Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User
mcoren
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 01/11/06
Posts: 1150
Loc: Northern Virginia, USA
|
|
I agree with many of Rod's points, although I don't agree that "The reality of the current economy is no doubt numero uno..." As Rod points out, these troubles have been brewing at the magazines for some time, long before the current economic downturn. I think he hit the nail on the head with the internet and the more connected amateur community of today versus twenty or more years ago.
One factor I didn't see mentioned is the growth of light pollution. People don't walk out of their homes and see the stars anymore, so they don't tend to wonder about them and actively go out to learn about them. As a result, the magazines are not gaining a lot of new subscribers.
As for my gripe with the magazines, S&T seems to have developed an annoying habbit of self promotion. A recent article on the discovery of Sirius B featured a photo of the aperture mask that former S&T editor Dennis DiCicco used to photograph it in 1970-something, which really added no value to the article IMHO. In another recent example, a reader question in the "Hobby Q&A" section asking why there are no green stars was answered with what amounted to "we answered that question in an article in our such-and-such month 1992 issue".
--------------------
Mike
Orion SkyQuest XT10
Suburban Washington DC
|
brianclose
newbie
Reged: 07/10/07
Posts: 1
|
|
I collect S&T, and have them back to 1960. Looking over it over time is quite interesting.
The biggest shift was in the 1980s with the SCT revolution. The magazine became a slave to two manufacturers. Articles were dumbed down (remember the firing of Bob the ATM editor?). The trend continued into the 90s when I finally had enough.
S&T also missed opportunities to lead the hobby. Remember CCD Magazine? They started and then canned it. On the one hand, I thought CCD content should have been expanded in the main magazine which I already was paying for, on the other hand CCD Magazine showed a glimmer that S&T finally got that they should help lead the hobby. Instead, after canceling CCD magazine I saw no significant increase in CCD coverage, especially "how to", which was left to books and the web.
So S&T has consistently ignored new and important trends or reported them late, or waited until Meade put out its own product for review (remember the PlanCam roll out?).
I really think that the domination of the magazine by two advertisers limited innovation and editorial content even before the web.
|
Jeff Morgan
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 09/28/03
Posts: 1530
Loc: Prescott, AZ
|
|
Quote:
I agree with many of Rod's points, although I don't agree that "The reality of the current economy is no doubt numero uno..." As Rod points out, these troubles have been brewing at the magazines for some time, long before the current economic downturn. I think he hit the nail on the head with the internet and the more connected amateur community of today versus twenty or more years ago.
Well put, a slow economy primarily kills off the "weak". Those reading the environment correctly and doing the "right thing" weather it out just fine.
Overall I think Rod covered it pretty well, although I am still wondering why a "conglomerate" would be interested in a low-volume niche mag like S&T. I'll put it my vote for more stuff in the back of the magazine and less in the front. The only amateur stuff that gets covered well is imaging (although those interested in imaging may disagree). Why not for example, have two or three articles per month on deep sky observing? There are lots of constellations up each month to be covered.
Definitely more equipment reviews. And when the product is flawed, please say so and stop trying so hard to find nice things to say about it. If you guys want to find something nice to say about a manufacturer, then why not do an in-depth personal interview or tour of their plant?
And of course, telescope making. Not just finished scopes built by master machinists that I could never do (although I must admit, I like those articles too), but some fundamental articles on things like optical fabrication or structural basics. Even reprinting the old articles from 30 years ago on these topics would be helpful.
Right now Sky & Tel is like a narcotic for me. I so much crave the day of its arrival in the mail and am ecstatic when I get my hands on each new issue. Then after about 20 minutes of fast skimming the high is over and I come crashing to earth again when the reality of the content sets in. I suspect that this will be a habit I kick at the end of the this subscription.
--------------------
Jeff Morgan
Prescott, AZ
Wile E. Coyote School of Telescope Making
|
highfnum
super member
Reged: 09/06/06
Posts: 104
Loc: NY
|
|
great article
i've been getting S&T since Aug '70
In some ways they are better -- product reviews are useful,
so is astrophoto technique
In some ways worse -- not enough ATM stuff
|
ckwastro
professor emeritus
Reged: 11/23/05
Posts: 730
Loc: AZ
|
|
Nice article Rod. You nailed it, although I will say I'm one of those who do believe these magazines will not bite the hand that feeds them. I have yet to see a truly objective review of any equipment by the Big 2 in either publication. Perhaps I'm jaded when it comes to mass-produced instruments, but several times I was left scratching my head after reading the reviews on particular instruments I had either owned or used.
Having said that, it is a tragedy what's happening to these rags. I've found in both mags much repetitive info, too many glossy ads, and a on-going reduction in truly good content. Certainly not enough objective reviews. As a result, last year I let my subscriptions to BOTH magazines lapse. I was skimming most of the content looking for new info I could put to use. Some of the science-related articles were good, but I found much of their content to be repetition as well, with maybe 10% - 15% of the article's total volume pertaining to new information on the target subject.
Sad, as I usually prefer to sit down with a book, or magazine over reading on-line. I sit in front of a computer all day, and although I love CN and AMart, often I'll print out threads and /or reviews so I can sit down with them away from the computer. Hopefully they will survive, but they certainly need to re-think the direction they are headed.
Thanks for putting this out there Unk! Great job.
--------------------
Kerry
- 92mm AP Stowaway (f/7 version, uh...actually f/6.57
 )
- Takahashi Mewlon 210
- Giro 3 Twin View
- 10x42 Audubon Equinox
- Bogen 3221 tripod / 3047 3-Way Head
- Denk Std BV
|
RRaubach
AstroCowboy
Reged: 01/26/05
Posts: 2173
Loc: Douglas (Converse County),WY
|
|
I generally enjoy any articles written by serious amateurs; i.e. Sue Frrench, Alan Whitman, and their ilk. I like challenging observing projects: globulars in other galaxies, distant or extremely difficult planetaries, etc. The trend, however, is away from observing projects. It's always how great the newest iteration of a 40 year old telescope design! The "big two" always are featured in the testing of equipment. I'm truly sickened.
I began my subscription to Sky and Telescope in 1953 (with several significant lapses).
I don't really want to say R.I.P. to either of the rags, but they need to fulfill the needs and wishes of the BUYERS!
--------------------
Rodger
Meade SN-10 (UHTC) on Tak EM-200 mount/Antares rotating rings. Moonlite focuser.
Parallax 14.5" Newtonian on HD 200 mount (arriving soon!) w/ conical Royce mirror.
TMB 203 f/7 APO refractor on Tak NJP-160 mount.
Discovery 12.5" PDHQ
Schneider 18x80 "Flakfernrohr" binoculars/tripod mounted. Canon 15x50 IS binoculars
Unihedron Sky Quality Meter
|
Jay_Bird
professor emeritus
Reged: 01/04/06
Posts: 680
Loc: Nevada 36N 115W
|
|
In short, a lot of us don't want "a" magazine, we each want "MY" magazine - the one with a lot more of whatever we like and less of all that other stuff.
There is more being said here, but that is a good part of the comments.
I still like to peruse the edited, portable products of S&T enough to subscribe, and of Astronomy enough to buy occasionally. I enjoy the regular observing columnists and features and the surprise articles that are outside my bailiwick. With a 8-inch biggest scope and 50mm binoculars I feel plenty challenged by Sue French and other regulars.
I think the magazines generally feel less "buy new gear" consumption-driven than the web, since I can just flip past the ads when I know I don't have the money.
Web sites are also driven by advertising because someone has to pay for all this ( I will give my thanks to Astronomics here, both for CN, and for good values! ). Maybe the link to vendors seems more subtle here to some, because it's a click away, not a printed page advertisement, but it's still here.
CN often links readers back to older posts to answer questions - exactly like one complaint about S&T.
--------------------
'these things stand like stone - kindness in another's troubles, courage in your own' Gordon
|
Nick Lloyd
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 10/24/06
Posts: 1640
Loc: cincinnati
|
|
I like the format of ink and paper, and I'm willing to pay more for it. However, the content MUST be there.
Three questions:
1)What is the perfect astronomy magazine?
2)What is the highest price you would pay for it?
3)Does it need to come out every month, or could there be just 6-8 issues a year?
(my response)
1)Observing techniques and non-Messier targets
2)$8
3)I'd accept 6-8 issues a year, no problem.
--------------------
"The best scope is the one you use." -rcg
|
Mr. Bill
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 02/09/05
Posts: 2757
Loc: Just passing through.....
|
|
S&T has gone from library reference material to back of the toilet reading in my household...YMMV
--------------------
10x50 Fujinon FMT-SX binos
15x70 AP binos + Paragon p-mount
Oberwerk 100BT 45 degree + Hercules fork mount
120mm f/5 Orion achromat + Moonlite focuser
140mm f/5.7 Vixen NeoAchro Petzvel refractor
150mm f/6.5 Antares achromat
150mm f/8 homemade achromat....EE Barnard MW Sweeper
8 inch newt with f/5 Swayze mirror
10 inch f/4.7 Orion newt + Paracorr
15 inch f/5 Discovery split tube
35mm Pan, 26mm Nagler, 17mm Nagler, 13mm Ethos, 8mm Ethos
Member IDA
|
GJJim
sage
Reged: 09/09/06
Posts: 257
|
|
Good article that echoes many of my feelings about these publications. My pet theory about their decline has a different cause -- the kids have grown up. For me the golden age of S&T was the '60s and early '70s when people actually made things. We bought kits, made and figured mirrors, and sweat bullets to get a grainy astrophoto now and then. The hobby is now dominated by grey-haired old men, and although we talk about ATM, 99% of us would rather whip out a credit card than pour a pitch lap.
So yes, the two major magazines became little more than slick catalogs for the two major scope vendors -- they were simply reflecting the changes in their subscriber base. Other magazines like Amateur Astronomy filled the ATM niche abandoned by S&T when it went "Hollywood" in the '80s. But even they have devolved somewhat and now cater more to the old men with disposable income and less to the few young people still fascinated by the night sky.
Has light pollution hurt the hobby and magazine subscriptions? You bet, and that is one area where amateurs might effect real change. Is the answer ezines? IMO, no because the physical format was never the problem to begin with.
|
CalAstro
member
Reged: 12/02/05
Posts: 26
Loc: Apple Valley, CA, USA
|
|
Uncle Rod, I couldn't agree with you more! Your article is straight and to the point!
But, I did want to add a few things... First, though we are concentrating primarily here on the astronomy mags, the same problem exists for virtually all "hobby" mags! Take a look at "ham" radio! Where are all the excellent magazines that existed even twenty and thirty years ago? Even the 'bible' of amateur radio, "QST" is just a ghost of it's once proud self! It's pretty much the same with all the mags for all the hobbies where we used to "wait for them at the mailbox chompin' at the bit!"
I do a lot of public outreach as a NASA/JPL Solar System Ambassador and I see a lot of interest in astronomy and space research in the youngsters of today. But many of today's amateurs have become "spoiled" with all the new goodies available. Many of the kids today, even when offered a "free" small refractor telescope to learn on, decline the offer because they would rather wait for their parents to buy them a "go to" scope! If you offer to help the youngsters "make their own telescopes", you're often met with a bunch of blank stares, and questions like "why would I want to do that?"
I'm not saying that the new technologies are bad, but we're taking away much of the pride of "building it yourself" and "seeing the heavens with the telescope that we made"! Even of those that do build their own scopes, how many still grind their own mirrors? And every time I see a new "variation" on the dob or other alt/az mounted reflectors, you see the same exact things being churned out and advertised in the mags for the next few years.
You are right on the money about "Sky at Night" and the inclusion of the CD's with each issue. Of course, in the U.K., the inclusion of recent episodes of Patrick Moore's BBC TV show on the CD's just helps them sell even more.
I agree with you that something could be done with "what up this month" coverage. But let's not get carried too far away! I spent a good part of last year doing public outreach and observing in Australia. The coverage for events in the Southern Hemisphere is sorely lacking in both "Astronomy" and in "Sky at Night". Both mags are for sale in Australia, but they are practically worthless there except for the "armchair" articles. "Sky and Telescope" is the only mag that produces an "Australian" version of the magazine. Being much more "unfamiliar" with the southern skies, I relied heavily on "what's up" and the charts in "Australian Sky and Telescope" to find my way around. Even though I did have a laptop with me, I found the magazine charts much easier to use, just to identify unfamiliar constellations!
And you are very right about review sites like excelsis.com and astronomyratings.com! Even though I thoroughly enjoy the review on CloudyNights, many of the items reviewed will forever be beyond my meager budget, or they are tested on scopes that are far different than mine! I would much prefer to read reviews where I can actually compare a product and get different user's opinions of that product being tested on equipment similar to my own! It does me absolutely no good to read about the latest eyepiece that has been tested on a 20" f/4 dob, when I'm using a 4" f/12 refractor! I want to know how it will perform on mine! That's why I've concentrated and written over 50 reviews this year alone on astronomyratings.com!
Anyway, these are just some of my ramblings. I do think the astronmomy mags need to get more of the "amateur" aspects of the hobby back into their pages. At least if they want us "amateurs" to continue to support them!
Philip E. Evans
California Center for Astronomy and Astrophysics (CalAstro)
NASA/JPL Solar System Ambassador
|
Larry F
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 05/24/04
Posts: 1396
Loc: Westchester, NY
|
|
Quote:
S&T has gone from library reference material to back of the toilet reading in my household...YMMV
Yeah, me too, but they're gonna make us take a laptop into the bathroom now if we want to browse S&T!
--------------------
C5 Orange Tube SCT
Orion 127 Mak
SV Nighthawk (1st generation)
CPC 800 XLT SCT
Coronado Maxscope 40
5 1/4" f/5.2 home-built Newtonian
Denk II Binos
Giro 2/Tech2000 Giro Driver/Tech2000 QuickDraw Pier
A zillion eyepieces and some more mounts
Mason & Hamlin BB 214 cm (piano)
My Gallery
|
Tony Flanders
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 05/18/06
Posts: 2093
Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA
|
|
Quote:
The Trouble with the Magazines
By: Rod Mollise
Not surprisingly, all of us at Sky & Telescope have read Rod's article by now, and discussed it at some length. Rod makes a few minor factual mistakes, but I don't think they're important enough to call out. His basic point -- that the magazines are suffering deeply because of competition from the Internet -- is beyond dispute. In fact, ever since Bob started as editor in chief -- and before that too -- we've been discussing exactly the same issues that Rod raised in his article.
In brief, the world has changed, and S&T will never again play the central role that it used to. However, the editors are certainly not going to let a 70-year-old magazine die without putting up the best fight we can. Despite everything, we're still the most authoritative voice around, and we represent continuity among the generations. The magazine needs to change radically -- as it has done before in the past -- but it also needs to stay the same. That's a tough challenge, but we're eager to take it on.
There are a couple of factual points in Rod's article that need to be clarified. First, with respect to the page count. Rick Fienberg addressed this in an eloquent and thorough post to the Stellar Media forum. The magazine's page count depends almost entirely on how many ads we get -- and hardly at all on who's making the decision, or even, in any direct way, on how many people are reading it.
Second, with respect to the new ownership. I wouldn't say that the editors and owners always see eye to eye, but we do so a lot more than most people might imagine. The bottom line is, and always has been, the bottom line. Unless it's supported by a foundation, no magazine can last for long if its expenses exceed its revenues.
The editors want to put out a great magazine, and know that we need to make a profit to do so. The owners want to make a profit, and know that we need to put out a great magazine to do so. Sometimes, around the margins, these different points of view would lead to different decisions, but again ... a lot less than most people imagine.
Barring a revolution in marketing, Night Sky magazine was doomed. Any responsible management would have made the same decision sooner or later. Night Sky never achieved the critical mass of readers needed to keep a magazine afloat. As one of the two people on staff who worked on Night Sky nearly full time, I feel the loss very deeply -- as did our core of dedicated readers. But it's better to try and fail than not to try at all.
Same story, many years earlier and under a totally different management, with CCD Astronomy. Ultimately, we exist to serve our readers, and we can only go where our readers will follow.
In case anybody doesn't know, I'm an associate editor at Sky & Telescope. You can read my brief bio here.
--------------------
Tony Flanders
eyeglasses
6x15 and 8x32 monoculars
8x25, 7x35, 10x30 IS, 10x50, and 15x70 binoculars
70mm and 100mm achromatic refractors
4.5", 7", and 12.5" Dobs
|
Wes James
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/12/06
Posts: 2454
|
|
Great article, Rod- and very timely. Saw it a couple of days ago- started to read it, had to go away- and when I came back- it was GONE! Glad it finally made its way back to the site! Wha Hoppen???? I've got a lot of thoughts on this topic...
While I agree that the internet age has done a lot of good, I think it's done a lot to dumb us down as a society. Our kids who- guess what- grow up to be adults, are forgetting how to do anything with their hands except use a keyboard. The Bluetooth thing- earsets sprouting out of their ears- are simply a step closer to a brain/computer interface that will allow our hands to eventually fall off due to a lack of any use for them.
As I newbie to astronomy 2-1/2 years ago, I loved the magazines, but in particular, Night Sky, a publication that spoke to me on a level I could understand- with articles and how-to's that helped me get my feet on the ground. I didn't need Astronomy's philosophies on what makes black holes generate radio waves at a frequency of 2.995 Ghz.- or whether life could survive in a Quark! I still mourn Night Sky's demise. And even though I feel Astronomy and Sky & Telescope has less and less practical value, I will still mourn their eventual demise, simply because I'm old enough to love to read- and to actually hold what I'm reading in my hand- with pictures that I can take with me to work or wherever. Not in some eBook form that Steve Jobs or Amazon might like to sell us. Along with their handy-dandy eBook reading device for only $129.95, batteries not included..
--------------------
Wes
Atlantic Beach, FL
Some bino’s from Miyauchi 5x32 Binon's up through Garrett 20x110 Signature's,
Some telescopes from a Stellarvue 80mm NHNG up through a couple of 8” reflectors…
And a wonderful 4.25" Delmarva Shiefspiegler!
Some good friends, made here on C/N.
Oh- several cats and a wonderful wife!
Anyone want a cat???? :-O
"When your work speaks for itself- Don't Interrupt" -Gamble Rogers
|
Larry Geary
sage
Reged: 09/24/06
Posts: 470
Loc: NJ, USA
|
|
GJJim: Hammer. Nail. Bang.
One possible silver lining in the huge increase in energy prices is that we might see people begin to turn off all those unnecessary electric lights burning away throughout the night. We may yet get our skies back.
--------------------
1-20-2013
|
Larry F
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 05/24/04
Posts: 1396
Loc: Westchester, NY
|
|
Just as a (more serious) follow-up, one of the problems with the Internet is the death of good writing. Another is the equality of opinion, which sounds like a great, democratic thing but by equilibrating experts and idiots it's not always very helpful in the pursuit of truth, beauty and knowledge.
To that end, in 1996 S&T published an incredibly eloquent piece by Yale professor (and Unibomber victim) David Gelerntner occasioned by the announcement of the renovation of the Hayden Planetarium in New York to become the Rose Center. Taking as his starting point a comparison of the statements made in 1935 and 1996 about the public purpose of the planetarium, Gelertner spoke about the need for a hierarchy of authority in pursuit of truth, and he bemoaned the dumbing down of culture occasioned by mass media and the transformation of education into entertainment.
Perhaps Mr. Flanders could make that opinion piece freely available on the S&T web site or post it on CN. Its argument justifies struggling to keep S&T in being as an "authoritative" source, regardless of the instant gratification of the Internet. You would find it illuminating. And it's that kind of unexpected and memorable writing that printed magazines just seem to do better and more effectively than electronic media. Even if they end up in the throne room.
--------------------
C5 Orange Tube SCT
Orion 127 Mak
SV Nighthawk (1st generation)
CPC 800 XLT SCT
Coronado Maxscope 40
5 1/4" f/5.2 home-built Newtonian
Denk II Binos
Giro 2/Tech2000 Giro Driver/Tech2000 QuickDraw Pier
A zillion eyepieces and some more mounts
Mason & Hamlin BB 214 cm (piano)
My Gallery
|
swalker
Imaging Editor - Sky & Telescope
Reged: 01/22/07
Posts: 366
Loc: 42.9225°N, 71.2242°W
|
|
Larry-
that focal point was by David Gelernter, and was printed in the June 1997 issue, page 6.
Sean Walker
Edited by swalker (07/02/08 12:33 PM)
|
Larry F
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 05/24/04
Posts: 1396
Loc: Westchester, NY
|
|
Thanks for the correction. My bathroom isn't large enough to save all the back issues, so I was off by one year. Nevertheless, the article should be somehow connected to this thread somehow since I think it informs the discussion.
--------------------
C5 Orange Tube SCT
Orion 127 Mak
SV Nighthawk (1st generation)
CPC 800 XLT SCT
Coronado Maxscope 40
5 1/4" f/5.2 home-built Newtonian
Denk II Binos
Giro 2/Tech2000 Giro Driver/Tech2000 QuickDraw Pier
A zillion eyepieces and some more mounts
Mason & Hamlin BB 214 cm (piano)
My Gallery
|
Rick Woods
Post Laureate
Reged: 01/27/05
Posts: 4288
Loc: Inner Solar System
|
|
Quote:
Larry-
that focal point was by David Gelernter, and was printed in the June 1997 issue, page 6.
Sean Walker
And you know what? I could go read that article, unchanged, right now. Why? Because I have that magazine on a bookshelf in the back room. Along with all its brothers for years earlier and later.
One vote here for the printed magazine. Reading on the internet for long periods of time makes me want to puke. I grew up on those magazines, and I liked it. They used to be written by people older and smarter than me. Now, they're written by people younger and smarter than me. Everything changes, but nothing will ever take the place of the new S&T arriving in the mail. The hobby is full of people who love the low-tech elegance and simplicity of the big Dob - why do they turn into rabid technology lovers when it comes to their magazine?
Luddites unite! Keep your subscriptions active, don't cave in to the paperless world. Because, if you do, what will you do when the power goes out?
Me - I'll pull out a back issue of S&T.
--------------------
- Rick
14" LX200GPS
8" Meade 826C
|
swalker
Imaging Editor - Sky & Telescope
Reged: 01/22/07
Posts: 366
Loc: 42.9225°N, 71.2242°W
|
|
Ditto Rick-
Of course, my opinion on this is biased, but it hurts my eyes after a long period of reading tons of text on a computer screen.
--------------------
12.5" f/5.1 Newt
10" f/4.5 Newt
4.25" f/4 Astrograph
80mm f/10 refractor
70mm Mak Cass
40mm PST
Millennium Mount EQ
TI ProDome #002
|
|
4 registered and 6 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: asaint, spaceydee
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 5061
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
