My exhibition, Objects as Magazines, opened last weekend in Milan. Here’s the introduction, with the address below. More pictures on the Flickr stream.

OBJECTS AS MAGAZINES

“When ASPEN arrives, you don’t just read it – you hear it, hang it, feel it, fly it, project it, even sniff it.”

Former editor of Ad Age, Phyllis Johnson had a vision of a magazine that would escape the traditional, bound format. The “multimedia magazine” she launched in the USA in 1965 didn’t last more than ten issues, and so never produced its promised “Buckminster Fuller issue, with each article folding into a geodesic dome”. But it was an early and courageous piece of publishing that refused to accept what a magazine was supposed to be.

As our lives have become ever more digital, so the importance of craft has increased. There are few truly remarkable things that I can send you in an email, but if I give you a sealed box, a whole world could be hiding inside – a world you can feel and touch and smell, a world you can hold up to the light and stick on your wall and carry in your pocket. And if that sealed box is a magazine, then the excitement of opening it will be repeated every time a new edition is published.

The magazines in this exhibition are not for everybody. Some of those on display use a conventional format, but attach unexpected objects to their covers to try and stand out. Others push the standard format to its limit, becoming collectible objects in their own right. There are magazines here that have adopted an unusual format and stick to it; others change format each edition, their only constant being flux. There are even digital magazines that have crossed over into the physical world.

The very best magazines are really just like boxes, stuffed with surprises and ideas, clever design and thought-provoking content.

The very best boxes are magazines as well.

Explore, enjoy, find worlds.

Andrew Losowsky
Barcelona, May 2008
www.losowsky.com/magtastic

Objects as Magazines
Until 17th June
Artbook
Via Ventura, 5
20134 Milano
Tel. 02 21597624

UPDATE: There’s a review and some of the captions over at the Creative Review blog

Luxury magazine ads are up
Luxury and weddings do their usual trick of bucking the recession, hence the recent flurry of Monocle-alikes. Will be interesting to see what WSJ brings to the party

Five copies of Aspen go for $1,400
The first ‘magazine in a box’ is in high demand

Baron and O’Brien turn Marc Jacobs into Andy Warhol
And they do it on the cover of that Warhol icon, Interview. As clear a statement as you’ll get that says “we’re in charge now”. More pics here

Flaunt makes 29-year-old former intern their new Editor in Chief
Either he’s good or they’re desperate

Amazon fights to keep cockfighting magazine on its site
It’s still online at time of writing

Weekly magazines don’t appear often enough
Shortlist’s Mike Soutar backs almost-daily mags. If Rubbish can do it…

Painting by numbers is nothing new
New Republic cover echoes Time cover echoes Esquire

Graydon Carter, Kurt Anderson and others talk about Spy magazine
PDF transcript of a discussion from 2006, now available from the NYPL via iTunes

Magazine includes credits for the model’s plastic surgeon
Nice counterpoint to the New Yorker piece that’s getting people in a tizzy

Ling magazine wins SPD gold
Bit of trumpet blowing for us. Not bad for a Spanish inflight mag

Photo by Telstar Logistics. Available through a by-nc Creative Commons licence

Since they told us the web had been upgraded to 2.0, the media buzzphrase has been “User-Generated Content”.

It is, apparently, both the saviour and the death of mainstream media. Actually, it’s a meaningless phrase, a catch-all applied to very different and often contradictory ideas – most of them not new at all.

Here’s a breakdown of what people actually mean by UGC in magazines.


1. User-generated correspondence

Before the phrase existed, UGC was limited to probably the most popular section of most magazines: the problem page (which, according to an academic paper on problem pages in men’s magazines, has existed since people invited discussion in The Athenian Gazette, in the 17th century; more information in this discussion of “virtual communities in the history of women’s magazines”). There’s also its less-interesting brother, the letters page, and of course, its completely unedited second cousin, the classifieds. They can all be fascinating reads in their way. (I’ve also seen all of them faked in various publications, to cover a lack of genuine responses/to stir up a bit of fun.)

It’s a particular space where readers have a very limited and highly directed interaction with the editorial team, and with each other – albeit one with a decent amount of freedom to say what they like (whether it gets printed is another matter).

2. User-generated responses

This is usually what publishers mean when they talk about User-Generated Content – when the magazine invites specific knowledge on a particular theme. Traditionally, this has been a cry from the writer to the reader, to help participate either in the research of a piece, or to be featured within it – “We’re doing an article on bellybutton fluff, send us your stories and pictures!”. More recently, however, the shout has come directly from the editors.

American magazine Budget Travel has just published an entirely “User-Generated Content” special mostly along the lines of “Review three Chicago guidebooks” and “Send us your reasons to love New York City”. And, amusingly, “Readers answer our travel questions” – where staffers then went and carried out the readers’ recommendations. (The editor talks about creating this special issue here.)

If, as Budget Travel and Marmalade did, you dedicate your entire magazine to such pieces, then the magazine can still be flatplanned, with the topics carefully chosen by the editorial team in order to ensure a decent mix of content. The difference is in the commissioning – rather than choose one journalist, you’re offering an open pitch to anyone who hears about it.

This only works if you have a decent-sized, active, engaged and interested readership. You also need to be very careful in how you ask the questions – just as when commissioning journalists, the brief should be specific enough to focus thinking, while broad enough to fit unexpected angles. If the readership don’t respond in sufficient numbers or quality, journalists and staffers will probably be invited to contribute incognito.

This approach can be significantly cheaper than hiring professional journalists and photographers, as dedicated readers may be content with recognition in their favourite magazine – though be prepared for a backlash if payment never occurs.

3. Not-your-user-generated content

With so much media swilling around, there’s a greater need than ever for content. And fortunately, the internet is full of it. In other words, the net has become a huge image library / catalogue of stories, and magazine brands like Nuts and Monkey are keen to make the most of the opportunity. Works best for either “personal story” magazines or those that focus on extreme accidents/sports/breasts. So, magazines that already feature what 90% of the internet is anyway.

There aren’t many people left in the media who think “if it’s on the internet, it’s free”. However, if it’s on the internet, it may be available. Yahoo offers a search option for Creative Commons-licenced content only; online magazines can embed your YouTube videos without breaking the terms of use. And even if it isn’t available by licence, you can always ask.

4. User-generated content

Hype it all you like, but it isn’t new – magazines call it “unsolicited content”, and have received prepackaged words and images from readers since print immemorial. What’s new is the idea to *ask* for it. Mostly this hadn’t happened before because what came in was either unutterably awful, or would have been a thousand times better if they’d just sent in the idea, and allowed themselves to be guided by a commissioning editor.

Enter the unedited badlands of the internet, page upon page of images, texts and videos all created by “users”. If you create a space within your own branded website where people to upload whatever they like – tips, stories, photos – and you have a decent number of people posting decent stuff, then maybe you can cherry-pick the best to include in your magazine (via some carefully worded T&Cs).

This is the publishing model for 8020 Publishing, who publish the photography magazine JPG and the travel magazine Everywhere, with content entirely provided by the magazines’ own communities. 8020 then pays $100 plus a year’s subscription for anything they use in print. Other variations include gifting points in return for popular content.

It’s a model with great potential and bigger pitfalls. There are some (slightly vague) suggestions on how to create a community of readers here, whereas the founders of JPG quit last year over a disagreement about the community, the content and the company. You can read some of the founder’s comments here.

8020 also adopts another UGC model, which is….

5. User-influenced content

The internet encourages two concepts that are of particular interest to publishers: metrics and conversation. You can never be sure exactly how many people have read a feature in your magazine, but you can know how many click the webpage, where they are, how long they stay, and where they go next. And people don’t vote to decide if a magazine article should stay or go (except the fanatical letter writers, who are usually fairly insane), but in one click they can point a thumb up or down, and leave a comment. If you’re very lucky, circularity will ensue, and conversation will lead to popularity will lead to more conversation.

What this also means is that you use your community as guinea pigs, with the features getting the most attention ‘voted’ into the magazine. TV channel Current uses this model; the Guardian‘s Comment is Free is set up under similar principles, with occasional pieces spinning off into the print edition (and vice versa). As with JPG and Everywhere, the community tells the editors what’s worth looking at. The editors then choose what goes in, based in part on the wisdom of crowds.

There’s a danger with this, which is that you’re revealing your best content to your most dedicated fan base, for free. Why should they then bother to buy the print magazine?

6. User-generated editing

Make your own damn magazine. Doubtless to be paid for with contextual advertising. With the eventual conclusion being…

7. Computer-generated editing

The Daily Me was an idea coined in 1995 by Nicholas Negroponte. Essentially, algorithms do the thinking so editors don’t have to, tailored to your own unique tastes. Kind of like an RSS feed on paper, but with stuff you would have subscribed to if only you’d known about it. The first half-decent attempt to make this happen was Idiomag, generating content from what you have on your Myspace/LastFM profile. But it still feels computer generated, and a particularly dim computer at that.

Key points

• User-Generated Content means a lot of things. Often it means a combination of the above. Choose carefully.

• None of the above is a cheap or easy solution to get through the recession with your finances intact. Community building is difficult and can be expensive; maintaining it is vital if it’s going to do what you hope it will. Otherwise you’ll end up with small amounts of content in return for a half-hearted, expensive investment.

• If you let people say anything, they may not say what you like.

• Taking content for free via hidden T&Cs rather than a formal contract and hard cash may turn your crowds into mobs.

• Crowds will soon make their own magazines, and start to get interest from your advertisers. Try to harness the creativity that brings to the industry, rather than fear it. (That’s a whole other blogpost.)

• Magazines have always welcomed high-quality contributions from unsolicited sources, albeit following a certain format (ideas not finished articles). However, most people don’t seem to know that – so opening up even a tiny corner to “the readers” seems revolutionary, even though pretty much all the people working for a magazine will have started out as readers.

• The role of the editor in creating a nuanced, surprising, entertaining publication is safe (until InDesign 4′s sentient plugin).

• The age of ubiquitous big budgets, huge photoshoots, and sending Hunter S Thompson away for six months with a gold card and a drug dealer in return for 13,000 words, is over. But then we knew that already.

• If you want to make money from your readers, there’s a secret you should know: the value of UGC isn’t in the content. However great a reader’s snaps or writing are, and however much you might be saving on commission fees, it’s all irrelevant. The money comes from the other thing a properly set-up UGC strategy can provide: a precisely measured, demographically accurate, loyal community around your brand, all plump and ready to be advertised at and sold to. And that’s the key.

Get them organised, print what they do, keep them happy and survey the hell out of them. Then contextualise everything that they say through the ad spaces on your page. The reason why UGC is popular among those in the know isn’t the UGC itself at all – it’s the UGD that it spawns. User-Generated Demographics. And then you’re laughing.

If you happen to be passing through Milan at the end of this month, I’m giving a talk entitled ‘The Ingredients of the Revolution’ at SignJam Live on 25th May, and also curating the exhibition Objects as Magazines in the gallery/shop Artbook throughout the weekend.

Themes in the former will include new ideas concerning creation, distribution and money making in the magazine world. The latter will be a varied selection of objects from my personal collection, including the occasional Visionnaire and even an Is/Not, if we can find a wall big enough. Stop on by, do.

Mad magazine’s office is filled with old merchandising junk
What a depressing place to work

Fantastic VF spread scores double by echoing classic illustration
Via Mark Porter

New York Look‘s summer cover is lovely, recalls Brodovitch etc
First cover ever with red eye?

V magazine goes digital…
Via Boico

…and so does Monkey Magazine
Digital magazine creates its own even more pointless web spinoff. They’ll be in print, next

Iran bans celebrity, film magazines
I’m a little bit late on this one

Time 100 cover gallery
Commissioned but not used – Time Top 100 cover stylings from Brody, Kidd, Euro RSCG

Stunning foot/shoe images for New York magazine
First three pages of the online story; the stiletto is remarkable

Vogue Italy creates all-black models edition
Keep an eye out for it in July

Vogue Japan creates Hello Kitty fashion shoot
OK, they win. Hello Kitty wears 55 looks from the latest Dior collection, including limited-edition figurines available at Colette soon. Reminds me a bit of Wallpaper*‘s ceramic fashion shoot last year

It’s a magazine’s worst nightmare: the backers suddenly pull out, leaving you with big overheads, no cash and imminent disappearance. Couple that with being a weekly publication, and the vultures aren’t so much circling as asking for the wine list.

This is what happened about a month ago to Amsterdam Weekly, a decent, free English-language magazine printed on newsprint, and distributed in cafés and bars around the city. What they did about it, however, was rather fantastic.

Rather than put the whole thing on hold (and lose momentum, readership, advertisers, staff), or go for a paid distribution (huge risk, new problems) they decided to ask for help from their readers in a rather novel fashion.

Inspired, I suppose, by the million dollar homepage filled with pixels, every page of the magazine except the ads was divided into 204 blocks, and then for two issues only, sold online for €5 each. If you picked up the magazine for the club listings, you’d have to pay to reveal them. If you were featured in an article, you’d have to put the money in the slot so everyone could see you. If you took the front page photo… you get the idea. People were offered special gifts if they bought a certain amount, from free entry to a “thank you” party, to books and tshirts, and the whole thing was powered by a natty web system that made it pretty easy to take part.

Announced on 27th March with the front-page headline “Unf*ck us!”, it was a brave solution. Did it work? Kind of. There were lots and lots and lots of holes in the magazine (PDF download of the second issue, 10th April) – but that also reminded its readers how much trouble the mag was in (and they could download the unholed version online, if they wanted). It could have been implemented a little better – it wasn’t very clear on the website which features would be revealed in the following issue, for example.

Overall, however, the idea was rather clever indeed. Its readers certainly won’t forget it in a hurry. Did AW make enough money to survive? Right now, they’re still going. And long may they continue to stay unf*cked.