boxing news- as good as it was?

[mahatma]

everyone whos responded to this thread accepts that boxing news needs advertising, but how much is the question?
Hands up whose bought the christmas issue for double the price and thought it wasnt worth the doubled price because it was full of adverts and christmas messages from promoters, that may be more acceptable at christmas but i dont want the magazine that ive read for 25 years to be like a yellow pages of adverts and 2 pages filled with 1 photo, with great boxing news in between.

[dondada]

I started reading under Mullan's editorship - what a writer. The kind of moral, crusading voice we don't really have now do we?

Some try their best in a tiny little way. The full-time pros should be more crusading, that's for sure. However, even Mr Mullan would have found it difficult today mate.

You need a very supportive backer who is prepared to face down those who constantly seek redress in the courts for perceived slights, even when sometimes they have little or no merit. It takes a lot of energy. Libel law in this country is appalling. Labour very belatedly tried to get it changed just before their time was up but self-interested parties blocked it.

I know for a fact that some writers/editors/owners (well beyond boxing) simply think it isn't worth the bother so end up avoiding any kind of mention which would upset litigious parties. This is well documented. This therefore creates a 'chilling effect', also well documented in standard journalism text books, giving the issuers of regular legal missives exactly what they want.

Sad and, more to the point, not in the public interest.

[mahatma]

thanks ian for that interesting insight into the libel situation that publications face.

and yes most of us liked harry mullan's writing style but i accept that times have changed and maybe its not as free and easy as the 70's to write with ones heart, as he often did.

claude had a difficult job following him and tris to be fair has only just started so i for one want to give him the time to develop his own style and put his own personal stamp on it.So far so good but it would be interesting to know what sway he holds over the owners, regarding my main gripe - the adds!

[Deserter]

everyone whos responded to this thread accepts that boxing news needs advertising, but how much is the question?
Hands up whose bought the christmas issue for double the price and thought it wasnt worth the doubled price because it was full of adverts and christmas messages from promoters, that may be more acceptable at christmas but i dont want the magazine that ive read for 25 years to be like a yellow pages of adverts and 2 pages filled with 1 photo, with great boxing news in between.

Mahatma, you're missing the critical link between advertising and the content you love. The simple equation is less advertising = less available money to fund staff salaries, freelance writers and photograhers etc. If you want a great read, the reality is you should welcome the ads. If ad revenue dries up the only option is for a magazine to address its cost-base i.e. sack full-timers, reduce freelance expenditure. The result would be a far weaker product. This would in turn lead to less copy sales so revenue would drop yet again and more cuts would have to be made - I'm sure you can read the trend. The end-game would be no Boxing News.

[Glyn Leach]

Spot on Deserter. Hesitate to speak for another magazine, but I'm pretty sure Tris and the boys hate adverts as much as I do. They get in the way and stop you producing the mag you'd like to produce. But they are a necessary evil and as Deserter says, ads pay for articles, photos etc. You have to have them. And you have to have as many of them as you can get because there are very few companies willing to advertise in a boxing mag and they do not pay a lot. For most magazines, the rule is that the advertising revenue should cover all production costs. This will never happen for BN and BM, or any other boxing mag. The ad revenue just isn't out there.

As both publications have relatively small readerships, ie cash from sales, which has to be balanced up against production/running costs, any penny we can get from ads is important. That said, I still hate ads, always have and always will. I daresay Tris feels the same — we're journalists. While specialist publications such as BM and BN will always need the ad revenue, I still have a limit as to the amount of pages I am willing to accept per issue and will not take unpaid ads from promoters etc, which can be weighed up against competition prizes and the like. If someone wants to take one of my editorial pages away from me, then they're gonna have to give me some money and that still won't make it worthwhile in my eyes. I resent bit of space I lose to an advert, can't help it. But you have to have them, fact of life.

On the greater point of how BN looks etc, I wouldn't comment if I had anything negative to say, that would be ungentlemanly and unprofessional. But I think the current team are doing a good job, well done to them.

[chinny]

I started reading under Mullan's editorship - what a writer. The kind of moral, crusading voice we don't really have now do we?

Some try their best in a tiny little way.

True, and your man Eric Armit isn't shy either. He must scour the alphabet rankings all the time looking for unexplainable movement. I guess the tone is a bit different. Harry would scream it from the front page. Yourself and Eric make similar points through an almost resigned humour, possibly influenced by the libel reasons you just referred to.

[Glyn Leach]

God love Harry but BN very nearly got sued out of existence in his time, you do have to be very careful. And the litigious culture has only grown since those days, so you have to be even more aware of the implications of what you write. It's all very well being a crusader but it isn't much use if you kill your own horse and lose the ability to go into battle at all.

[Coco]

I think Dixon has done a real good job, and BN looks in good hands

[DIRT SUGAR]

Exactly, it's alright coming on here with our pseudonyms and ranting as anything too out of line is taken down or just plain diluted by amount of other posts on here, but if you're having a pop at someone and it's your byline on a printed piece, you have to be very careful these days.

Also, regarding adverts, Boxing News is the trade mag, therefore where better to advertise your equipment etc?

[hc tibwal.]

Very good magazine, very good. In fact BN and BM are best in the business, better than Ring etc etc etc.

BN has always been good and early days of Tris Dixon's editorship seem promising.

Likes of Flexen who is a very good writer make the mag very good indeed.

BM - Love Leach's editorial, Farhood, Bunce and Smoggie are all welcome additions.

All in all very good

[mahatma]

deserter/glynn et al thanks for your responses which have been both informative and interesting about the issue.
my frustration over the adds has been balanced by the arguments of those in the know and i accept them.im pleased that glynn shares my view over the adds and that he has a bottom line regarding number of pages used

[Cyclops]

Sometimes it's good, sometimes there's not much of interest in it, but I always buy it. Like some other people have said, it's amazing that we still have a weekly magazine for our sport. It's not that easy to find though: You can walk into most newsagents and find three or four magazines about f*cking fishing, but only something like one in three shops will carry Boxing News in my experience.

Much better than Ring magazine (which I have a subscription too) which I automatically distrust just because it's owned by Golden Boy. I think going on about how Ring is so out of date is probably a subject done to death.

Also, I think it's great they've got Don McRae- Dark Trade is the best boxing book I ever read.

Oh and to be honest I didn't even notice there were that many adverts in it. All magazines have adverts. Big magazines like FHM and GQ and all that crap have about ten pages of adverts before you get to a contents page.