Re: [Paddlewise] Magazines

Doug wrote;

>I've never found that to be entirely true, though some repetition is 
>evident
>and probably necessary for economic viability. I know any time the 
>editorial
>staff reviews an article that is similar to a previous one, it must offer
>new information or reword things to sufficiently shed new light.

Since I wrote the comment that inspired Doug to respond I should point out 
in fairness that most magazines focussing on a specific activity do the same 
thing. As Chuck pointed out the magazine has to appeal to beginners. You 
can't expect new subscribers to buy old issues to get caught up. I don't 
consider the repetition a crime at all, I just don't feel it serves my 
interests. Opinions will differ on whether each article variant offers 
enough new content to make it worth reading.

Nick brought the subject up because he felt the tone (correct me if I have 
this wrong, Nick) did not present a suitably sophisticated image of the 
sport. I don't think he expected it to have the same content as say, Marine 
Technology. I have no idea if a magazine with a different focus would 
survive nor do I have any opinion on whether Sea Kayaker properly fulfills a 
need. It has survived and I suspect that provides a good measure of its 
value and success - to enough people to makemit pay for its owners.

One has to balance cost versus return. I did not feel Sea Kayaker provided 
that for me. It may serve other people well. I get what I need elsewhere 
(here for example and at no cost). I would, however, subscribe to a sea 
kayaking magazine along the format of the Tell Tale Compass that took no 
advertsing and could call a spade a dirty shovel if necessary.

Nuf said from me about that. Hurricane force winds, blowing snow, and huge 
waves. I think I will have another cup of coffee an watch thankful that I 
don't have to go out there.

Cheers

John Winters