CN FORUMS ARCHIVE Telescope Reviews: Monthy Astronomy vs S&T race

Scott,

You are right in saying we aren't homogeneous, nor monolithic. But we do share several demographic characteristics as a group that help define a magazine's readership appeal. Some would include our overall education level (both formal and informal) and that we probably have a wide range of interests (S&T's Reader Demographics on their web page has some interesting stats). That latter aspect always presents challenge for an interest specific magazine such as S&T and Astronomy.

I have heard both David Eicher and Rick Fienberg talk about this at Texas Star Party over the years. One of the biggest concerns that both of them have is the overall greying of the folks in our community (and I am certainly square in that group). I believe that was one of the motivations for S&T starting Night Sky.

My comments were not critiques, but just observations. I don't honestly think for one minute that S&T is out of touch with the community. I just think that, right now at least, Astronomy is a bit more in touch, by comparison. The margin perceive isn't huge and that could easily change in the next year.

This is a pendulum that has been swinging for decades now. I think Astronomy has probably seen much more variety (both good and not so good) in its editorial presentation (compared to S&T) over the years mostly because they have had more changes in their editors and staff.

S&T, by comparison, had a long run with Leif Robinson as editor-in-chief (20 of his 38 years there). The turnover to Rick was a planned crossover that gave more of a smooth transition to changes.

I also think that their respective editorial approaches are influenced by the locations of their offices (S&T is in Cambridge, MA and Astronomy is in Waukesha, WI). I know when I worked as an editor for a magazine several years ago, this was a significant influencing factor.

These are both good magazines competing for a niche audience. One thing we always should remember, though. The readership they are vying for is much, much larger than the regular audience here on CN or the folks you meet at star parties. They couldn't survive just on our readership alone. For 2005, Astronomy's audited paid circulation was ~129,000 and S&T's was ~90,000. That's over 10 times the number of registered members here at CN (using Astronomy's numbers). So the presentation of these magazines will be oriented to a much broader audience than us and will certainly not reflect all of our tastes (going back to your comment that we aren't a homogeneous group).

David M.

--------------------
David Moody, FRAS
17.5" f/5 dob
10" f/10 SCT
5" f/8 refractor
80mm f/6 refractor
66mm f/6 refractor
Plus a few others out of the rotation