I've been browsing the magazine section of Google play store, and have been quite surprised at the vitriol directed at many of these publications in the review sections, because despite paying for a subscription, these people are having to wade through pages of ads before they reach actual content.
I get it, though, you know. I totally understand that even paid-for content needs to be supported by advertising. You never get ANY magazine or newspaper which is totally void of advertising. The more marginal the magazine, the more advertising. Unless you're talking something like Vogue or Cosmo!
I also get the readers' frustrations. In the paper world you can grab the magazine and flick through to the article you want to read. Sometimes you'll actually stop to glance at, or even read, an ad, but while the content may be presented linearly, that's SO not how it's read.
For example: I get my copy of PC Pro, and immediately flick to the readers' letters. That's my joy. Then on to the review section, where upcoming tech is drooled over - by the writers as well as me! Then, when I've read those two sections, I'll find the latest musings from John Honeyball. THEN, and only then, will I return to the front of the mag, and continue my journey.
Actually, the very first thing I'll do is to remove ALL the ads which are going to stop me flicking easily. You know the kind: the ones printed on card, and the little booklets added in at binding time. Those are a big nope. All the other advertising gets to stay, and I'll skim it as I browse the mag. I sort of feel sorry for the advertisers who've probably paid quite a bit more for a prominent ad, but not sorry enough to let it mess with my enjoyment.
And here's where I'm in great sympathy with the people giving digital magazines the 1-star reviews. The way one is forced to read the magazine is totally linear, as if it were an ebook. In fact, as far as I can work out, the emagazine is simply a pdf version of the paper magazine. Thus the 22 pages of ads at the beginning of some of your upmarket ladies publications are right there and in your face. You've got to swipe 22 times to get started. That's the equivalent of turning, one by one, 22 individual pages in the magazine. But remember, that's not how we read. Those would be flicked past quickly, although one might stop to read one that caught the eye. Imagine, if you will, that my eye was drawn to the main story on the front cover. I could flick randomly through the mag to find the article, or I could use the handy dandy index at the front of the publication. Which is exactly how the digital versions should work - seriously, this has been a function of ebooks for simply ages, and those you DO want to read linearly. Click or mash the link, and it takes you to the chapter in question. Click or mash the link in our new idea of an emagazine, and you're immediately whisked to the relevant article.
So my assertion is this: digital magazine content delivery sucks.
Oh my word how hard it sucks! I could create a PowerPoint presentation which would do the job better, but I wouldn't bother to put ads in it. There must be a way to deliver really good content in a way that uses the computer-like abilities of our phones and tablets, and yet still utilises the advertising base. Sure, digital magazines are in their infancy, but since I've had to download a dedicated reader app to get my content, surely it's not beyond the imagination that the content be presented more along the lines of a web page. Many apps are ad assisted, with little banners coming up at the bottom, so that's just one of the imaginative ways ads could be presented in a digital mag. Since the method of reading magazines and books is completely different, surely it's not beyond the bounds of possibility to attempt a different model?
And while I'm still not done with my rant, there's the question of pricing. I find myself surprised, nay astonished that some publishers have the gall to charge MORE for the digital version than the actual printed-on-honest-to-goodness-paper-and-delivered-via-post version. There is NO argument you can make that will convince me to pay MORE for a digital version than a paper version until you add more content/usability to MAKE it worth it.
Posts
