New York Times:
More's average reader is 51, among the oldest in the magazine business, making selling ads a challenge, More executives say. While it tackles ageism in its pages, it is getting a good dose of it from advertisers.
Jarvis Coffin: Pride Goeth Before a Fall: Consumer Magazines Talk About Building an Ad Network
A horizontal consumer magazine ad network is the wrong model. Don't do it. It will not protect magazines from brand erosion, the source of all value.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I have to say, as I approach 40, I don't consider myself a "has-been." I work hard, take care of myself & those around me, try to have fun, etc, but I've never really been one of those "Vogue" girls who needs to portray a certain image. I've never read More, but it sounds like something I might be interested in. Especially if it's geared toward the educated, slightly older, independent female.
Kudos to the magazine publishers that haven't forgotten the women who keep things running as time goes on!
A few years ago, I was excited to buy a subscription to "More". What I wanted was a magazine that didn't treat anyone over 45 as a has been. That interveiwed celebrities MY age, whom I still admire, even though they are not on "Gossip Girl." I wanted advice on fashion - what to wear at MY age to not look like a fool. Instead, there is too much talk about cancer and illness and overcoming adversity, then turn a page and there is running a marathon, climbing K2, starting a million dollar company, in order to "cope" with getting older. OLDER = DEPRESSING. Thus, OLDER = NECESSITY OF INSPIRATION (in order to deal with depression.) I just want to know if wearing a tunic top will make me look like an aging hippy or like the oldest pregnant woman in the world. Maybe to know what Sissy Spacek is up to, these days. A little bit of politics, music, food, aimed at MY age group. I don't want ENDLESSLY to read about cancer and I don't want to made to feel I'm personally responsible for finding a cure, either.
Read the "O" (Oprah) magazine. It has everything you're looking for. I promise you, you'll not be disappointed.
I've read this a few times, even had a subscription but I stopped it, why? Most of the articles are GRIM, and the fashion is overpriced all the time. Add those two together and you end up with boring and depressing, the magazine has no fun component. Everything doesn't have to be a sad tale of death, divorce, dying/ aging parents, or money.
I never read "women's" magazines.
I prefer Science, Archeology, Nutrition, World Events, etc.
Me too, I love sociology, anthropology, psychology.....so much more interesting than shopping!
MORE is beter than COSMO!
Not too hard to be better than Cosmo, lol!
Who's still reading COSMO?
I had a subscription to More but let it expire after that first year.
I agree with every other critique on this board. And to me, the magazine was just boring. Basically the same thing month after month after month.
It's also kind of depressing...it seems like it was all about hiding or covering up your age. For crying out loud...we're ALL getting older. Every day each of us ages. Why do we need to hide it?
I don't eat well and exercise so I can look like I'm 20...I eat well and exercise because it makes me feel good.
This magazine is patronizing, depressing, boring and superficial. I read magazines with substance, if I read them at all. I don't need yet one more article imploring me how to look 30 when I'm 40...I don't want a magazine targeted at my 'age group'. I like magazines that represent my intellectual group.
First huge mistake. The name: "More." It conjures up one or both of two images: women with more flesh, or women with more age. I've never read the magazine, but I bet that, if it hasn't already happened, it will soon: advertisements for diapers, blood thinners and cholesterol reducers, expensive wrinkle creams and no-medical-check-up insurance.
I learned a long time ago that any business that sets a target market for over 40's, 50's women will find itself in trouble. That age group, particularly 50's + may dream of being younger, but they don't follow through. Their mainstream is resigned to its aging fate.
As a 40's+ woman, I avoid magazines that condescendingly and patronizingly target older women. I want to perceive myself as just a woman. I want to look at fashion spreads of women of all ages: beautiful, young and toned; beautiful, older and toned. I don't want to read about how to cover flabby arms. I want to read about how to avoid them in the first place.
If I were to start a women's magazine, it would be for all women; it would women dream while they flip the pages, not bring them down to earth with a jolt; it would show them that they don't have to start wearing loose hip hanging tops and cut their hair just because they are getting older. It would also show them that they are important if they don't make $100,000 + a year.
Or more money!
I want to perceive myself as just a 58 year-old human being.
I got a subscription to MORE for myself and a gift one for a girlfriend STRICTLY DUE TO THE PRICE.
And when it expires,I won't renew.I agree with many of the responses here about its shortcomings.
It seems badly out of touch with the average woman's life in these troubled economic times.
And,as an AA blessed with good genes, I can't relate to their obsession with
eradicating wrinkles with cosmetic procedures, plastic surgery and/or overpriced makeup.
I do enjoy the interviews with 40+ celebrity women that the media ignores unless
they're publicizing a new book/TV show/movie.
Otherwise,despite how it shares with MORE a love of overpriced items,I'm much more satisfied
with the contents of O,the Oprah magazine.I always find something useful,helpful
and informative in it every month.
At least sometimes you see someone who looks like you, as an AA woman. I'm Asian. Good luck finding anything about us. For us, it's better to look at Japanese magazines, and try to understand what the heck they're writing.
Sorry for the typos, still getting used to bifocals and I hate them!!
I have a subscription to More, but the minute it's up I'm never buying another copy of this worthless rag.
I would love an over-40 (heck, make that boomer woman 50-65) Allure-type magazine that covered new beauty products and clothing trends. Things real women could afford and would like. More is nowhere near what most of us want. More has an article on inexpensive clothing were "nothing over $100." They mean EACH PIECE is less than $100!
Every cream they mention is expensive (no drug store here). Little, if any clothing is available from a mass marketer like Sears, Pennys, or Macys. Their health advice is excellent, but frankly, I can copy the few useful pages from the issue at the library for less than a dollar a month.
The magazine is dedicated to the idea that everyone on earth was an advanced degree, lots of money, and threw off their capitalist shackles at 50 to reinvent themselves as artists, environmentalists, etc.
I just don't think there are that many women in America who live such a life. Also, we are not all a size 4, and get tired of seeing so many emaciated types made out to be the ideal (you actually look a lot younger with a little meat on your bones).
This magazine does not celebrate the average American woman of 40 or over, but a tiny little slice of who's out there.
This is one magazine I won't mind going under.
I love More. I do share some of the criticisms offered here. My salary is nowhere near the average stated in the article. I am frustrated that the model winners are like the same slender, gorgeous student models that used to be featured in Glamour back in the day. And, enough with the plastic surgery, already! However, the articles in general are interesting, and the clothing featured, while out of my price range, is more stylish than fashion shown in, say, Family Circle. More is not the be-all-and-end-all to magazines for women, but it's pretty good.
I just checked out Bust's website. Intriguing, but not my style.
I love More. It's well written and informative and great.fun, all in one mag. I'd hate to see it fold.
I agree with many of the posters, here. I enjoy the magazine, but was turned off my the model search they launched, because most of the winners were these privileged, pampered, ladies who have summer houses and have never waited on tables or struggled to pay college tuition.
It seems very condescending to middle class women who work and don't have Ivy League educations and who make under $250,000 a year. I do enjoy seeing women over 50 who take care of themselves, so parts of the magazine are interesting, but it is rather elitist. They need to open their eyes and address the interests of middle-income women.
The magazine is boring as heck. I am over 40, but could not read it. Very formulaic -- success late in life stories and or success after divorce; womens' health issue scare articles; movies stars aging gracefully, along with regular people too! News flash! Wear sunscreen, ladies, and you will still look hot long into your later years. I'm 45 and don't have a single wrinkle. After two years of yawing through this rag, I was longing for a magazine for flaky chicks who weren't interested in traditional conformity. Thank goodness, one exists, in "BUST."
I love BUST, although I've only seen it twice. It IS a great mag, though a little grrrrl power for someone my age, I sometimes think (I'm 49, also not wrinkly!) Since giving up MORE, I've moved to a subscription to SELF, which promotes health and fitness more than most glam magazine. I've noticed that some of the articles are written for and about women my age, plus I feel I'm promoting a healthier outlook for my daughter when I leave SELF on top of her fashion magazines.
well the mag industry has beaten up women over 40. they have celebrated the 25 yr old size 2 with 2 kids and no stretch marks who just wants to wow her man/husband in bed. no maturity need apply. now they're reaping the benefits
Loading comments…
First Posted: 08-24-09 09:30 AM | Updated: 09-24-09 05:12 AM