Here's my two cents. Part of the problem
is that magazines like R&T don't know who
their audience is anymore, if they have
one at all (maybe ALL their revenue comes
from advertising now).
There was a time, before this age of
communication, when us old grey beevors
were young and RELIED on R&T as a source
of INFORMATION. We'd await each issue
impatiently to read about what went on at
the F1 race from 2-3 months earlier. A road
test was read line by line because there was
no internet to supply all the stats. The
Salon section was great because you couldn't
download a picture of a 1931 Bugatti with
your computer.
As one of the cognoscenti back then, I read
Competition Press Weekly (now Autoweek) because
I couldn't wait 2 months to get race results.
Now I wouldn't waste my money on that mag,
which has also gone done the tubes since I can
get F1 results and in-depth analysis from the
net moments after I've enjoyed watching the race
on cable. (And there was no racing, of any sort,
on TV or in the papers in the 60's).
So my original point is... who IS the audience
for these magazines? Mainly the proofreaders at
the ad agencies I suspect.
Joe DeLuca
Ledgewood, NJ
'57 yellow 4/4
Morgan 3/4 Group, USA
-----Original Message-----
From: Stuart J. Ross [mailto:stuross@nac.net]
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 8:25 AM
To: Vandergraaf, Chuck; morgans@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: RIP R&T (or what happened to Road&Track?)
What do you expect? You don't bite the hand that feeds you.
Ever notice that
when an expensive car, say a Porsche, is introduced, a mag like
R&T or Car &
Driver does a "road test" on the car, but there may be 7 pages of slick
advertising related to that same car in the issue? How can they
possibly pan
a car when the company is supporting the advertising budget
with mega-bucks?
It is the "little guy" (like Morgan) that offer these publications the
chance to write negative comments. Then they can say, WE find faults in
cars." and seem like they are telling the readers the truth,
when in fact,
they are the pawns of the money giants. I am not a big fan of Consumer
Reports because they hate any car that has style and
performance. They would
love to see all of us drive old Nash Ramblers, I think, but they can at
least tell us the real story on defects and flaws. I read a
very interesting
article by Gloria Steinam called "Sex,Lies and Advertising"
that discussed
her similar problems when she ran MS magazine in regards to the
relationship
of ad space for cosmetics etc and the content of articles in
the same issue.
There was too much "hanky-panky" between the advertisers, their
money, and
their influence on the editorial content of the magazine. Same
is true (more
so probably) in the car-mag area.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vandergraaf, Chuck" <vandergraaft@aecl.ca>
To: <morgans@autox.team.net>; "'mga'" <mga@napanet.net>
Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2000 10:06 PM
Subject: RE: RIP R&T (or what happened to Road&Track?)
> Don,
>
> Funny you should mention this. Just yesterday, I was "sort
of" cleaning
up
> my "den," (a.k.a. my room in the basement) and came across a
pile of R&Ts
of
> the early 1990 ... and a copy of the December 1958 issue featuring the
Alfa
> Romeo BAT-9. When I compared that issue with the 1990 vintage, I
remembered
> why I stopped subscribing to R&T about five years ago. When
the spirit
> moves me, I wander over to the local public library and leaf
through the
> latest issue. I wonder why I'm keeping the 1990 vintage copies.
>
> Between subscriptions, I would buy an R&T issue that had an
article about
> Morgans, but I haven't done that for a while either, lately.
>
> In addition to the negative things you mention, R&T won't say anything
> negative about the cars they feature, until the next model comes out.
Only
> then will they point out the shortcomings of the model it
replaced. Mind
> you, I probably can't afford 95+% of the cars they do test,
so some of the
> criticism is academic.
>
> Chuck Vandergraaf
> Pinawa, MB
> '52 +4
>
> I'm with you as far as old growth forests, cars with personality, good
music
> and family-owned businesses go but I'll be honest enough to admit to
> shopping at Home Depot and enjoying the security of modern cars.
> > ----------
> > From: mga[SMTP:mga@napanet.net]
> > Reply To: mga
> > Sent: Sunday September 17, 2000 10:58 AM
> > To: morgans@autox.team.net
> > Subject: RIP R&T (or what happened to Road&Track?)
> >
> > Fellow MG enthusiasts,
> >
> > I've subscribed to R&T since the '60's, and have a
collection that goes
> > back
> > to the late '40's. The devolution of this magazine is very sad. At
first
> > it was just an amateur enthusiast newsletter; then it grew into a
> > wonderful,
> > informative and creative magazine. Now, it is basically a sales
catalogue
> > for new cars with a few boring articles inserted between
the ads. When
it
> > arrives in the mail now, I find that I can read what I want in it in
about
> > 5
> > minutes. If I take a few old issues from my collection to
read again, I
> > could spend hours with them!
> >
> > I know it was bought and sold several times. Did it get
burdened with a
> > debt service that requires that the thing be full of ads?
Is there a
> > conspiracy to destroy everything that I like or love (family-owned
> > businesses, old-growth forests, cars with personality,
politicians with
a
> > heart, beautiful music, etc.)? Or am I just getting old?
> >
> > Anyone have any comments on this?
> >
> > Don Scott
> >
>
|