Re: [CR]Commercial nature of CR and the decline of Bicycling mag

(Example: Framebuilders:Tubing)

Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 10:22:02 -0600
From: Jerry & Liz Moos <moos@penn.com>
To: Mark Chandler <justridingalong@yahoo.com>
Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR]Commercial nature of CR and the decline of Bicycling mag
References: <20011104012305.1924.qmail@web20405.mail.yahoo.com>


A good example of how advertiser-dominated Bicycling has become is that they don't even care about paid subscriptions any more. They hype the circulation numbers by giving away trial subscriptions via coupons from Nashbar and a bunch of other places. I signed up for one about 4 years ago, and they kept sending the issues for over 2 years even though I ignoed invoices to actually pay for continuations. If I'd bothered to ask, thay would probably still be sending free issues. It's all about circulation numbers to base advertising rates on. At Bicycling, like most US publications, "journalistic objectivity" is a complete joke.

Regards,

Jerry "PAID subscriber to Cycling+ and CycleSport" Moos

Mark Chandler wrote:
> > On another point, I do recall that Bicycling magazine was once more
> > philosophical and appreciative of the art of bicycle frame and part
> > manufacture. As the bikes have become more functional, but less
> > artistic and shapely, so has the magazine become more crass. The
> > articles from the 70's and 80's included musings about the sheer
> > beauty of this or that stem shape or frame detailing. Now that the
> > bikes are industrial and not pretty, the writing has become
> > functional window dressing in support of the way the industry has
> > moved. I may be wrong, but do any of the contributing staff ever
> > question the value of 10 cog freehubs or robot weld displays?
>
> Bicycling was more sympathetic to the CR cause when their staff was
> comprised of folks who had ridden clips-n-straps, shifted friction,
> glued a tubular, etc. Now, we have folks who are refugees from
> automotive magazines and the like.
>
> They don't have time to wax poetic over the shape of a stem because
> they're busy writing capsule reviews of products that come from their
> major advertisers.
>
> What fries me is that Bicycling knows they're bad, and they don't care.
> Their readership turns over frequently enough that they can recycle
> the same articles over and over and fill in the rest with reviews of
> Shimano/Campy's we'll-add-one-more-cog-this-year offerings.
>
> If you want a decent, general-interest cycling publication, I heartily
> recommend England's Cycling-Plus. US sub's are 38 pounds, and it's
> worth every cent.
>
> --mc (former cyclo-journalist-hack)
>
> =====
> Mark Chandler / JustRidingAlong@yahoo.com
> Superior, Colorado
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Find a job, post your resume.
> http://careers.yahoo.com