The Future of TIME
Posted on 02/12/2008 6:30:05 AM PST by abb
Time magazine received a body blow in the latest circulation report from the Audit Bureau of Circulations, leading a round of bad news for consumer magazines in a variety of categories. Comparing the second half of 2007 with the same period in 2006, Time Inc.'s flagship title saw newsstand sales fall 19.4% to 107,277, as subscriptions tumbled 17.5% to 3,244,595. Overall, circulation fell 17.6% to 3,351,872.
In November 2006, Time cut its rate base 18.8% to 3.25 million, so the decline in subscriptions may be due partly to a purge of "junk" circulation, including automatically renewed subscriptions. But it's hard to put a good spin on the steep drop in newsstand sales, which advertisers often view as an indicator of audience engagement.
Ironically, the declines follow a major redesign that was intended to make the magazine appeal to a mass audience. Introduced in March 2007, the new look delivers less visual clutter for a cleaner, streamlined appearance. There is lots of clear "white" space, fewer, more eye-catching images, and interesting text formats.
In editorial terms, Managing Editor Rick Stengel said he wanted the magazine to become a weekly journal of analysis and commentary on world events resembling the Economist; he also brought a number of well-known opinion columnists on board.
At least Time isn't alone: competitors Newsweek and U.S. News & World Report also suffered in the second half of 2007. Newsweek's newsstand sales fell 16.3% to 92,576, while subscriptions were basically flat. U.S. News' newsstand sales fell 7.9% to 33,757, as subscriptions also remained flat.
There was some good news in the newsweekly category. The Week continued building its subscription base with 8.2% growth to 478,593. Meanwhile, the Economist enjoyed newsstand growth of 10.1% as subscriptions rose 13.1%, for a total circulation increase of 12.8%, to 652,545.
The Future of TIME
Brother, can you spare me a TIME
ping
I have a dr’s office where they keep sending us Time (we never ordered it; ?channel stuffing). I just throw it in the trash ‘cause I don’t think its fit for the patients to read let alone me.
The other thing that’s interesting about Time: compare an issue from the 1950’s to an issue from today. Today’s version is dumbed-down to the level of a comic book.
Compare to Human Events: 70,000 paid subscribers.
100,000 for Time, 90,000 for Newsweek, and 33,000 for U.S. News. : )
Human Events could well outstrip the left leaning “national” rags.
LOL . . . National Reviews audited circulation of 150,000 is larger than all three “national magazines.”
The Sands of TIME
See that little arrow? That's Toll Brothers announcing a stock split -- on June 16, 2005.
“Comparing the second half of 2007 with the same period in 2006, Time Inc.’s flagship title saw newsstand sales fall 19.4% to 107,277, as subscriptions tumbled 17.5% to 3,244,595. Overall, circulation fell 17.6% to 3,351,872.”
That still looks like a fairly strong circulation to me. I’m no fan of Time, mind you, but to say it is “dying” is a bit optimistic, eh?
The trend is unmistakable. They are for sure not getting healthier.
By the way, do these figures account for the people who now read Time online rather than in print? I have no idea how many people that might be, but certainly you cannot simply ignore them — and then tout all the readers of conservative websites in the next breath. I’m just trying to be realistic, folks.
My very liberal mother told me she is cancelling her subscription to Time. Needless to say, I was quite happy to hear it.
Did she say why?
“The other thing that’s interesting about Time: compare an issue from the 1950’s to an issue from today. Today’s version is dumbed-down to the level of a comic book.”
Read “Witness” by W. Chambers. It will boggle your mind to see the high quality, highly literary stuff that Time used to put out in the 50s.
Time may raise their prices , again ?
Comparing the second half of 2007 with the same period in 2006, Time Inc.’s flagship title saw newsstand sales fall 19.4% to 107,277, as subscriptions tumbled 17.5%...
I can have a more intellectual experience reading the Cat in the Hat, or Horton Hears a Who. Time is right up there with the Tele-tubies for me.
We had the Asia edition of Time while stationed overseas in the 50s and early 60s. Lots of column inches of news analysis with few pictures. Occasionally we would see Life magazine; few words, mostly pictures.
Great caption, very very funny, I appreciate your post.
That’s good. What did they expect? The public schools are not teaching how to read. They’re too busy trying to convert innocent young children into “alternative lifestyles”.
It's about time.
.
“Ironically, the declines follow a major redesign that was intended to make the magazine appeal to a mass audience. Introduced in March 2007, the new look delivers less visual clutter for a cleaner, streamlined appearance. There is lots of clear “white” space, fewer, more eye-catching images, and interesting text formats.”
More rearrangement of the deck chairs on this Titanic.
These arrogant mediots will never understand that when they lie, spin and po about 50% of their potential audience/subscribers/advertisers using the Dixie Chick post 9/11 marketing strategy, that is the kiss of death for them.
Typical liberal management in the MSM.
First they use the Dixie Chick post 9/11 marketing plan to po 50% of subscribers, readers, and advertisers.
Then they make their product smaller and try to charge more.
Thanks.
” Here is looking at you : kid. “
The mediots are committing suicide with their Dixie Chicks marketing plan.
‘Time’ Plummets——boo-frickin-hoo-—cry me a river, why don’t they.
I subscribed to Time a year ago for $ 19.95 because they threw in a laser level which I thought was worth that much. Now they are offering me an overnight bag to re-subscribe at the same price. I don’t need an overnight bag and I don’t need Time.
Jon Meacham, the editor of Newsweak, recently begged students at the Columbia School of Journalism to tell him how he could bail out his sinking ship. He also was advised to become like the Economist, i.e. British and center (sic: centre) left.
This guy is the spitting image of the Rt. Rev. Rowam Williams, Archbishop (Arch-Ayatollah) of Canterbury.
I doubt if any medical, dental or other professional offices buy or subscribe to Slime. They just appear as freebies.
“The mediots are committing suicide with their Dixie Chicks marketing plan.”
The mediots and small lib owned boutique stores and book stores across the nation fail to understand how their Dixie Chick post 9/11 marketing program is suicide for their businesses.
That is good news for us.
Sam, you played it for her, play it for me.
She was a beauty.
Everyone go to your local bookstore, accidently shake out all of the suscription litter cards and drop them in the mail for processing.
“There is lots of clear “white” space,”
Blank pages with “this page intentionally blank?”
I think they have to list freebies as such-—not in circulation nos-—that’s what got Newsday execs in a peck of trouble.
The Hands of TIME
It’s about time Time disappears...
On a related note...we recently rented Jodie Foster’s “The Brave One” and Nicole Kidman’s “Invasion” and both movies went waaaaaay out of their way to take an unnecessary shot at the Liberation of Iraq.
Close to the point of just moving on hollyweird like I do on so much of the other drivel. They’re already on life support for me...last time I went to a theater was to see “Transformers” with my son...heard it was PRO-military, and was pleasantly surprised!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.