How Much!?!?!?

[Chris Plumb]

Just out of curiosity TT - have you ever bought Waterlog ?

 

Nah - the Crossword is too difficult!

 

 

C.

[mark barrett]

I’m not convinced that the drive to make profit necessarily rules out publications from including quality writing.

 

The world of publishing is predominantly profit driven and yet has throughout its history provided us with a bounty of thought provoking works.

 

Modern magazine publishing is about selling copies as well as advertising but need it abandon quality writing?

 

Do magazine publishers hold focus groups in which they are told by punters to dumb it down? Probably not.

 

But like TV executives do the chattering middle classes that run publishing decide that dumbing down will bring in the readers.

 

I’m a great fan of keeping writing simple but enjoy wit and the ability to escape from cliché.

 

Where websites score so highly over magazines is the ability for users to really engage with the whole experience and (apart from you lurkers!) contribute to a debate that evolves rather than the somewhat lame letters page of a magazine.

 

Though websites are not immune to the drive for profits and I can spy an ad for a well known insurance company as I type… not that I think his should be viewed pejoratively. Websites need to generate income and without that, all you users here wouldn’t have your place to come and play!

 

But back to the magazine sector. I enjoy handling a physical product. In the same way I like handling a CD and its packaging rather than the download.

And with writing, the printed word on the page is just so much easier to read than that presented on a computer screen.

 

But it's very much dumbed down. Perhaps there is a market for a quality weekly magazine though.

 

John Aston in a Dream of Jewelled Fishes (Apologies for occasionally obsessing about this book on this site but it really is very good) blames it on the desk top revolution, digital photography and the ease of running huge swathes of colour photography rather than focusing on text.

Perhaps he’s right. I only took up angling recently. Did the Angling Mail and Times offer better writing back in the sixties and seventies?

 

And back to dumbing down and TV Executives. Was it only 1992 that the BBC brought us a Passion for Angling bringing together both a traditional and modern angler looking for the essence of the magic of angling.

2009 gives us Robson Green – need I say more.

 

My own view is that angling magazines employ people who really can fish but can’t actually capture its magic in words.

 

I’ve used the term magic quite a bit in this article and that feels strange for me, a die hard materialist devoted to science, but there is something soulless about the ‘how to’ articles when perhaps the writers might just want to focus on why we fish.

 

 

I dont think that's particularly true or fair.

 

Tiddler Tamer, have you actually ever written anything for the angling media?

 

I only ask because if you had, you would realise that every magazine is different, but they all have an 'in house style' to a greater or lesser extent, and most writers write to that style. I don't believe that the Angling Times or Mail have ever really gone into the flowing literary style of writing, it's not really their genre. Even Dick Walker, who is thought by many to be amongst our finest angling writers, wasnt really of the type of writer that you request. Dick was known more for his straightforward 'easy reading' style that explained what he wanted to say in a succinct style that anglers could relate to.

 

Whatever the general consensus of opinion on here, the weeklies have pretty much mantained their circulations and the Mail last year even managed a 7% increase in a recession, so they have to be appealing to someone.

[Dick Dastardly]

Did the Angling Mail and Times offer better writing back in the sixties and seventies?

 

 

I would have to say yes.

 

I know it can be argued that now days Im not so keen as I was as a youth,I certainly know a lot more and possibly the gap (knowledge and capture wise) between my self and the angling journalists has been shortened or even removed. But Im sure the quality was better.

 

I used to have both weekly mags every week without fail.I also kept them never throwing them out! They built up a terrific reference work. Any trip to a new venue or in search of a new species would see me reading up on it in my collection of Mail and Times.Helped a lot.There also used to be entertaining articles like the "Incomplete Angler" and others of a light nature.Actual angling "news" was also reported!

 

Yes there were adverts but they were adverts not disguised as instructional pieces etc! Product placement wasnt there.Any reference to an item in an article was purely to pass on knowledge.

 

I dont mind adverts they (should) help keep the cost of the publication down as well as being informative and again a source of reference when buying/selecting new tackle. But lets keep them as adverts/tackle reviews please.Basicly because I feel a lot of these articles these days arn't articles with product placement but purely wrote as a vehicle for product placement! surely detracts from the potential quality of any piece?

 

As its often said some angling writers fish and some anglers write.I dont really care! Just employ people who can do both to a competent level.

 

Also in those days angling made the "stars" of our sport these days it seems the weeklies do! I can think of several examples. My problem with this is that often these media stars dont have the knowledge they are put up to have and so a lot of bad information is passed down to people who know no better. I have no problem reading about a guys first trip (lets say) for Zander (can be good entertainment) but I cant stand reading the same story when the guy is speaking with "authority" after the one trip! Also reading his veiws based on the limited experience given as the bottom line which others will follow. Some seem to have made (albeit limited!) careers out of this sort of thing! I wont cause problems by naming them!

 

Or have I just simply out grown the weeklies? after all even Kebabs get boring if you eat them for long enough......

[Vagabond]

I would have to say yes.( in answer to "Did the Angling Mail and Times offer better writing back in the sixties and seventies?")

 

 

I would agree with you Budgie. There is no present-day writer of sufficient stature to produce interesting material week after week in the way Dick Walker did.

 

Having said that, it is nobody's "fault" - Dick was a once-in-a-millenium phenomenon. We shall not see his like again. One problem is that many writers are too specialised, and perhaps reluctant to compromise their image as (say) a pole "expert" by attempting something different. We need half a dozen good "all-rounder" writers to enthuse the rank and file of readers to do likewise. Don't ask me where they are coming from though.

 

Certainly Anglers' Mail seems as conscious as anyone for the need for a bit of variety. The speed with which they followed up Elton's hint of the chap who had caught 405 species indicates just how eager they think their readers are for "something different"

 

As Mark said, an increase of 7% circulation in a recession suggests AM are doing something right.

 

However, like others, I do deplore brand-plugging disguised as "how to do it" features. I remember Dick Walker doing an article on angling photography. "I use a Pentax" he wrote, "but there are several other TTL cameras just as good, such as Minolta, Nikon and Canon" An example worth following.

[Anderoo]

The world of publishing is predominantly profit driven and yet has throughout its history provided us with a bounty of thought provoking works.

 

It is entirely profit driven, even sectors which purport not to be (I am a 'chattering middle class' publishing oik) - for every excellent publication there are a thousand more which will never get past the proposal stage because the margin isn't high enough.

 

AM and AT have to their credit found a formula that works for them, you can't argue against that. It's a business like any other; they don't owe us anything. What I find depressing is that there's a large enough market for them as they currently are. Like I said before, I'm obviously not their key demographic. There's nothing of interest for me in either of them.

 

I agree with Budgie, adverts are fine. Product placement and sponsered anglers done up like an F1 car are not.

 

I actually wouldn't mind paying £1.70 a week on a magazine that was well written and thought provoking. I do feel sorry for new anglers coming into this wonderful pastime though - do they know there's a whole world out there past the carp 'n' pole commercial's otter fence? A world with gurgling and sparkling streams, red-tipped avons, chest-high nettles and dense brambles, wild fish and wild nature?

 

Which, surely, is the whole point? If it was just about catching as many fish as possible, wouldn't we just drag a net across the lake and then go home happy?

[Dick Dastardly]

Whatever the general consensus of opinion on here, the weeklies have pretty much mantained their circulations and the Mail last year even managed a 7% increase in a recession, so they have to be appealing to someone.

 

 

I thought I remembered that from some where Mark when I read one of the earlier posts that mentioned "dropping" sales.

 

My worry though is that it isnt the readers preferences that influence the papers but the papers who influence the readers.

[Dick Dastardly]

I would agree with you Budgie. There is no present-day writer of sufficient stature to produce interesting material week after week in the way Dick Walker did.

 

I cant disagree with anything you say re Dick Walker Dave but it wasnt ALL about him.Both weeklies had a great "depth" of talent writing for them on a variety of areas.There are plenty of writer/anglers of this calibre about today but It seems to me that the weeklies dont employ them!

 

Or is that it? Is the problem that in the Golden days the press took in articles from independant writers (even if on a regular basis) and now a days they actually "employ" writers full time? Come to think of it 90% of the "poor" angler/writers I can think of are staff members.

 

Or is it that todays good angler/writers are only interested in writing books or in the monthlies? and if so why?

[Vagabond]

I cant disagree with anything you say re Dick Walker Dave but it wasnt ALL about him.Both weeklies had a great "depth" of talent writing for them on a variety of areas

 

Very true, and I didn't mean to imply otherwise.

 

Hugh Stoker (sea)

T.K.Wilson (trout)

Tag Barnes

Frank (Boris) Barlow (match)

Fred J Taylor

Owen Wentworth

are just a mere half dozen, off the top of my head, all of whom outshine modern angling writers.

Edited May 8, 2009 by Vagabond

[tiddlertamer]

Just out of curiosity TT - have you ever bought Waterlog ?

 

Apologies for delay in replying – modem problems (It broke!)

 

Have I ever bought Waterlog?

 

I’ve not read a copy yet but I’ve been shamed by your post into ordering the latest copy from its website.

 

 

It is entirely profit driven, even sectors which purport not to be (I am a 'chattering middle class' publishing oik) - for every excellent publication there are a thousand more which will never get past the proposal stage because the margin isn't high enough.

 

AM and AT have to their credit found a formula that works for them, you can't argue against that. It's a business like any other; they don't owe us anything. What I find depressing is that there's a large enough market for them as they currently are. Like I said before, I'm obviously not their key demographic. There's nothing of interest for me in either of them.

 

I agree with Budgie, adverts are fine. Product placement and sponsered anglers done up like an F1 car are not.

 

I actually wouldn't mind paying £1.70 a week on a magazine that was well written and thought provoking. I do feel sorry for new anglers coming into this wonderful pastime though - do they know there's a whole world out there past the carp 'n' pole commercial's otter fence? A world with gurgling and sparkling streams, red-tipped avons, chest-high nettles and dense brambles, wild fish and wild nature?

 

Which, surely, is the whole point? If it was just about catching as many fish as possible, wouldn't we just drag a net across the lake and then go home happy?

 

A world with gurgling and sparkling streams, red-tipped avons, chest-high nettles and dense brambles, wild fish and wild nature?

 

That’s a world I want to be part of too Anderoo.

 

I didn’t mean the reference to the ‘chattering classes’ when referring to those in charge of commissioning TV programmes, to be derogatory. I’m no doubt a fully paid up member myself with my media based job, and urban base in north London.

I think what I was bemoaning was that commissioning editors often go for the lowest common denominator in search of high viewing figures.

And yet this seems to defy logic when quality programmes have historically attracted high viewing figures too.

These commissioning editors – our arbiters of conventional wisdom and taste - serve up crap.

We live in a world where Catching the Impossible can’t get bought up by a TV channel and yet a commissioning editor has just offered Robson Greene a new contract.

 

I dont think that's particularly true or fair.

 

Tiddler Tamer, have you actually ever written anything for the angling media?

 

I only ask because if you had, you would realise that every magazine is different, but they all have an 'in house style' to a greater or lesser extent, and most writers write to that style. I don't believe that the Angling Times or Mail have ever really gone into the flowing literary style of writing, it's not really their genre. Even Dick Walker, who is thought by many to be amongst our finest angling writers, wasnt really of the type of writer that you request. Dick was known more for his straightforward 'easy reading' style that explained what he wanted to say in a succinct style that anglers could relate to.

 

Whatever the general consensus of opinion on here, the weeklies have pretty much mantained their circulations and the Mail last year even managed a 7% increase in a recession, so they have to be appealing to someone.

 

Mark – First of all you are to be congratulated for coming online and defending the publication you work for.

 

I’m sure your predator column has fans up and down the country and you bring great expertise in pike, zander and perch fishing to the Angler's Mail.

 

I do not write for the angling media but writing is an essential part of my job.

 

Most news based writing in the Mail and Times is pretty much straightforward inverted pyramid and I wouldn’t expect anything else.

 

It’s the features that are hit and miss.

 

And the editor is I guess ultimately responsible for choosing which areas of fishing are covered in respect to both news stories and features.

 

I guess appealing to match, specimen and leisure anglers is a broad spectrum so it’s always going to be tough to keep everybody happy all the time.

 

I do buy both publications every week though so feel entitled to comment on them.

 

And there is so little that appeals.

 

According to other contributors here, that wasn’t the case back in the sixties and seventies.

 

So perhaps its time for the Angling Times and Angler's Mail to have a rethink about what they offer up.

 

It just might be that they could offer up something with real charm and magic to match this beautiful pastime of ours.

Edited May 9, 2009 by tiddlertamer

[Guest tigger]

A world with gurgling and sparkling streams, red-tipped avons, chest-high nettles and dense brambles, wild fish and wild nature?

 

 

Thing is Anderoo your one of a very small percent of anglers who appreciate those things. I have to say I'm one also and I do know a few others....not many mind ! Your viewing things through the old rose tinted specks which is nice but most modern anglers just want a quick fix, catch some large fish and then away to the boozer. I don't think there are enough anglers with our view on angling to warrant a weekly magazine. Maybe we should start one up....dreamin again