View Single Post
Old March 12th, 2018, 01:53 PM   #8
adouglas
Cat herder
 
adouglas's Avatar
 
Name: Gort
Location: A secret lair which, being secret, has an undisclosed location
Join Date: May 2009

Motorcycle(s): Aprilia RS660

Posts: A lot.
Blog Entries: 6
MOTM - Jul '18, Nov '16, Aug '14, May '13
I'm going to be the outlier here and say I love it. It's a breath of fresh air. Gorgeous. Well designed. Well written.

Let me put this in context by saying I've been in the industry myself. I've written and edited books, been a magazine editor, and have been a full-time writer for 35 years. So my perspective is different from most. I look at this stuff through the eyes of an insider who thinks a lot about how communications work.

First, we should consider the nature of the magazine. Already in this thread there's a conflation of content and design that IMHO misses the essential point. Complaining about lifestyle articles... well, what if the magazine looked exactly like the old familiar Cycle World/Sport Rider but had that content (which it did)? Would you still complain?

Motorcyclist has never been only about sport bikes. That more general focus is not new.

From a design standpoint... the new book is refreshingly different. Very high quality paper, terrific photography, a distinctive format (size), and something of great importance to me, good writing. It's aesthetically pleasing. And therein lies the point.

To me, the pleasure of reading the magazine matters. I don't need ANY magazine to get content that informs. That's not why I pick up a physical printed piece. No, it's for the experience of holding it in my hand and flipping through it.

15 years ago SR and magazines like it were the ONLY source of info like bike reviews. But now, all that stuff is online. You don't need a magazine for that kind of content anymore. When the reviews finally do make it to print, you've already seen all the pictures, read all the specs, and know everything there is to know. This is inevitable because of the time it takes to print and distribute a magazine.

Which begs the question: What are magazines for in this day and age?

To me it's clear. The web is really good for looking up stuff in a hurry and getting educated. It sucks for enjoying the experience. Sitting on my deck on a nice summer morning with computer and phone nowhere in sight (or more importantly hearing), sipping coffee with my dog at my feet, listening to the birds and having an entirely analog experience with a beautifully crafted piece of printed matter is an underrated joy. I like good writing, great photography, and a distinctive voice. I like to unplug and connect with the world in a different way. That's what this magazine gives me, and there isn't anything else quite like it.

There's another thing going on here, and that's the multi-channel nature of communications these days. Motorcyclist understands this very well, and is serving that insatiable tech-head, bike-review GIVE ME CONTENT need on the website and with videos. Ari Henning does a fantastic job with the MC Garage series, for example. You want a really good piece about, oh, bleeding brakes? They've got it... online, where people are going to look for it anyway. You want an up-close-and-personal first-hand review of the new Ninja 400? Yep. It's there, online, where you have onboard video that, once again, you're going to look for anyway.

When you combine all that stuff from MO with the dozens of other outlets all covering the same topics, you've got all you could ever ask for in terms of hard information.

So looking at the magazine in isolation is, in my view, the wrong way to think about it. Think instead of the whole experience and how a printed magazine fits into that experience--the role it plays in your interaction with the world of motorcycling. Think about where you go for different kinds of information and how you consume it. The world in which we live is a mashup of YouTube, websites, social media and print. Each has its best use and to me, a magazine doesn't need to, nor should it, replicate what the web already does so well.

Another thing to think about is the publication's positioning. Before the redesign it was pretty much impossible to tell the difference between Cycle World and Motorcyclist. You want what Motorcyclist used to be, just subscribe to CW instead. Sure, you'll get your literbike shootouts... and then have a whole issue dedicated to V-twins (yawn).

I agree that the loss of SR hurts. Like many here, I don't particularly care about dirt, cruisers, tourers, ADV or any of the other flavors. I sure as HELL don't give a rip about stunting. I like sportbikes new and old. I miss having a rag dedicated solely to my tastes. But demographics and economics are what drives this, not passion. There aren't enough of us to keep such a magazine in existence.

But all is not lost. Roadracing World does truly excellent in-depth bike reviews... really exhaustive and rich with information. Worth subscribing just for those, even if you don't follow racing.

There's also Cycle News, which is free, digital and frequent. They aren't as focused but they too have great photography and enough stuff I'm interested in to keep me engaged.
__________________________________________________
I am NOT an adrenaline junkie, I'm a skill junkie. - csmith12

Nam et ipsa scientia potestas est.
Heri historia. Cras mysterium. Hodie donum est. Carpe diem.
adouglas is offline   Reply With Quote