For the magazine business, next year will be a year to watch — and not just because it could hold answers to lingering questions about the financial health of the industry.
Next year will be the first in a decade and a half that the four largest US magazine companies will all have new leaders, making it possible to judge whether the recent troubles in publishing can be addressed by changes in the executive suite. Or, if not, whether the problems run deeper than they now appear.
Over the summer, the magazine world’s own Velvet Revolution played out — a quick change of hands with relatively little discord: Ann Moore was out at Time Inc after eight years as chief executive, replaced by Jack Griffin, who was poached from his job leading Meredith’s magazine division. Meredith, the publishing giant responsible for Better Homes and Gardens and Family Circle, promoted one of Griffin’s deputies, Tom Harty.
At Conde Nast, Charles Townsend, who had held the dual role of chief executive and president since 2004, agreed to hand over the job of president to a protege, Robert Sauerberg. And David Carey, a longtime Conde Nast executive, departed to lead Hearst Magazines, displacing Cathleen Black, a publishing industry fixture for three decades and now the embattled choice of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg to be the city’s schools chancellor.
Not since the mid-1990s have those jobs turned over in quick succession, and that time, the changes happened over two years. Strikingly, the economic picture then was similar to what is occurring today. The business had just begun to spring back from the devastating effects of a recession that drove away advertisers and forced publishers to close magazines.
The new cadre of executives at the time — Steven Florio at Conde Nast, Christopher Little at Meredith, Don Logan at Time Inc and Black at Hearst — would steer their companies through periods of expansion and prosperity through the rest of the decade and beyond, an era when successful publications like O: The Oprah Magazine, Teen Vogue and Real Simple were born.
Whether the rebound from the economic collapse of 2008 and last year will prove as robust is an unsettled — and, to many, an unsettling — question. However, there is little doubt that the next generation of magazine company executives is confronting a media landscape in which the margin for error is far smaller, while uncertainty about whether readers and advertisers will remain loyal is more palpable than ever.
“This is the changing of the guard from an older school to a newer school,” said Justin Smith, president of the Atlantic Media Co.
The changes, he said, were part of an inevitable evolution in publishing that was perhaps long overdue.
“It is quite remarkable that it took until 2010, 15 years after the arrival of the Internet, for a new generation of leaders to emerge,” Smith said.
Indeed, the new generation is certainly more youthful, by corporate standards at least. Harty, 47, is the youngest. Carey and Sauerberg are both 49 and Griffin is 50.
They have either followed unconventional paths to the top or come from outside the companies they now help lead. Griffin was wooed from his job leading Meredith’s national media group to come to Time Inc.
Carey left Conde Nast to head Hearst Magazines, a crosstown rival. Sauerberg rose through the ranks at Conde Nast not through the more traditional publisher’s path, but through the consumer marketing division.
Harty came to Meredith, which publishes female-oriented publications, from the Golf Digest Cos.
“You have to bring in someone who understands the magazine business, but you don’t want to bring in a virgin,” said Jack Kliger, the former chief executive of Hachette Filipacchi Media, publisher of magazines like Elle and Car and Driver (and which named a new chief executive itself in September). “I think the overwhelming message here is that these companies are looking for change agents.”
However, Conde Nast, Hearst, Meredith and Time Inc differ considerably in their approach to change — and the degree to which they feel that change is necessary. The one certainty they all seem to embrace is a once-bitten-twice-shy caution about advertising revenue.
“Through the ‘90s when magazine advertising was growing at respectable rates year over year, the industry focused disproportionately on advertising,” Griffin, a hockey player and marathon runner who is known for an economical, to-the-point speaking style, said in a recent interview. “The laser focus on the consumer took a subsidiary seat for some period of time. What I’m doing at Time Inc is making it pre-eminent again.”
At Time, the world’s largest magazine publisher, Griffin said he wanted to reintroduce the concept of “charging a fair price and charging consumers who are interested in the product.”
In other words, consumers can expect to pay more.
“We spent a tremendous amount of money creating original content, original journalism, fact-checking, sending reporters overseas to cover wars,” he said. “You name it. What we’ve got to do as a business is get fair value for that.”
Supplementing that approach, Griffin said, will be new partnerships within Time Warner, Time Inc’s parent company, that allow magazines to take advantage of the vast film and visual resources at their disposal. One such partnership in the planning stages, he said, is a deal between a major cosmetics company and InStyle to broadcast from the red carpets of big Hollywood events like the Academy Awards and the Screen Actors Guild Awards.
These kinds of partnerships are central to Griffin’s vision, but some are not without impact on Time Inc’s staff. The company recently eliminated a small number of positions in its business operations after consolidating resources with Time Warner.
Conde Nast, long the king of the US$1-an-issue subscription, has also come to embrace a fair-value philosophy under Sauerberg. In an interview, Sauerberg said he and his staff had been working on creating what he called “12-course content meals” — package deals that would include access to multiple Conde Nast magazines delivered in multiple ways, like print, tablet, mobile and Internet, as well as invitations to magazine-sponsored events.
“Think about our magazines as, let’s say, a good content meal,” said Sauerberg, a man with a laconic demeanor who speaks in a soft, gravely tone. “What would a great meal be? What would a 12-course unbelievable meal be? Would it be a magazine? What’s the mobile experience? What kind of event does this person want to come to? What personal advice do I need to hear about something that’s really important to me?”
Higher prices seem to be an inevitable part of that package.
“We have a group of people who are so committed to our brands that I could easily see them wanting to commit to a bigger monthly commitment for lots of things they get because they’re such junkies,” Sauerberg said.
At Hearst and Meredith, which were already fairly lean companies and were less affected than Time Inc and Conde Nast when the advertising market collapsed, changes have been considered with less urgency.
One notable change Carey made quietly at Hearst this fall was to dissolve the longstanding divide that kept online sales operations separate from the magazines themselves. (Conde Nast made a similar move late last month.)
“It felt largely siloed between print and digital,” said Carey, who has a gentle, pensive affect and an eye for fashionable suits. “I think we felt the need to give publishers permission and give them the sense that they could bring ever-more complex print and digital packages to their clients.”
He has now added the title “chief revenue officer” to the nameplate of every publisher.
“The way people perceive them, the way they are introduced to clients, the way they are written about in the press,” he said, should convey “a broad mandate to generate revenue.”
As for new business initiatives, Carey said Hearst was planning more joint ventures along the lines of its existing deals with Harpo, Oprah Winfrey’s production company, which publishes O with Hearst, and Food Network, which teamed up with Hearst to publish the Food Network Magazine.
“Stay tuned for more announcements on the partnership front,” he said, declining to elaborate.
Meredith, which of the four publishers is arguably the most diversified with its successful television and book publishing businesses and was the least affected by the recession, sees no need for wholesale change.
“We don’t have to do these dramatic reorganizations or take drastic measures to get people in line,” Harty said. “We don’t have to tear down silos.”
However, one thing Harty said the company was examining: expanding its licensed products. The company already pulls in more than US$1 billion a year selling products with a Better Homes and Gardens license at Walmart stores. It is now planning to sell plants and bulbs with the magazine’s imprimatur directly to consumers.
“We have relationships with all these consumers,” Harty said. “How can we figure out how to sell them goods and services? We believe that’s a key.”
Harty, burly in build and quick with a self-deprecating joke, laughed when asked about any overarching strategy and remarked: “What I’ve attempted to do is not screw up what’s been going very well.”
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations