When the next generation of touchscreen tablet computers hits the market, one of its highly anticipated uses will be as a full-color reader for books, newspapers, and magazines. Of those three, the main beneficiary may very well be old-style magazines. The black-and-white Kindle doesn’t do magazines justice, and they never really quite translated to the Web. The magic of a magazine is all in the layout—the interplay of lush prose with stunning photography or standout illustrations.
A tablet computer holds forth the promise of a high-resolution color screen that is big enough so you won’t have to squint at it. Tablets will be portable and comfortable enough to hold in your hands while you are sitting in an easy chair. And subscriptions can be delivered on an ongoing basis as quickly as an issue or an article can be published, without those pesky printing, paper, or shipping costs.
It’s not hard to understand why beleaguered magazine executives and editors can’t wait for these tablets to appear. They are already talking about creating a Hulu for magazines—kind of like a giant digital newsstand which delivers its digital editions to tablets and other devices from all of today’s major print magazines.
But what will a digital magazine look like exactly? My former editor Josh Quittner, who is now working on some prototypes for digital magazines at Time Inc. (among other things), recently offered the following perspective on re-imagining magazines for these devices:
Don’t overestimate the importance of the right device. With no imagination at all, we can envision a 10-inch iPod Touch, which would render beautifully packaged magazine-style content in a far more reader-friendly way than the Web. Even the “lean-back” experience of the Kindle, as primitive as it is, is far more conducive to long-form reading than trying to read on a desktop or laptop. I mean, it’s not coincidental that the killer app on the Web is the browser. The Web is built for browsing—not deep reading. Everything about reading on the Web is designed to shorten your attention span. Every link promises that whatever you’re currently reading isn’t nearly as interesting as the thing behind the link. Not that there’s anything wrong with that for some things. But it can’t possibly work for everything.
When I read that, I did a double-take and asked Quittner whether he was he actually suggesting removing the links from digital magazines. He responded, and even wrote another blog post, saying that is exactly what he meant:
Magazines don’t need links. They should be like wonderful applications, surprising and delightful and fluid to use. If you want to browse the Web, close the app.
What Quittner is evoking here is the iTunes model, where you download self-contained apps to your iPhone. Imagine magazines for sale on iTunes, but for a bigger device. And they are not just filled with words and pictures, but have interactive elements, perhaps video too, and operate more like an information app.
I think that’s a great idea, and would love to see magazine “apps” like that. But not including links in the text would be a mistake. And in fact, Quittner’s analogy only goes so far because many iPhone apps support links which then open a browser. That kind of hybrid design could work for digital publications as well. Digital magazines should be immersive, self-contained experiences, Quittner argues.
I agree with the immersive part, but if it’s too self-contained you end up with a CD-ROM. When was the last time you bought one of those?
But Quittner seems to want e-mags to be more like e-books, which don’t have any links at all. In his mind, every link “leaves the barn door open” and points “away from the product . . . to the wide-open Web,” where nobody wants to pay for anything.
Sorry old pal, but that horse left the barn a long time ago. I can appreciate the challenge magazine companies have of transitioning from print to digital without losing paying subscribers, but they ignore the link structure of the Web at their peril. Those links are there whether they acknowledge them or not and people will seek them out.
If the Web has taught us anything it is that information does not exist in a vacuum. An article without links is a dead story. An interesting artifact perhaps, but not something that will engage and delight the modern reader, who finds information these days by following links or passing them around. If you close the door to the Web, you’ll only be locking yourself in.
And that raises another question about these digital magazines. Will each story have an associated link, and will people need a tablet reader to open up those links and read them? While you can create a much richer experience in a dedicated app than in a browser, the gap between the two is quickly closing. The latest Javascript rendering engines, HTML5, and a whole slew of advancements are turning the browser into a rich application platform.
When Google launches its own electronic book store, the books will be delivered via the browser. No special electronic reader will be required. The same should be true for digital magazines. New browser technologies can make digital magazines more immersive than a standard HTML Website, and in fact a magazine’s Website can be programmed to unlock different features depending on the type of browser and device that is being used to view it. If it detects a touchscreen tablet, maybe the UI changes to deliver the most compelling experience.
There will always be demand for information that is packaged in an informative and entertaining way. But the most vibrant magazines (and newspapers) of tomorrow will live on the Web (not some jewel-encased app), and they most certainly will have links
CD-ROM image by Clinton Little; Tablet magazine image via Gizmodo.
As much as i maybe unpopular here, i kind of agree with Josh Quittner.
I think the magazine does not need links, if you buy a magazine, you’re buying a self-contained ‘book’ on a given subject.
As i read the above article, i also kind of agreed with him on the ‘app’ idea, but when i got further into the article, i think Clinton’s view on the fact it ‘needs’ to be done in a browser is the right way to go.
That way, regardless if your using a tablet, an iphone, a laptop or any other type of device, you can still read the magazine.
If the magazines were in an app format, it would really limit the devices you’d be able to read the magazine on.
I understand both sides, but it will be interesting to see how the magazine industry adapts to technology over the coming months and years. Its definitely an area which is going to evolve massively in the near future.
I take it you’ve never read PC World then? They have links to software in their magazines.
There is always google. Just select text in your browser, right click and search text in search engine. This is good alternative to hyperlinks.
Firefox3 got it first, but i would love other searches were also available in right click context menu, so that i can search wiki instead of google.
Lots of publishers have refused the free invitation to be on magcover.com but rather purchase a standalone license for themselves.
i agree. links should be there.
my suggestion: links + immersion = best of both worlds: have e-reader/e-magazines to *toggle* the rendering of links and/or provide links at the end of the article (ala Wikipedia).
~C
How funny. Banner adds in most instances are an abomination people avoid like plague rats but web sites use them anyway to squeeze whatever money they can get out of them.
With digital magazines there is a unique opportunity to actually profit from product links. I have read magazines and then gone to investigate some new product or service and article talked about. How great would that be to just click on it? One could argue we run the risk of corporate sponsored articles but I would argue thats a risk we already run now.
Irony is always amusing to me, so here we have an ad rev model that might actually work well and he’s against it! It seems like traditional medias like print and television (or look at the music industry!) are doing everything in their power to fail at digital media.
Very good point, but no matter what they do to try and resist the digital movement aint going to work because its going to happen, with or without their blessing.
They need to evolve as companies, just like technology, people, the world, everything evolves.
In fashion in particular, the advertising is part of the aesthetic. Banner ads are not considered responses to users needs.
Simple; have a way of showing and hiding links. Therefore, you go through, be immersed in reading the article, then when you want to dig deeper, turn the links on and be as connected as you want.
I don’t think e-magazines have to be in any particular format (although, I do like the idea of each newspaper/magazine having it’s own app) but they must be flexible, and they must be instant. News and articles must be published FIRST on e-magazines and then be spread to maintain the credibility print media has.
As long as the consumers is happy, the creator/author is happy, and the publisher is happy (I don’t know, make the app a 1 off payment, or do some subscription model) then I don’t think there will be any problems.
As for devices, Erick, you make an excellent point, the web can unlock the devices features. I don’t think you need one specific device, I think you need a wealth of devices, all of which enhances the reading of articles above and beyond that of looking at them on an LCD monitor through your choice of web browser.
Interesting article, I look forward to seeing what comes of it.
Erick, as usual, makes some great points. But wait until you see some of the things folks are working on in magazine land. Fuller counter-post here: http://thethird...ags-have-links/
The primary impetus for steering away from the browser seems to be that the content retains its value to a greater extent.
No matter how much publishers wish to wall-off their content, the fact remains that in the digital age, silos of data only hold for so long.
With respect to the NY Times, I always felt that they should provided everything past the current half day as free content. Speed is worth paying for…
However, I will say that content creators should earn money on their product, and I very much respect this. But, publishers are mostly revenue-wise about shipping content. If you remove the portions that create content, the businesses are vastly different in scale.
In my particular content area, the publishers are consolidating and being reduced in size. When I told them this ten years ago, an employee asked me if I wanted to get rid of the companies. Dear goodness, they’re going to get rid of themselves, they never needed my help!
Indeed, you seem well-informed and well-reasoned. I think moving forward with the idea of iterating makes the most sense. A willingness and ability to adjust doesn’t seem like an option, it’s a must.
All middlemen are being removed and a large number of $ are being removed from the market caps of long-held media organizations at the same time:
1) The guy getting rid of his old couch doesn’t need to pay his local newspaper anymore>> craigslist
2) The creative and quality musicians don’t need EMI anymore.
3) Good reporters don’t need the very large org that is the NYT to gain readership.
4) Ashton Kutcher doesn’t need Fox to reach 1 million people.
5) etc.
I’m reminded of the saying:
Wow… I could not agree LESS with your comments/assumptions.
If what you say were true, then people would have steered away from the browser for ‘lush’ video content long ago; but that didn’t happen. Flash (for video playback) is enormously popular; and HTML5 includes an attempt at standardizing video in the browser. The reality (and my point) is that everything is coalescing around the browser.
The greater reality is that the browser has accomplished what nothing has been able to do thus far… it has standardized people’s experiences and brought more content to more people across more platforms.
How would you plan to distribute your content to multiple devices at the same time? Your special ‘magazine app’ for desktop and mobile?
Hello everyone! we’re here to reinvent the wheel! It’s just not as useful as the other wheel.
Can’t wait to see what you guys in Magazineland come up with, Josh.
Great post and important debate for publishers. No question in my mind that links are core to the success of the format. Agreed that people buy magazine for the magazine format but keep in mind that it is going the way of the dodo as a format. The value of the editorial voice in not just conveying ideas but acting as a springboard for further exploration is invaluable. In a world with an infinite amount of freely accessible content we need editors in subject domains to help us make better use of our time. Fine writing from publications that have a robust history of editorial insight are a national treasure and maybe will find a way to evolve to stay relevant. Maybe this is a path?
It also maps to new forms of monitization (i.e. adsense) and the potential of automating the hyperlinking process for back catalog content or current if writer is too lazy.
My background is in publishing and I felt that once we got past the app as distraction, that content creators would need tools to develop products. We now have subscription services and such on the iPhone in particular, and the ability to get product in people’s hands is both possible and long overdo.
Here is a link to a proposal I made to a national magazine which is/was respected, small, and local to my business (http://modoku.c...sualization.pdf). It is simple, and is oriented towards the current iPhone device profile. Out CMS would control content within the application, which would be both static as well as dynamic — web orients. There are so many issues wrapped in such a simple project that I don’t know where to begin, but I will give a list of sorts.
• The user experience is key. Where are the users going to use it? What are they looking for? Are they subscribers? Occasional readers?
• The interaction should be print oriented. Mobile and tablets will restore a print/design perspective while utilizing web protocols.
• The content in this profile needs to be concise and hierarchical. Not table of contents — a visual swipe review of content, in this case interviews.
• “Articles” can combine media but should be redundant for various modes — standing in line.
• Advertising is visual and targeted. This is where the web brings implicit strengths of metrics and dynamic targeting.
I will write something longer on my blog today. The biggest mistake these publishers are making however is not starting. Start small. Iterate. Learn. I don’t want a relationship with Time, whether billing-wise or probably advertising based. I want content. My company is moving towards publishing platforms in the catalog, magazine, and media spaces, and sample projects are really not that expensive, nor is consulting on the one area where they are missing the boat…
I dont care where the information comes from, if PDF or web, but what we truly need is a simple tablet, with color digital ink and touch handled to read books or magazines in the bed without forcing our precious eyes.
The CD ROM era produced some good ideas in terns of experience that browser based designed are only beginning to catch up with.
Magazines without hypertext…. Well, one could argue this works for ebooks. I personally think it’s wishfully thinking. The reality is that it only works because the alternative was not presented. The right solution will allow a few levels of interaction, e.g. Pop ups with more info, save for later or open full window (will only work with devices that can have operations in the background).
No links, no web.
I thought Steve Ballmer was a moron when he said paper would be eliminated by 2012 but this article kind of makes me think we could be well on our way by then! wow!
As for the links issue, I think it’s inevitable that links will be included with these magazines. People will want them, advertisers will want them. So they’re going to be in there.
is your prose an example of “lush prose” Eric?
This is the best title of any article written at TC since the site started the hate on AAPL about 6 months ago.
Seriously dead on. And as much as I like the _idea_ of a new device from AAPL I can’t imagine what I’d do with it versus what I do with the laptop my office provides. Not yet at least.
Seriously – my greatest fear re: Apples pending itablet thingy is that it won’t support Flash. I believe that Flash holds the key to creating and delivering the interactivity ideas that are presented in this post and that Apple’s insistence on shunning Flash from the iphone is purely a financial one (protecting their turf, so to speak).
” … every link “leaves the barn door open” and points “away from the product . . . to the wide-open Web,” where nobody wants to pay for anything. ”
This is the type of thinking that I’m talking about and probably similar to the reasoning at Apple with regard to Flash.
Even Microsoft, with their ‘flash-killer’ SilverLight, use Flash in abundance on their own web sites – but you’ll never see Apple do the same.
eMagazine’s will need to be connected to the web – they’ll need to dynamic in many ways in order to truly offer a “real futuristic magazine experience” for all parties – the reader, the publisher and the advertiser. Content within the pages of these new emagazine experiences will need to auto-updated with new information as the ‘news’ changes in realtime. They’ll need to have interactive advertising that feeds user-related data back to the advertiser or their agency in near real-time and the advertising in the emagazine will need to be smarter enough to know what I like and what I don’t like so that I am more likely interact with it. It needs to feel glossy and do more than what is currently on offer.
Flash, as a platform, can be used to achieve these things right now. To offer any lesser an experience than this might as well simply be done with a PDF … no very exciting.
Both Flash and the iThing are months away, Flash not being available until mid 2010 in a form that utilizes a common code base and works across devices. That said, I agree that the technology has a lot to offer in this space, more than perhaps the Apple developer tools. But, the true issues are not about platforms but about publishing tools and methodologies — workflow.
I publish a weekly, online-only digital Flash magazine focused on the Delaware beaches called Coastal Sussex Weekly (http://www.coastalsussex.com).
While it’s severely technologically deficient in every way compared to what’s discussed here, I have been fascinated from the beginning at the way people use it, from clickthrough rates on ads to forwarding content to printing out individual pages to what they recall weeks later.
I believe from my limited experience that magazines are destined to thrive in digital form as a concept, with or without links. I use links, but I have had advertisers generate business from the magazine without a clickthrough involved.
I’d also enjoy connecting with people who are working on the tech side of this issue. I’m not one of the big guys (far from it), but I’m fascinated with where it’s going.
I don’t know why they haven’t gotten bigger by now but I always thought of Zinio (http://www.zinio.com/) as a Hulu for Magazines. Their main problem with uptake was that there wasn’t a portable device(smartphone) that could support their reader (it uses Flash).
“An article without links is a dead story.”
I was waiting for you to support this assertion with an argument. It didn’t happen, and I must disagree.
The primary function of a link is the web equivalent of a footnote or reference: it says’ check this out with reference to what I’m saying’. In other words, it facilitates commentary.
However, in self-contained magazine-type articles (as opposed to blogs), the long form allows expansion on the basic point, meaning linking is not often necessary. As long as the article is self-contained, linking can only serve to distract and break the reader’s flow.
I read your entire post without following a single one of the links. Observing people read my blog, I was surprised to see how many never followed the links- because they don’t want to break the flow of their reading.
I read The Economist and similar magazines regularly, and it manages to deliver complete, engrossing articles without a single link- just as in the hard copy version.
Long posts (like yours) are particularly ill-suited to linking, because they prolong the time it takes to read what is already a lengthy write-up. I would thus make bold to lay down the general principle that the longer the article, the fewer links it should have. And full-length features should have none.
http://www.amusis.com
This post on TechCrunch is a mistake. Magazines are and should be self-contained. Why mess with a format that has worked quite well unless you’re going to improve it. Adding links would simply make these readers equivalent to my laptop’s web browser in terms of the distractions that they offer. Reading any good magazine should be an immersive experience. If you want to consult outside references, you should have to work to do so. Unfortunately, it seems like work isn’t something that Mr. Schonfeld is willing to do when it comes to reading. So, perhaps, he should stick to the short blog posts that are full of links but completely empty of meaning.
Erick:
I wrote this a couple of weeks back when Conde Nast announced the closure of Gourmet:
http://brijit.w...commit-suicide/
You’re a former print magazine guy, and seem to appreciate the form more than most of your online peers. Why can’t the biggest players get out of their own way? Or would you argue that there’s precious little they can do to survive, let alone thrive?
Thanks,
Jeremy
USNews & World Report has been experimenting with this new format for quite a while -> http://www.usne...eekly_order.htm
It’s a PDF which can be transferred to any device that you like and sometimes comes with embedded videos. I wonder how they’re doing with that.
What is a magazine? Is it like one of those scroll thingys? There is already a magazine replacement it is called a web page. We have a saying in Texas about flogging dead horses.
Can you stop adding pictures of the Crunch Pad until it is actually released? I’m putting off getting another laptop because of it.
Your CD-ROM comment does a disservice to CD-ROMs. As the author of the MacGuide search engine back in 1988, we published a search engine for the 7000+ products that were available, with links to demo versions of the product.
Quittner is not alone in his view of links ‘driving people away’. Likewise, most people assume ‘freemium’ is only about giving your product away.
Digital distribution gives publishers of all sizes a more nuanced platform to create and profit from derivative works, as well as an opportunity to revisit the definition of a subscriber.
I’m quite sure their advertisers would demand links.
Mr. Quittner relishes the return of “deep reading” but the underlying fear is that his readers will not read the article or magazine in its entirety. They will click a link in the middle of reading the article. This same mentality infects musicians who want their listeners to listen to an album in its entirety. That world is long gone.
will books drop dead when the web becomes easier to hold?
according to recent news, the future of books and ebooks will be vook-like, and media tablets will turn books into multimedia, web-linked, social-networking experiences. it all sounds very new, but isn’t this already how people develop content for the web?
should we worry about books, or should we simply take the web in hand (with the help of mobile tech) and continue to develop web content to its fullest potential?
The next generation of readers can be the tablets and keyboard-less netbooks like Archos 9. As far as a link-less Magazine for digital magazines, I beg to disagree, especially for magazines that are ad-supported. A clickable PDF or (whatever form) magazine ad helpss compared to an ad in a print magazine.
I’ve read two magazines which give me the best reading experience in terms of digital magazines as they make use on how content should be presented in widescreen computer monitors and netbooks, which is basically landscape, full screen:
1. http://www.gxo.com/ (Graphics Exchange News)
2. http://mag.popularairsoft.com/ (Popular Airsoft Magazine)
Both are PDF magazines use text, photo, flash, video and audio to give a richer reading experience. You do not need to zoom in and out just to read the text properly which is what I detest in print magazines being converted for web or flash paper reading a screen (they don’t work well in portrait setup). I consider both magazines to have the best practices for digital publishing. What’s more, they can be viewed offline, especially when you lose your connection when mobile.
With the upcoming tablets, then the experience with these two magazines will be even better.