Slate: Sports Illustrated is broken, but here is how to fix it

Very good point. Up here in Canada that shit has no relevance. There are plenty of people up here who follow NCAA football and hoops but there can't be too many Canuck readers who give a shit about prep sports.

 

I think we buy into this without really thinking about it. SI may be a little different being a weekly. But look at GQ -- current issue is almost 300 pages, last month's 50th anniversary edition was almost 500, a phone book. This month's Esquire is like 228. Unless you think I am driven entirely by the table of contents -- in which case I ignore not only all those short items in front, but all those ads as well -- you are talking about a serious investment of time just to page through the thing, let alone read any of it. Which people are willing to do. So what difference does it really make if you have a gazillion short items all competing for attention vs. a few long ones? It's still a 500-page magazine. I don't think anyone sees an interesting long magazine article and, before he even starts reading, says "Wait a minute, how long is this fucker?" and then pages through the jumps to see whether it's 3,000 words or 10,000 and then makes a decision on whether he'll commit time to start reading it. Nah. The subject matter either gets their attention or it doesn't, and the writer either holds their attention or he doesn't. Because of the ads, you have the same editorial space whether the stories are short or long. And it's the same investment of time for the readers.

 

Probably outnumbered by the people in Alabama who don't care about the NHL coverage. No big deal, you turn the page.

 

I disagree.
Comparing a daily to a weekly to a monthly will quickly lead one on a path to false conclusions.
A reader doesn't look at a five-day-old newspaper and the GQ they received in the mail five days ago the same. There is immediacy associated with newsprint. The pressure doesn't exist with magazines.
Perhaps it's nature (newspapers') and nurture (the readers'). But, it's reality.

 

It's not a new thought, but SI needs to get away from trying to be ESPN: The Mag. If you try to be all things to all people, you're nothing to anyone. SI needs to get back to what made it great: Well-written, interesting features. Stop trying to be ESPN with its graphics and stupid polls.

 

I didn't mention newspapers in my post.

 

I thought the "we" in your first sentence was a collective "we."
Let's call that response a "whoops."

 

did gary smith write "bracketed by fate".

he did.

that's the problem. in the old days those kind of pseudo-profound cliches did not make it into print.

 

It is a collective we. I think newspapers also buy into it as gospel without thinking a whole lot about it. But I completely agree that the strategy for newspapers and magazines has to be different.

But I didn't buy GQ for a couple years because I wasn't finding much of interest. I bought the anniversary issue just because. And as I sat on the couch with it while my wife was watching Gray's Anatomy it struck me that readers can't be all that pressed for time if they are willing to delve into this 500-page monstrosity.

 

In 1985, The New Yorker had a circulation of 450,000.

In 1999, the magazine had a circulation of 800,000.

In 2006, the magazine had a circulation of 1,065,000.

This is a magazine that regularly writes 10,000 word features about poets, sculptors, fringe politicians. Yet it does exceptional long-form journalism, week after week after week.

The idea that people only want quick information without thought, that they do not want to invest in a long story, that they cannot handle anything longer than 1,200 words in a magazine, is silly.

Sports Illustrated doesn't have to be The New Yorker. It really can't be anyway. And I concede that people who like sports and people who like politics, art and culture are different animals. But people will invest in good stories if you give them a reason to invest in them. If you give them crap, it will make it feel even more disposable.

You can still produce serious, interesting, intellectual journalism without turning away readers and betraying your identity as a magazine.

 

Quick thought:
How many of those New Yorker subscribers also subscribe to Sports Illustrated?

 

You can, but you do so with the understanding that it's a limited audience. New Yorker is somewhere around No. 80 in circulation among US magazines, lagging behind Boys Life.