The Boxing News -where is it going ??

[dalcumly]

In April 1961 our own Dave Charnley fought the champion Joe Brown for the world lightweight title . The fight was held at Earls Court in front of 18,000 fans , the biggest ever attendance at an indoor event in the UK up until then . The fight was broadcast live on the radio and shown the following night on the BBC . Some of the national newspapers had the result on their FRONT page the next day . It was a huge event . The Ring magazine declared it their 1961 Fight of the Year .

On Friday night I stopped at a motorway service station and while in Wh Smith's I glanced at the magazine section and saw that the new Boxing News Annual was on the shelf . Before buying it I glanced through looking at the content . I noticed that they had a feature on 1961 being as it was 50 years ago . The article was divided into months with a couple of paragraphs highlighting the main events . You will not be surprised ,given the age and experience of the current Boxing News editorial team to learn that the above fight was not even mentioned . In fact , as far as I can remember , the April events consisted of some comment from America and a few names of British boxers having minor fights that month . As you can imagine the Annual went back on the shelf .
I love getting my Boxing News every week and I know the staff there work hard but I'm sorry ,their young glitzy style is not doing it for me . Matt Christie starts every article with utter garbage when there is no need . Just report the fight please instead of trying to be smart . Tris , have a word in his ear please before you lose more readers .
The Boxing Monthly is starting to take the shine off of our premier boxing publication . I know that many of my boxing acquaintances have just stopped buying the magazine over the last couple of years , and I do think that the Boxing News circulation is dropping - perhaps someone from the team could confirm or deny this . You have to have a sense of history ,it is not a teenage pop magazine !!

[Jon Saxon]

In April 1961 our own Dave Charnley fought the champion Joe Brown for the world lightweight title . The fight was held at Earls Court in front of 18,000 fans , the biggest ever attendance at an indoor event in the UK up until then . The fight was broadcast live on the radio and shown the following night on the BBC . Some of the national newspapers had the result on their FRONT page the next day . It was a huge event . The Ring magazine declared it their 1961 Fight of the Year .

On Friday night I stopped at a motorway service station and while in Wh Smith's I glanced at the magazine section and saw that the new Boxing News Annual was on the shelf . Before buying it I glanced through looking at the content . I noticed that they had a feature on 1961 being as it was 50 years ago . The article was divided into months with a couple of paragraphs highlighting the main events . You will not be surprised ,given the age and experience of the current Boxing News editorial team to learn that the above fight was not even mentioned . In fact , as far as I can remember , the April events consisted of some comment from America and a few names of British boxers having minor fights that month . As you can imagine the Annual went back on the shelf .
I love getting my Boxing News every week and I know the staff there work hard but I'm sorry ,their young glitzy style is not doing it for me . Matt Christie starts every article with utter garbage when there is no need . Just report the fight please instead of trying to be smart . Tris , have a word in his ear please before you lose more readers .
The Boxing Monthly is starting to take the shine off of our premier boxing publication . I know that many of my boxing acquaintances have just stopped buying the magazine over the last couple of years , and I do think that the Boxing News circulation is dropping - perhaps someone from the team could confirm or deny this . You have to have a sense of history ,it is not a teenage pop magazine !!

Just like most of our beloved sports demograph you got old.

Total shitter isn't it?

[NazNaci1]

To be fair, I am in my mid 30's and used to buy it every week, without fail (since 1984).

Its been about 3 months since I last bought a copy. I don't know, I mean I still love Boxing and watch practically every fight but with regards to the publication, it has gone backwards, a little. I don't mean that from a writing stand point, as such, as I do not have a problem with the journo's.

Maybe its the the new layout, the ads, the 6-8 pages of AM stuff. Not sure. I think it was Yid who said that, in the past you could pick up a copy and take your time, read through it and it was a good, solid read. Now you can pretty much read it all in about 20 mins. It just feels 'light' and lacking something. I just don't really get the urge these days to buy it, which is sad.

If I am in ASDA's, I can pick up a copy and pretty much skim read it in about 15 mins. There seems to be less in depth reports, far more snippets and just quick briefs of fights.

It might be just me, in all honesty, so I don't to moan too much as its not like its a bad publication. Maybe things have unwittingly changed my end.

[P4P#1]

I disagree, its the only magazine i buy, and most of my mates do who watch boxing, i only ever buy monthly if im desperate for somethin to read. Its oldish news and your reading about things that happend weeks ago, boxing news is better imo, i like the annual thought it was worth the ten quid, each to there own i suppose.

[reggaereggae]

I actually like boxing news. I have read it for 22 years. I think the quality of the writing is not alwayd great (that Kenneth Sam-Bouharie for example id dreadful), but I like the little snppets.

From Twitter / facebook - gives a little insight on the fighters. I like the colour and the artwork and enjoy the interview at the back. Publications have to move with the times, and I think BN has modernised to suit the younger fan whilst not omitting good fight reports and articles.

BN is the only publication I cannot miss, I alos buy Boxing Monthly every Month but often don't read more than half the articles.

Both are much better than the shite that comes out of America (the Ring etc) that's for sure

[iamasadlittleboy]

The problem is us fans know most of the news before the magazines hit the shop, we won't read it fully as we already know most of whats to come.

[tear up]

The problem is us fans know most of the news before the magazines hit the shop, we won't read it fully as we already know most of whats to come.

i agree use to by all the time but like ya said you know whats happened before it comes out with the net so no point buyin it now

[iamasadlittleboy]

The problem is us fans know most of the news before the magazines hit the shop, we won't read it fully as we already know most of whats to come.

i agree use to by all the time but like ya said you know whats happened before it comes out with the net so no point buyin it now

Also add that to the fact we all have less money and some of us are now unemployed....we'll take the free option rather than the pay option (hey allegedly staff...)

[damianhucker1]

used to buy every week , think ive only got it 3 times this year .

as someone said above , its finished in about 20 mins , i can find a sun on the bus and spend longer reading it .

[milpool]

I actually think it's pretty good. I hadn't got it for ages then earlier in the year I got it and have pretty much bought it every week since about mid-July.
The only downside for me is that it comes out on a Thursday so if I get it on a Friday I've only got a day to read the previews before the big fights of the weekend.
I'd be interested to know why others have such a downer on it and what they'd prefer to see, and that's not me disrespecting their opinions I'm just genuinely interested.

[iamasadlittleboy]

I actually think it's pretty good. I hadn't got it for ages then earlier in the year I got it and have pretty much bought it every week since about mid-July.
The only downside for me is that it comes out on a Thursday so if I get it on a Friday I've only got a day to read the previews before the big fights of the weekend.
I'd be interested to know why others have such a downer on it and what they'd prefer to see, and that's not me disrespecting their opinions I'm just genuinely interested.

Sorry if my comment came across as being disparaging it wasn't meant to be, just I find it hard to qualify buying it when I can get pretty much everything for free from various sites a few days earlier and "live" as opposed to a day or two after something happens. When I used to buy the magazine I used to enjoy it, but now I'll only read it if I'm getting a train somewhere and don't expect to have a mobile signal.

[Tommy Gunn13]

I still look forward to picking up on a thursday morning,as much as i did 22yrs ago on a friday

[Quixall]

I think the advent of the internet is a huge reason...........

People can go to a number of boxing sites to read articles and go on you tube for reviews and interviews for forth coming fights.

[mahatma]

used to get boxing news every week, i got sick off all the adverts which were at times like a yellow pages didnt like the 2 page photos of fights either -enjoy the stories and features and the standard of journalism was always good -guess with internet times are hard for publications-but ive always seen it as the trade paper so expected different than the other mags now there more or less the same

[broomy7s]

I recently subscribed and altho it's an easy 20 minute read I do enjoy what I read.

[the truth]

i said it before and ill say it again, its utter garbish now fact. it was mint when abrams was in charge, since these spotty kids have took over its toilet read then toilet roll material

[Flump]

I like it. I think it's picked up since Abrams left to be honest, week in week out it's usually pretty good.

[oliverfennell]

There seems to be less in depth reports, far more snippets and just quick briefs of fights.

But it's not 1984 anymore. These "in-depth reports" would turn off a lot more people in 2011 than have been turned off for the reasons you state. The reports should still go in, of course, but this is an era when we can read about a fight within an hour or so of it happening, and read an in-depth report the next day at the absolute latest. So a modern magazine of any kind needs to be more of a preview/analysis/colour/human interest/features package than a newsy read.

[oliverfennell]

i said it before and ill say it again, its utter garbish now fact. it was mint when abrams was in charge, since these spotty kids have took over its toilet read then toilet roll material

I wouldn't put it in those terms but I agree with your general point. People are correct that the internet does the job that BN used to do, so they need to adapt. They have tried and, I believe, failed. I'm just a layman, so people in the journalism trade can jump all over me on this if I'm wrong, but I think the way to compete with the internet is not to try and emulate it on paper but instead do what it doesn't always do and provide some genuine depth. The internet is all about one liners and brief snippets of minute by minute information (buzz). Niche print publications should surely look to produce material that is a little more weighty and specific, right?

Well, yes and no... I do think magazines (outside of the likes of Nat Geo, Time, Economist etc) need to have the shorter bits, multiple "entry points" etc to an article, but of course the longer pieces too. I think BN gets this balance right. There's the "news bulletin" type first few pages, big fights get a 2-page preview or report which is a fair whack, and lesser fights and according amount, and there's always a lengthy feature of 6 pages or so in each issue.

[johnnykayo]

i had bought the boxing news since 1976,every week without fail and 2 years ago i give it the big toe im afraid ! its a right load of crap,it just went down hill since claude left and you can get all the info on here and its much better as so many sites etc on the sport,so i can honestly see it folding in years to come,a waste of £3 !!!

[REEVE]

read boxing news since 2005 (not long compared to sum i know)

but the qaulity of the mag has went down the spout in the last 2 years / 18 months its just not the same

[Old bones Ian]

Well i have to say i don't criticise Boxing News that often, but this weeks copy has 6 pages of an interview devoted to Carl Frampton. Now i like Carl and feel he can go a long way in the game, but 6 pages!!! and that doesn't include the page and half for his fight preview against Hughes.

2 pages of the interview are full page photos, and there are 4 other pictures as well.

for me this just looks like a lazy week at BN.

And good luck to Carl tonight.

[gasman]

I have bought it a couple of times this month and I have to say it has been a good read. This week's mag had a column by Teddy Atlas (which I hope becomes a regular column) and the Don McRae interview was excellent. I might renew my subs.

[mahatma]

bad things-full page photos, continual adverts throughout make it more like a yellow pages,too much amateur coverage and hyping up fighters let the normal media do this -BN was always the TRADE paper, sometimes it compares with heat/hello 6 pages on Frampton is excessive, for a ten fight or so pro, Ok building a fighters profile but lets report on the facts not the hype!

good things-standard of journalism good , like letters page,some of the features e.g pacman mayweathermartinez klitschko brothers etc

guess with the internet its difficult for any publication but alot of loyal readers have switched off to it, but times have changed so everyone tells me

[Cyclops]

Now you can pretty much read it all in about 20 mins.

True dat.

Still buy it every week though.