Which would you rather read? (FF magazine rant)
- This topic has 76 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated Nov 3, 2008 at 5:11 pm by
.
-
Posts
-
a. ) an article written by a guy who spends a weekend at a lodge fishing with a guide and postures as an expert on the water in question, yet clearly doesn’t 100% know what he’s talking about.
b.) an article written by a guy who surely fishes the water in question on his own a fair amount, but embelishes a lot of details about the experience or still can’t get the facts straight.
c.) an article written by a guy who flat out lies about his experiences on the water and makes up outlandish stuff that is just plain not true and in some cases, impossible.
I had this conversation at the fly shop the other day while flipping through a magazine. I’ve seen each of these scenerios more than once lately… sheesh.
There are some really good writers in the world of fly fishing, but it also seems like some magazines are really scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to content. What gives? In the last year or so, I even saw a humor article recycled from one regional publication in its sister publication.
So, it begs the question: what do you like to read in fly fishing magazines? I, for one, could do without reading another article about the so-called famous waters of the West. Really, the Madison River again? Super. Another one that kills me are those articles about places that shouldn’t be mentioned, like little marginal piss-trickle streams or fragile little wild trout fisheries. Do we really need to out every waterway on the planet, whether worthwhile or not?
I would really like to see magazines turn more focus toward techniques, hatches, tying, etc… Worthwhile how-to stuff. I guess one could argue that there are a few magazines that feature this type of content, but I would like to see more. I’d also like to see some more conservation stuff. I’m not just talking about anti-Pebble Mine articles but things that are going on in states that benefit wild, indigenous fish. Once again, yes, some of this is happening, but it would be cool to see on a broader scale.
So, anyway, what do you look for when grabbing a fly fishing magazine off the rack? Personally, I look for a lot more than I usually end up getting.
I would rather read about an experience………..like a funny story of a trip without any detail on where or how they fished.
i like
-a destination article-be it exotic or somewhere i can go
-an educational article-be it on fish, bugs, gear, hydrology, etc. something i can read and learn from and share with others
-an essay by rotated authorsi don’t like pompous or arrogant authors, just someone who is educated and well informed in our lifestyle and can present it to us in away to keep me entertained, interested, and paying money to read what they wrote
I agree with lando…I dont like any of your three options.
Finally, for (c), this is is really the editor’s fault for not double-checking the facts as presented by the writer. Lack of quote support is a common hallmark of these articles, and frankly, they usually appear in the regional publications which run on lower admission standards, lower writer pay, and more over-worked editorial staff.
I think this is probably the worst offense. I mean, I really like reading about streams that are allegedly in a different watershed than in real life. [/sarcasm]
Or, how about this one… an author who claims to fish a lake 12 months out of the year when the lake sits miles behind a closed gate several months each winter and is often ice covered for months at a time? That sort of gross inaccuracy wrapped up in a blatant lie is really pathetic. And it’s really sad that an editor would even need to check stuff like that.
Another one I recently saw involved a small regional river being written up as a short destination piece in one issue, followed by the same river being written up as a feature article one or two issues later. How many different ways can you write about one waterway? I guess when you’re scrounging for articles, anything that comes across the editor’s desk will work…
Anyway, solid analysis, Zach. I understand that magazines have different niches and that changes in format are highly unlikely, but the fact remains that a lot of publications have become pretty stale and seem to suffer from a lack of quality content. And you’re right, there seem to be big differences in quality between some of the national and regional magazines.
Micah –
Believe me, man, there are a lot of very smart, very motivated people involved in trying to create the perfect fly fishing magazine.
Or, how about this one… an author who claims to fish a lake 12 months out of the year when the lake sits miles behind a closed gate several months each winter and is often ice covered for months at a time?
Does this have anything to do about the recent article in SW Flyfishing magazine?
here are my thoughts and if they are repearts it is because I want to get them on the screen before reading all of the others, so I dont forget all of them…dang it just lost three.
OK my own opinion;
It seems that Fly fishing mags reach for the lowest member of the FF community, the newbies if you will.Keith I think that you’re right on the money. Again, though, we need to look around and do a head count. This board has 1,000 members. About 100 of you are “active.” That’s probably a pretty good analog to the proportion of “fly fishers” versus “active fly fishers” out there.
We have had polls before which can be pretty interesting about where you’d draw the line on calling someone a “fly fisher.” Is a “fly fisher” someone who fishes once a year? Once a month in season? Thirty days a year? When you think about it, thirty days a year is a ton – most weekends, in other words, and all of them in season.
Say there are 10,000 “active fly fishers” in the country. The number may be greater than that, but probably not much. There might be 100,000 people who fly fish often enough to call themselves fly fishermen. Those folks are buying magazines, though, because a lot of them really wish they could get out more. And, in fact, most fly fishing magazine circulations have historically topped out around 100,000.
If 100,000 give or take is the maximum number of subscriptions you can sell, but only 10% of your audience is dedicated enough to support a “Wall Street Journal” level of fly fishing, which group would you target? I’d argue that Tom Bie at The Drake is targeting that “Wall Street Journal” crowd, if not in social terms, then at least in terms of numbers days on the water per year. His readership is similar to the readership of this board (and I bet a bunch of you get the Drake, as I do). And Gray’s Sporting Journal is targeting the Wall Street Journal crowd from an education/social perspective (though I bet Gray’s readers have far fewer days on the water/year than Drake readers). The trouble is there’s only really room for one magazine that targets that “advanced” demographic. Manufacturers have a limited budget to buy ads with, after all, and the subscription sales won’t cover the costs.
Fly Fishing in Saltwaters magazine recently won out in its long battle with Saltwater Fly Fishing magazine. Both of them also fight over about 10% of the market. The difference between FFiSW and SWF magazines versus The Drake and Gray’s is that the first set fought over the exact same 10%, where The Drake and Gray’s only partially cannibalize each other’s sales.
Absolutely, it all boils down to money. That’s the point of being in business, right?
Advertising sells and so does article 1,382 about the Madison, Missouri, Big Horn, etc. That’s what the 90% wants to read about and where they want to go on their summer vacations.
Then you also have the issue of qualified writers and magazine format. I’m guessing it’s hard enough for some magazines to fill all the pages, let alone hold themselves to rigorous quality standards.
I find it boring and repetetive, but I guess some don’t. Interesting conversation so far.
I’m not trying to suggest I know much or that there isn’t anything to learn from articles. Good information is printed from time to time, and some magazines are definitely better than others.
And yeah, that fish and Fly article was killer.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.