disruption product staying relevant strategy

No, the iPad will not save magazines

The iPad is a gorgeous media consumption device. It’s desirable, it’s selling like hotcakes and buying apps is easy. Print media owners shackled by declining sales can be forgiven for willing it to their saviour.

It won’t be.

As the paltry sales of GQ’s iPad app indicate, simply having an app isn’t enough. The dirty truth is that no-one ever wanted a magazine. Just as Coke sells happiness rather than fizzy drinks, what people actually get from mags are:

  1. Signalling. What magazine you hold up on the train carriage, or have on your coffee table sends a message about how you see yourself – be it Viz, the Economist or Wallpaper
  2. Passing the time. Mags work great to wile away train journeys and lazy bath-times
  3. Special interest Whether you love cars, photography, cycling or houseboats, there’s a mag for you.
  4. Sense of belonging People like feeling part of a community and sharing tips.

Magazines have delivered on these benefits very well for decades. The challenge is that digital does all of these better, or changes them:

  1. No-one knows what you’re reading. It’s the device itself that says something about you. iPad v Kindle, and iPhone v Android is the new Mods v Rockers.
  2. You’re never alone with a mobile. Yes you can read magazine-like articles and look at professional photos, but you’re more likely to listen to music, watch episodes of Glee, email your friends or check-in at a foursquare location.
  3. Niche interests are hyper-served by digital. I’m not just interested in digital photography, I want to read in-depth articles on not only Canon lenses, but that particular lens, and those particular types of shots
  4. Sense of community has of course been owned by the massive, real-time, rich media interactions of social media. I want to know now what people think of that Cameroon goal.

That all said, magazines will not die. Print has winning attributes of portability, ever-lasting battery life and brings a simple, tactile pleasure. However, it will of course change. There will be fewer titles and producing them will become a leaner, tougher, much less pleasant game. Print dollars really will be replaced by digital cents. Get over it.

My counsel is:

  • Think brand and not product. Top Gear is the shining example of a media brand that has transcended its format and is thus less vulnerable to channel shift.
  • Embrace failure. There are no certainties in this era of disruption. Things will not settle down, and it is delusional to ‘wait and see’. No-one has a right to survive. The only viable strategy is to keep testing and keep learning.

1 reply on “No, the iPad will not save magazines”

Interesting points. The concept of ‘signalling’ is one that rings especially true with me. Although I would be lost without the iTunes library on my iPhone, I still like to buy music in physical format. Although I’m slowly starting to buy more music digitally, I still like to ‘display’ my physical music collection on shelves at home, as I believe, like all music fans, that it conveys a good taste in music – although this, I’m sure, is subjective!

The way I consume literature is also divided. I read all of my news online now, or through the Guardian’s fantastic iPhone app. However, I have deflected all attempts of my loved ones to buy me an e-reader. Why? Because, like my CDs, I love the signalling that comes with displaying the books I have read on shelves at home – despite the fact that this modus operandi could be construed as fairly pretentious.

There’s no doubt that the physical publication industry needs to change in this digital age, but as you suggest Carl, the iPad is not *the* answer. I love first editions, old vinyls and CD collections, but I also love technology. The trick for publishers is to combine the best elements of both, and tailor an offering accordingly, in integrated fashion.

Leave a Reply