Five things the new Village Magazine needs to do now
Tuesday, February 10th, 2009So the second issue of Village Magazine 2.0 is coming under some legal scrutiny from Declan Ganley, following the publication of a profile critical of the man himself.
This is sure to be of some concern to Michael Smith and all at Village as legal battles with millionaires are never good for a publication’s bottom line, regardless of the rights or wrongs of the case.
But Village has much more integral issues to deal with - ones that will ruin its chances of survival on a day-to-day basis, never mind in the context of legal issues.
Here are five things I think Village Magazine needs to do if it wants to have any hope of surviving 2009 and beyond:
1) Get a proper website and use it properly.
At the moment Village Magazine is using a Wordpress blog with a basic template and nothing else. This makes it look like a fan-site more than anything official. At the very least the website should be re-designed to make it visually relevant to the magazine itself but really it should serve as a destination and not just a marker in the sand.
Village, as a monthly (or whatever it is) publication cannot hope to keep up with the pace of the rolling news agenda but its website can. The old Village made soundings in the right direction but was always too scared to make the leap into a truly online outlet. The magazine was kept behind a pay-wall even after it was off the shelves, the unique online content wasn’t all that unique and there was no interaction with the readers.
The new Village website needs to look at what’s going on internationally and react. It needs to be relevant to the daily news grind, it needs to provide a real forum for discussion of its published content and it needs to tap into the readership as a source of constructive criticism and information.
At the very least, it needs a real website.
2) Re-think its design and get consistent with it.
The old Village must have gone through five major redesigns in its short life, if you factor in format changes and the like. Consistency was simply not there as basic things like the logo and cover template would change dramatically from issue to issue. Not in a smart, subversive way like Adbusters but in a small and confused way that implied incoherence and uncertainty within.
One month it would have a red border, the other it would be blue. One month the logo would be relatively small and the next it would be huge. One month there would be loud, ugly yellow text detailing a story and the next it would be modest, white and neat. Internally it was just as bad and simple mistakes (like the contents pointing to the wrong page or naming the wrong writer, typos in headlines etc.) were common place.
What the new Village needs to do is pick a striking and slick design and stick to it. It needs to make it look serious, not amateur or tabloid. It needs to be eye-catching and bold and it needs to be unmistakable.
The last two covers have been very similar to the old Village, possibly to make it recognisable to the old readership. This makes some sense, of course it also works to make it recognisable to those who hated the old version for reasons other than its ideology (such as it’s design). The underlying problem, however, is that the old Village didn’t look very nice.
If you look at the Editorial page of the new issue it’s a horrific muddle of colours - it’s so unappealing and harder to read as a result. A lot of the design internally is off too; not ugly but inconsistent and bare. Some design ideas in there are good - colour-coding the sections can work very well but it needs to be done properly and the pages need to look full and professionally produced.
I’m not sure who is picking the design at the moment and whether it’s form over function in terms of how it looks but Irish magazines have a terrible habit of sacrificing design and losing readers as a result. It’s not that they’re shallow readers, its just that bad design is unappealing to the eye. It’s the reason why newspapers spend huge money researching what design works and what doesn’t. It’s the reason why designers go to college. It’s the reason why Village needs someone with a good eye, plenty of talent and enough of a voice to remind everyone that neither design or editorial quality needs to be compromised when creating a product.
3) Spend whatever it takes to get an agenda-setting story every issue and make a big deal about it.
This was a major flaw in the old Village’s strategy - it had some great investigative journalists on board at first but because it was weekly they were never given the time to really dig deep on a story. It finally went monthly but couldn’t keep these journalists on staff even though they now had time (but perhaps not the money) to properly investigate issues.
In the end the magazine became a victim of the news cycle - it was reacting to things that happened last week and was often stale by the time it got to the shelves or worse was engaging in monologues about things that had been debated on TV and radio at length anyway.
A monthly cannot try and follow the news agenda, it needs to set its own. It is not practical to expect huge exclusives every month but even a few small but unique news stories will let readers know they’re not going to be reading something stale when they pick it up.
When they do get this kind of story they should shout about it from the roof-tops too. Get it discussed on radio, TV and blogs but more importantly put it as the cover story.
In the latest issue the magazine claims to have an exclusive from Frank Connolly on corruption allegations relating to a large Dublin development. This is mentioned on the cover but it’s part of a list down in the bottom right-hand corner. The reader’s main focus is drawn to a picture of rats and a vague headline about dealing with the people that killed the Celtic Tiger. It may be an attempted link in to the corruption story and others but it doesn’t work - it’s too nondescript and seemingly irrelevant.
As well as this the image used isn’t nearly strong or specific enough to let people know what it’s about. The main headline and picture combined could lead people to think this is some kind of vermin eradication trade magazine. I say that half in jest but in reality it certainly doesn’t imply it’s a news or current affairs publication.
4) Tell us something we don’t know.
Connected somewhat to the previous point, Village needs to stop chasing the news agenda and filling its pages with cheap and repetitive opinion.
Newspapers are there to tell us what happened yesterday and will happen today or tomorrow; they’re also full of opinion and debates on what that means for the wider world. There is a place for a news re-cap and opinion in a monthly magazine but it should be in the minority. Two pages at the start with multiple 150-word pieces on the main news events of the month and a handful of columns at the end, that’s enough. The rest should be fresh, new and original. I’m not saying it has to be hard-hitting and earth-shattering at every turn, it just needs to be unique.
Features taking a new angle on an old story, oranalysing the repercussions of events would be far more interesting than someone’s tired opinion on the same.
5) Let people know it’s changed.
Village had a core readership when it went to the wall and that should be brought to the new version if possible. It also had a swathe of people who refused to read it for various reasons and more who don’t know it’s back.
These people need to be reached in some way and it needs to be made clear that things have changed and how. Not just in the editorial of the magazine because you’re preaching to the choir somewhat; it must be told to as many people as possible outside of that small base.
That doesn’t require a huge advertising campaign, a decent website and word of mouth will do most of the work for you and a new look that makes it stand out will do the rest. The problem now is that Village 2.0 is being read by the same small (or even smaller) audience as Village 1.0 and as it looks and feels like the old version it’s assumed to be the same.
Get the content, get the solid and consistent look and get the word out there. It won’t guarantee survival but repeating the mistakes of a failed project from the past will only guarantee failure.
I appreciate that some of these things don’t come cheap either, particularly getting new and unique content on a monthly basis. However while daily newspapers can get away with slashing budgets and maintaining readers - because they’re just regurgitating information that’s out there - monthly magazines cannot. There is no reason to buy a magazine over a newspaper if they both offer the same thing and people will not buy Village if it has nothing new to bring to the table.
Blogs elsewhere
February 10th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
[…] can help us get our message out. Like many of you, we have been testing the waters externally Five things the new Village Magazine needs to do now - adammaguire.com 02/10/2009 Five things the new Village Magazine needs to do now February 10th, […]
February 10th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
There’s a distinct lack of advertising. That looks like it is way above all the issues above.
And what about the time and money which would be needed for the kind of website you propose? It sounds a bit unrealistic for a new magizine.
February 10th, 2009 at 6:08 pm
No more time than it took to revive the publication and no more money than it was willing to offer for one story on Libertas.
A lack of advertising is of course an issue - it can only be resolved if the magazine has the readership to attract it. In my opinion that can only happen if it improves what’s on offer to the reader.
February 11th, 2009 at 10:03 am
worth spending this much time on?
state and village should merge, and become erm hotpress?
February 11th, 2009 at 10:09 am
I think it is worth spending time on, from a financial and journalistic point of view.
There’s room in the market for a good political monthly it’s just that no-one seems to want to exploit that. If Village makes itself reputable, readable and reliable it could do the job.
Of course it would have the opportunity of an even wider audience if it did all of these things while taking a more neutral political stance. It’s not a major problem that it chooses not to, of course, and there’s nothing stopping a left (or right) wing publication being a must-read even for those who disagree with it. It might just mean they have to work a little harder to convince people of its worth.
Magill probably hasn’t had any news in it for a long time - I still can’t get over the fact that a recent issue of that particular magazine had a book review as its cover story.
February 11th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Advertising compromises journalism. If it can survive on less then it’s for the better.
February 11th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
“No more time than it took to revive the publication and no more money than it was willing to offer for one story on Libertas”
That’s the problem, I would say it took a lot of time and effort to revive Village, and it was willing to spend a lot of money on if they got the goods, and that was a big if.
You say the site should be a “destination and not just a marker in the sand”, I disagree. Village is supposed to be a periodical. Unless it has plenty of resources — which it looks like it does not — it has no business developing a “destination” website.
They should be emulating a subscriber magazine website, something like thephoenix.ie. And that’s not even needed until they start publishing regularly for a few months and they still see a future. Anything more is a distraction from their main business and journalism of the magizine.
“Advertising compromises journalism. If it can survive on less then it’s for the better.”
That’s very simplistic. Besides the BBC and a few others, advertising in fact funds most journalism in part or full.
If a publication is supported by fewer advertisers it is more relent single advertisers which is possibly more likely to compromise the publication. Unless Village is not going to pay its writers etc it needs advertising to supplement their cover price.
February 11th, 2009 at 8:18 pm
Oh, and in terms of my comments on going in the thephoenix.ie direction, I would adjust that to include a more up to date looking site with promotion channels.
February 11th, 2009 at 11:09 pm
That’s the problem, I would say it took a lot of time and effort to revive Village, and it was willing to spend a lot of money on if they got the goods, and that was a big if.
But it wasn’t willing to spend a relatively small amount of money on a number of integral aspects of the magazine itself? That doesn’t make sense to me. A strong story is great but betting the farm on it and nothing else is a waste of time even if it comes good in the end.
You say the site should be a “destination and not just a marker in the sand”, I disagree. Village is supposed to be a periodical. Unless it has plenty of resources — which it looks like it does not — it has no business developing a “destination” website.
They should be emulating a subscriber magazine website, something like thephoenix.ie. And that’s not even needed until they start publishing regularly for a few months and they still see a future. Anything more is a distraction from their main business and journalism of the magizine.
Firstly the example of Phoenix is irrelevant to Village; Phoenix has built up a loyal readership and a business model that works for it. It can survive without having to attract a new audience for some time and still be quite viable.
Village doesn’t have that luxury - it needs to draw new readers in and it needs to prove itself before people will take a chance on it.
Secondly there’s no valid reason not to have a proper website in this day and age even if it’s not fully fledged from day one. I would include established publications like Phoenix in that and long term I think they’ll need to get their act together.
Having a site purely to create and accommodate subscriptions makes no sense - I’d be surprised if anyone visits thephoenix.ie and decides to subscribe as a result; they only do so after reading the magazine itself. At best it would allow users access to an archive (assuming they present it in something other than PDF) but people won’t subscribe purely for that feature.
On the other hand if Village create a destination website with fresh content on a regular basis they will get people visiting it. There’s then the potential to convert these visitors into readers and subscribers. This content could be a mix of aggregated news feeds, opinion and minor news stories that don’t/won’t/can’t make it to print. The kind of stuff that would be stale by the time the magazine went to print anyway.
Having an about page and a phone number will ensure you get one visit and no return.
February 12th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
“I would include established publications like Phoenix in that and long term I think they’ll need to get their act together”
Maybe some day in the future they’ll need a different kind of website, but not now. The Phoenix’s business relies on subs, the cover price, and the printed advertising.
I would take issue with the use of need to “act together” too. Unless you have information to say otherwise, their business model works. And unlike other publications, the Phoenix’s doesn’t have large amount of their copies been marked as ‘bulk’ in the ABC reports.
A cost-benefit analyses isn’t even needed on them developing a “proper” website now. It is fairly clear releasing their content on the web would do damage to their business model (which is still working), and that is before you take into account of the costs of maintaining and updating such a site.
“On the other hand if Village create a destination website with fresh content on a regular basis they will get people visiting it. There’s then the potential to convert these visitors into readers and subscribers. This content could be a mix of aggregated news feeds, opinion and minor news stories that don’t/won’t/can’t make it to print. The kind of stuff that would be stale by the time the magazine went to print anyway.”
What business do they have in the more regular news cycle? How much would this cost? Wouldn’t it be a distraction from writing and producing a magizine? As I already pointed to isn’t it way, way to early to be talking about this kind of site when the magizine is hardly on its feet?
And you say there is the “potential to convert these visitors into readers and subscribers” but what’s the actual potential these people will pay for a sub or the cover price? Will it cover the cost of the content and updating of the site?
February 12th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Maybe some day in the future they’ll need a different kind of website, but not now. The Phoenix’s business relies on subs, the cover price, and the printed advertising.
I would take issue with the use of need to “act together” too. Unless you have information to say otherwise, their business model works. And unlike other publications, the Phoenix’s doesn’t have large amount of their copies been marked as ‘bulk’ in the ABC reports.
A cost-benefit analyses isn’t even needed on them developing a “proper” website now. It is fairly clear releasing their content on the web would do damage to their business model (which is still working), and that is before you take into account of the costs of maintaining and updating such a site.
Did you actually read what I said? We’re pretty much in agreement here - Phoenix doesn’t need a good website because it’s current business model works. I think that will change in years to come as its audience becomes increasingly made up of people used to doing things online, you say that may well be the case.
I’m not disputing that Phoenix is a successful business - I’m just saying their business model won’t work for new entrants because it is based on having a loyal readership.
What business do they have in the more regular news cycle?
If they wish to be relevant in a world where news cycles move at a faster pace than ever they need to be on their readership’s radar for more than once a month.
How much would this cost?
With aggregated content and one or two of the magazine’s writers contributing a handful of pieces not very much, I’d imagine.
Wouldn’t it be a distraction from writing and producing a magizine?
Has Harry McGee’s, John Collins’ or Simon Carswell’s print output suffered as a result of their contributions to the blogs on IrishTimes.com?
With the right time and people management it wouldn’t have any impact on the magazine’s production. There’s a lot of time within a month-long turn around where there’s little to do and aggregated content can take up a lot of space too.
As I already pointed to isn’t it way, way to early to be talking about this kind of site when the magizine is hardly on its feet?
It’s way too early for the magazine to try and attract readership by improving its physical and online presence?
As I’ve already said, I wouldn’t expect a fully-fledged news outlet from Day 1; I would expect more than a basic Wordpress blog template.
And you say there is the “potential to convert these visitors into readers and subscribers” but what’s the actual potential these people will pay for a sub or the cover price?
More chance than if they have nothing to prove your magazine is worth reading.
Will it cover the cost of the content and updating of the site?
That depends on how much they invest in the site. It doesn’t have to be much but it can be if they want.
February 14th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Daily newspapers and mags which are outside the daily news cycle are not directly comparable.
McGee, Collins and Carswell are all staff journalists, it’s a different story getting freelancers or other non-full-time contributes to write extra content. And most good aggregated content is not free.
On the editing side, there’s still large production teams on papers.
“It’s way too early for the magazine to try and attract readership by improving its physical and online presence? ”
Indeed, I should have said I agreed you on this.
What they currently have is very poor — the about page is the default text, no contact page, no how to subscribe page etc. They need to fix that.
February 15th, 2009 at 11:27 pm
I still think they don’t quite know what niche they fill. Until Village know exactly what they bring to the Irish media sector, that I can’t get elsewhere, I’m unlikly to buy a copy. Tell me why I can’t live without it, and I’m half sold.
February 15th, 2009 at 11:40 pm
Daily newspapers and mags which are outside the daily news cycle are not directly comparable.
Not entirely - both are victims to the constant news cycle rolling news and the internet has brought; granted some more than others.
McGee, Collins and Carswell are all staff journalists, it’s a different story getting freelancers or other non-full-time contributes to write extra content.
Why would it have to be freelancers alone? I’m sure Michael Smith himself has plenty to say an even one more voice providing content would be plenty.
I also don’t see why you could not get freelancers or contributors involved.
And most good aggregated content is not free.
I don’t recall saying it would be.
On the editing side, there’s still large production teams on papers.
There’s far more content and less time to turn a newspaper around too.