Small newspapers not getting it on magazine inserts

 As Louis DeJoy kills the joy in newspaper Mudville with the ever-continuing rate hikes (mixed with the ever-continuing kowtowing to Amazon), newspapers that deliver by mail (which includes some small five-day dailies these days as well as non-dailies) need to be rethinking their bromance with magazine inserts.

NOT tabs on newsprint.

Magazines on the gloss.

First, with newsprint cost issues, magazine stock, even cheaper, is on the rise.

Second, and to the point of this post, magazine stock, even the flimsier stuff, definitely weighs more than newsprint.

Those of us editors with some advertising experience, or GMs or small-town publishers, already know there's an issue as to whether or not magazine ads primarily poach from newspaper ads, anyway.

But, those quarterly neighborhood magazines often more than double the cost of the newspaper into which they're inserted.

And, are the ads paying for that?

Take my beloved nearest CNHI paper.

Its "holidays" quarterly issue of a month ago was 32 pages and just over 25 percent adhole.  Not sure how much net profit that returned.

And, the editorial side, the printing turnaround time was slow enough that a "coming" event mentioned in a feature interview had already happened.

InMaricopa recruited me — and then ...

For the first time, I think, I was recruited for a job, and no, not by one of those recruiters.

It was by the former top editor, now transitioning out to a job at Politico, at a combination online “newspaper” and monthly print magazine, InMaricopa, in Pinal County, Arizona.

That said, for people with some of my bent in reading, or knowledge of the Southwest, you’ll understand the partial quote and the idea, when I say that a picture of Maricopa, Arizona, should be in a phrase dictionary next to Cactus Ed Abbey’s “Growth for growth’s sake …” (Update: The new water cuts that BuRec has talked about ARE COMING. And, a day after BuRec announced them, InMaricopa has zip on its website.)

So, I was ambivalent from the start. But, agreed to talk further. After a phone call with transitioning editor, he had me talk briefly on the phone with the publisher / co-owner, who then set up a Zoom.

Meanwhile, he emailed me an application. (More on that in a sec.)

Before the Zoom with him and the ad manager, I emailed back about “salary range.” Him: “We don’t really have a range.”

Well, before the Zoom, I googled “Apartments for rent in Maricopa.” Got Apartments.com, I think as first hit. NO Apartments. Just houses. That means, even compared to North Texas, utilities will be MUCH HIGHER for electricity (not even counting water problems as noted by BuRec). I also hit one of those cost of living comparison websites. Between this? I was asking $20K more than currently, and had no problem saying that on Zoom AND saying that was on the low side.

Two days after that, I looked at the application and finished it TO MY SATISFACTION, but forgot, or passively-aggressively, didn’t send it.

I’ve not filled out a standard “application,” at least not before actually being hired, in more than a decade. So, another turnoff right there. Yes, this was just like applying at Walgreens or something.

Seriously. Way to turn off potential applicants.

Second, I don’t put dates of college attendance on my resume, for obvious reasons, so they weren’t getting them either. Ditto on salaries. I just scratched through them.

Well, Monday, when I was in county commissioners court, publisher calls. When I get to office, I first finally email him, with note if you can’t read anything, ask, but NO note explaining my scratch-outs.

Then, off  my voicemail, call him back.

He picks up, has a kind of garbled response rather than a “hello” then either drops his connection or else cuts me off.

Didn’t call back since.

There were other hesitations about this job too.

First? No paywall on the website.

Second? Boasting about Facebook "likes." Facebook don't feed the bulldog.

Third? I don't have a problem with it in an occasional newspaper special section, but when you openly admit a fair chunk of stories in your mag are the old "buy an ad, get a story," yes, we do have some concerns. As for the mag itself? It's more than 40 percent ads on one sample issue, but 25 percent of that was biz director ads that I've not seen before in monthly community mags. It's either smart aggressive advertising, or deep discounts on TFN ads. My guess? The latter. Also, it's delivered by mail, but I don't know if that's free or paid subscription. Can't tell from the editorial masthead.

Said masthead DOES mention the word "prosperity," which the publisher emphasized as part of its mission when he asked if I'd visited the website. I'd guess that prosperity doesn't trickle down a lot.

Fourth, the Pinal County newspaper, headquartered in Casa Grande, may (or may not) suck, though it does have a dedicated Maricopa reporter, and apparently a separate edition or paper for Maricopa, but running it down in public?

As for the mag itself? OK, no more than that.

Magazines are NOT the answer, newspaper owners / publishers

For community sized dailies, and even more nondailies, magazines aren't the answer to continued struggles. They're certainly not "THE answer."

Any county of less than, say, 50,000, from my experience, they should not be considered the answer. They may be a part of a partial answer. Don't expect more.

First, while you may get a few advertisers who say they wouldn't advertise in a regular newspaper, or even newspaper special sections, it won't be that many. Half of your magazine ads will be cannibalizing. Related to that, if a biz advertises in both that magazine and your newspaper, but has separate accounts on its books, it will suddenly hit advertising annual budget redlines quicker than normal, and leave you dry for the rest of the year.

Second, all of this was true even before the Trump paper tariffs.

Magazine slick, or even lower grade semi-slick, is getting even pricier than regular broadsheet. And, speaking of separate accounts, if you the newspaper publisher or owner aren't running separate accounts for the magazine yourself, how do you know you're not even losing money there?

Case in point from latest issue of a magazine within the eastern front.

A 15 percent adhole? And, since all pages are in color, there's no special charge for color ads?

The one after that was better, at more than 20 percent. But the one after THAT was 12 percent or so.

December 2018 issue? Worse. Flat 10 percent.

I'll be dollars to donuts, even with all content from salaried staff or John and Jane Q. Public, there's a 50 percent chance that first one lost money, and certainly the third one.

Let's also not forget that many of these magazines are given away free, even if they have a cover price that's basically purely nominal.

(Oh, and not all papers in the same chain do them monthly; papers twice the size only do bimonthly ones.)