Now, I know what you’re all thinking. “Of course magazines and newspapers are different, I don’t need to read about this, it’s pointless!” But I’m actually not talking about the basic concept of why magazines and newspapers differ from each other in that sense. Rather, I’m talking about how this difference might help magazines last longer than newspapers, now that the Internet has started to take over and readerships are diclining for both.

I recently read an article on Gawker.com that talked about this very point. (If you would like to read the article, here’s the link:http://gawker.com/359301/the-future-of-magazines-possibly.)  The author said that magazines, although they are declining in print readership just as newspapers are, have an advantage. For one thing, magazines tailor to specfic groups of people and each specializes in certain things, whereas newspapers generally only talk about events and interesting things going on in the world.

Another point is that magazines tend to have writers who know a lot about what they are writing, which gives them more credibility and professional knowledge than most journalists, who often have to learn about the topic of their story as they are writing it. People appreciate writers with experience and knowledge in their stories.

However, there is one possible problem with magazines that newspapers do not really have: magazines depend heavily on the economy being good. If people don’t have the extra cash to spend on reading something they enjoy, they will simply unsubscribe. Many magazine companies suffered, and continue to suffer, during the recent economic problems that have been going on in our country. Meanwhile, newspapers will not necessarily lose readers for this reason, as people will usually not decline a chance to learn about what is going on in our country. In fact, they may even gain readers who want to keep tabs on the economic depression.

Advertisements