More on Basiji Hunters

I forwarded the info in my previous post to an Iranian-American (I'll not disclose name or even gender, because this person still has family in Tehran), who responded: "It's definitely true and they are very community-connected." This person had been a protester in the 1979 revolution that overthrew the Shah, which of course led to the current regime. "This is happening all over again for a better future, I hope."

Iranians Going "Basiji Hunting"?

The Washington Note quotes from an e-mail written by an Iranian:

By the way, two nights ago I went out to see a few things ... as the general crowds spread into their homes militia style Mousavi supporters were out on the streets 'Basiji hunting'.

Their resolve is no less than these thugs -- they after hunting them down. They use their phones, their childhood friends, their intimate knowledge of their districts and neighbours to plan their attacks -- they're organised and they're supported by their community so they have little fear. They create the havoc they're after, ambush the thugs, use their Cocktail Molotovs, disperse and re-assemble elsewhere and then start again - and the door of every house is open to them as safe harbour -- they're community-connected.

The Basiji's are not.

These are not the students in the dorms, they're the street young -- they know the ways better than most thugs - and these young, a surprising number of them girls, are becoming more agile in their ways as each night passes on.

Also, with $10K every local police station lock can be broken and guns taken out...the police too are crowd friendly...for sure put a gun in their hands and these young become a serious counter-balance to the Basij...call them 10% of 18-22 year olds - that makes circa 10 million around the country versus max 4 million Basijis.

That excerpt comes from a longer article that tries to predict the likely scenarios for the outcome in Iran. (It's not optimistic that a peaceful solution will result.) I, on the other hand, would love it to end peacefully, but my definition of a successful conclusion to this is pretty much total surrender by Khamenei and the other hard-line leaders there. If the above excerpt is true, then it's truly amazing that the government's control has broken down so much that people are proactively attacking the militias.

(The usual caveat has to be placed on anything that is an anonymous source quoted on a web site you've never heard of and re-quoted on another blog: It might be all science fiction. I hope it's not.)

Digital vs. Print: Why Must I Choose?

Curious about how National Lampoon looked in its earliest years, I jumped at the opportunity a few months ago to buy (on eBay) an issue from its second year. It arrived in good condition, and I greatly enjoyed reading it -- lying down on the couch or sitting back at my desk with my feet up, paging back and forth, sampling an article here or there, picking up the magazine every time I wanted to read an article in it.

That experience made me remember how much I'd enjoyed the magazine when I discovered it in junior high school (early 1980s), so after testing a couple other issues from eBay, I decided to go ahead and purchase the digital archive of the magazine's complete run. I did a quick look through the issues on the disk when it arrived, and I was impressed. And I haven't put it into the computer since. I have, however, purchased some more old print editions off eBay.

Why? I already have those issues in digital format, right? Isn't it stupid to purchase some print copies (albeit inexpensive ones) when I already own the issues in digital form? Aren't digital and print all the same, if you listen to the print-is-dead crowd?

Well, they're not the same. I actually like the digital version very much. It's a high-quality, complete collection of every darned issue of the magazine, and I can read it at any time. If I take the disk out of the box. If I turn on my computer. If I put the disk into the computer, click the keys, access the appropriate year, access the appropriate issue. If I haven't lost interest by this point in whatever fleeting thought it was that first inspired me to pick up the box and try to find that issue.

Digital editions are great. Seriously. I love them, and I really applaud publishers using them to make available vast storehouses of information in the form of years of archived issues, or using them as an additional version of new print copies. They're just not the same as print editions, and therein lies a point that could hurt the editors who want readers to read what they assembled, and could hurt the advertisers who want the most people to see their ads the most number of times.

Starlog magazine, which went on print hiatus this past spring, has said that it will be producing digital versions of its entire run of the magazine. The archive of its sister mag, Fangoria, is also going to be out digitally, and it has already begun producing digital versions of its line of comics.
Playboy, in addition to the Cover to Cover series of deluxe disk packages, is selectively making digital versions of past issues available free on its web site. All of that is fantastic. I already own the Playboy Cover to Cover archive package for the 1950s, and I plan on buying each new decade as it is released. I will also be eagerly awaiting the Starlog and Fangoria (and other mags, too) digital editions.

But, as a recent conversation reminded me, publishers that rely only on digital editions are shortchanging themselves, their readers, and their sponsors. During a discussion about web sites and digital information, an internet professional noted the benefits of digital news, but then sheepishly said he hasn't given up his daily print newspaper: "I love print." He didn't mean that he just has an old-fashioned affection for it. He said that it's a sit-down (or lie-down) experience to really read something. You have a different experience (including a different degree of identification with and amount of time spent with the publication) when you hold it in your hands than you do when you stare at a computer screen.

So I say, Long live digital and print. I love them both. I understand them both. I want them both. But business and marketing trends are generally led more by emotion and group-think than by clear thought and experience. So we'll continue to see print devalued, even when it's profitable, and we'll continue to see print abandoned for online-only, even though there are other ways to cut down the waste of print (by changing distribution methods, for example). Mainly, we'll continue to see publishers shoot their brands in the feet.

Athletes with Guts: Iranian Soccer Team Shows Their Colors

The captain and five other memebers of Iran's national football (er, soccer) team wore green armbands during the first half of a game against South Korea in Seoul. Watch the BBC News report:


As they mention in the video, these players are due to return home after the game, coming back to a country that has banned foreign reporters, is killing and beating up protestors and other opponents of the religious regime, and frantically trying to put a stop to the biggest threat to the government since the 1979 revolution. Godspeed to the protestors, I think, and good for the national team players who demonstrated some real bravery.

I'd love to see some MLB players sport a green armband or ribbon. It might not be their country, but it's a universal cause.

Update from Iran's Elections

So this doesn't have anything directly to do with magazines, the main topic of this blog. But it's stunning -- and I think everyone who can should be paying attention and spreading reports of the amazing developments in Iran. I don't know how this will turn out; might very well lead to a bloody crackdown and an even more repressive state. Let's hope for a better outcome than that.

Here's a report from Channel 4 News in the UK:

Papers Unclear on the Concept

Here in San Francisco, we have a free daily newspaper owned by an out-of-town right-wing publisher. It's the San Francisco Examiner, and I'm not sure the company that produces it is clear on how to distribute newspapers.

Consider: The Examiner is a tabloid-sized paper (it also occasionally has tabloid-style editorial leanings, but it lacks the courage of its convictions, so it never rise -- or sinks -- to the level of the New York Post or New York Daily News). And yes, it's weird to have a conservative paper in one of the most famously left-wing cities in America. But that's arguably a good thing, because a city should have multiple voices. Now, it'd be good if people were able to access those voices.

A very thin tabloid is what it is: It's a commuter paper, read almost completely during a bus or subway ride to work. It's not a paper worth taking home and reading after dinner and sharing with the family; there's not enough content in it. So, if it was your paper, why would you hire people to hand out the free paper (it's bad enough that you have to shove a free paper into people's hands) at the downtown subway stops, and not at the subway stops where they get on the train? I have no use for the paper once I get out of the subway, but I might read it from time to time on my way in to work.

Stubborn Adherence to Ad Model Is Killing Magazines

In the April 2009, Jason Fell looked at why publishers are ceasing publication of successful magazines. In "Why Are Successful Magazines Folding?" Fell quotes some publishers -- such as my former boss, Hanley Wood's CEO, Frank Anton -- who stubbornly stick to the ad-driven model for magazines. For them, there are too many magazine pages seeking a limited number of ads, so their should be shrinkage in the magazine marketplace.

I was pleased, however, to see U. of Mississippi magazine expert Samir Husni give a deeper perspective: "The publishing model ... served us well since World War II, when we switched from a circulation-driven publishing model to an advertising-driven model." We now have magazines that devalue their content by practically giving away subscriptions, expecting to get a good rate base to charge advertisers. Hanley Wood, of course, publishes a lot of B2B titles, and they largely live in that world of ads-over-paying-circ.

But it's not the only way, and there are many magazines that survive by subscription and/or newsstand revenue. Put out a magazine that people actually want to receive, are willing to pay for, and it's one they're also more likely to stick with during down times because it has value to them. If Husni's correct, then since WWII, we've traded a solid long-term magazine model for one that is less dependable, puts readers and content at the whim of advertisers, and that delivers less value to the reader. Not sure that's progress.

The Latest Shopping Spree, Part II

My latest trip to the bookstore, just a couple hours ago this afternoon, ended with me walking out with two magazines:

Monocle (June 2009): Another giant issue (more than 200 pages, I think, counting the inserts) from Financial Times columnist Tyler Brûlé. We get the only magazine that includes Lebanon's elections, Sarkozy, manga, an aviation survey, a look at Mongolia's capital, Obama's White House designing, and a report on the Karachi, Pakistan, police forces. I have no idea if this magazine is a resounding financial success, but I hope it is. It is a big part of my evolving view that these globally-fucused, hefty hefts are the successful magazines of the future, like my new best friend forever, Winq. I'll write more on this theory in the future.

Smithsonian (June 2009): What made me pick up this issue? I've always been impressed by this fine magazine, and I buy several issues of it every year. My mother used to bring home stacks of them from the publishing company where she worked. But my partner's a Frank Lloyd Wright fan, and they've got an article on Wright, so ... magazine purchased.

And then there are the magazines I almost bought, even carrying them with me until I decided for certain that I didn't want to spend money on them:

Deathray (June/July 2009): In my continuing effort to find a science fiction media magazine to replace the hole in my heart left by the print cessation (er, hiatus) of Starlog, I have been trying to choose between SFX, Deathray, and SciFi Now. Problem is, all three oversized British mags are so bleeping similar that one is left walking away from all of them. I had a Deathray in my hands, but before I went to the checkout counter, I realized I hadn't read the April/May issue (had barely opened it), so why spring for an entirely new issue?

Discover (July/August 2009): A decade or two ago, my sister gave me a copy of an annual Best Science Writing of the Year anthology, and I loved it. I learned in the books' introduction that Discover magazine was one of the founders of a new type of popular science writing -- intelligent, accessible to the non-expert, and high-quality. I've read it off and on over the years, even subscribing once or twice. But I have to admit I hate-hate-hated the redesign instituted a few years ago when Bob Guccione Jr. took over the mag (and that's not a knock on Guccione; I see him as someone who's done a hell of a lot of things I wish I'd had the money to do in the magazine industry; I have a premiere issue of Spin magazine just a foot away from my keyboard as I write this, as a matter of fact, and I thought it was great when I heard a rumor that he was interested in reviving Omni as a quarterly, because it fed my own interest in restarting a late science/SF magazine). Anyway, this magazine just didn't make the final should-I-or-shouldn't-I decision as I was toting up the damage from my magazine grazing (particularly in light of my subscription to the weekly New Scientist), so back to the newsstand it went.

Maybe I should write one of these posts on the mags I'm buying used on eBay???

My previous shopping spree

Comic Foundry's Death not Required

I admit I've never seen Comic Foundry, but in the course of following links from one blog to another, I discovered that this magazine had died an early death after only five issues. But I was getting curious the more I read, because in the penultimate issue, Editor in Chief Tim Leong announced the impending closure of the title due -- not, as one would expect, to the tanking economy and the bloodbath that is the publishing marketplace these days -- to a lack of his time to produce the publication.

Hmmm, must be nice to be able to publish a magazine and actually walk away from it. For all the publishers who would die for the chance to produce their own title, this must seem an unbelievable choice for Mr. Leong. But, hey, it's his magazine. And you've gotta respect him for that. It's sort of Calvin and Hobbesian in the way the creator just walked away when it suited him, not waiting for the slow decline of fame ...

Fantasy & SF Blogging

The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction is giving away a limited numbers of its current issue to bloggers who promise to blog about the issue. Magazines usually send out comp copies to various members of the media, hoping to entice them to cite the magazine in an article or newscast. So this isn't unusual; was just the first time I've noticed it -- and the only time I've seen the magazine publish an online call for bloggers to request the freebie.

And no, I don't get a free copy for this blog post. I already subscribe.