and are so easily deleted if they don't catch the imagination.
And who trusts an on-line digital picture to portray what it claims thse days?

I was looking at our old family pictures the other day, loads from the 35mm days but once we started using digital there seem to be a lot less, when you'd have thought that the opposite would be the case as they cost nothing to take.
Not sure if they just never got saved and so lost when computers upgraded or maybe we took loads but then deleted loads as they didn't appear important at the time.

 

[WideEyedFox]

For some strange reason I've found myself "allergic" to a lot of papers & magazines over the last 10 years or so. GM included, when I'm trying to read them I start sneezing! Newspapers, magazines, 99% have the same effect.

Most books seem fine, but I do buy a lot of ebooks now after buying a book last year I could not read so had to buy the ebook as well.

Not sure if its the paper, the ink or the print process.

Thus, I consume all of my daily news electronically, with training/reference materials I can usually get away with books. Fiction/Autobiograhpies etc. are split between books, ebooks and audiobooks.

Ebooks work great for me as I usually have 3 or more on the go at the same time. Picking up a tablet/reader/mobile is a lot easier than carrying them about.

Edit: RE Digital Photos - we look at ours a lot more than the prints. We have decades of photos, some scanned all on a photo frame. Some days we use the PC in the lounge to play music around the house (iTunes + Remote App) and Windows Media Centre to slideshow the photos on the big TV. Photos come up ad hoc that we'd not see for weeks, months or years if they were in an album in a drawer.
It's all backed up on 2 external drives. One at home, 1 off-site, so if the worst happened we'd still have them, and the family videos.

 

[DappaDonDave]

The sad thing is, what happens to the historic record?

Finding an old magazine is just as interesting as a new one, looking at the changes in attitudes, equipment, etc.
How long will old "copies" be available on line, and can you trust them to be unedited from the day they first appeared?

This is particulalrly true of pictures, hard copies of historic or family pictures survive in a drawer and can be viewed easily, digitals often don't get looked at more than once and are so easily deleted if they don't catch the imagination.
And who trusts an on-line digital picture to portray what it claims thse days?i

I was looking at our old family pictures the other day, loads from the 35mm days but once we started using digital there seem to be a lot less, when you'd have thought that the opposite would be the case as they cost nothing to take.
Not sure if they just never got saved and so lost when computers upgraded or maybe we took loads but then deleted loads as they didn't appear important at the time.

Historic record- it's called "the cloud". All pictures ever will be available online!

Did you know you can copy a picture into google image search and it'll find it! A PICTURE!

 

[Hacker Khan]

I think in 10 years, even more of the people born between 1960-1970 will have these devices. Then there will be a much smaller minority without which will enable more media outlets to switch fully to digital.

I fall into that category you cheeky ******* You calling me old! I will let you know I have a 32K Ram pack on my Spectrum, that's how cutting edge I am, so stick that up your pipe and smoke it.

The think that made me think was that my daughter is nearly 7, and guess what just about every one of her friends has had or wants for their birthdays. A tablet. And my company is thinking of going over to tablets from laptops now. I agree that I don't think smart phones will tip the balance as in most cases I would say the screen is too small (Or may be my eyes are not good enough to read it), but tablets will.

 

[MegaSteve]

You get the Metro and Evening standard free every day all over London and elsewhere presumably so that probably doesn't help newspaper sales either

I can remember when London had two great evening papers to chose from... Whats on offer now is rather flaccid in comparison... Most probably reflecting the fact that they are for free...