Ads on Covers. They're Doing It. Shouldn't You, Too?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Douglas Shore on April 22, 2009 at 10:57pm

This subject comes up every few years, and I respond every few years, so here we go again.

More than 20 years ago, we created a front page for our tabloid b2b magazine Sports Trend that had two ad positions on it (we called them upper and lower billboard). They were clearly distinguished (and distinguishable) from the editorial content on the front page. I recall no confusion among readers or advertisers, nor any outcry from the publishing industry in general. Creating those two premium ad positions for what was a relaunch of a failing magazine that we had acquired was one of several factors in generating interest and eventually tripling the ad revenue of the original title.

If you work for a b2b magazine that has bound volumes going back to the early decades of the 20th century, take a look. You may find that for many titles, the cover content in those days was advertising, 100% (except for the title).

And fast forwarding to the present day, you will find advertising on the front page of some of our leading newspapers. I, for one, never have any trouble distinguishing the ads from the editorial in the Wall Street Journal.

As long as there is no attempt to confuse or mislead the reader as to what is editorial and what is advertising, there is no question of ethics. Whether it is a good business decision or not (value of the editorial vs. revenue from advertising vs. reputation of magazine, etc., etc.), it is one that only the leaders of that publication can make, and the market will eventually judge the wisdom of that decision.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Dan Tynan on April 28, 2009 at 4:35pm

print magazines are already on a respirator; putting ads on the cover is like smothering the patient with a pillow.

(I've been on the edit side, as staff and freelancer, for 20+ years. can you tell?)

fact is, though, many large magazines 'sell' their covers without really calling it an ad. look at any major fashion magazine. who decides whose clothes, jewelry, makeup go on that model? is that decision based on how many pages that advertiser bought?

there is no such thing as sacred space. but the relationship between the reader and the magazine is sacred, or as close to it as a secular organization can get. screw that up, and that's the ballgame. so the question to ask is, will our readers trust us more or less if we sell the cover? and that's the answer to whether you should run an ad on the front.

cheers,

dt

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Greg Wiley on April 28, 2009 at 4:59pm

Hmmm . . . . lots of people weighing in on this already. I see opinions but no actual rationale that clearly descibes how a cover ad is actually detrimental to the editorial mission. Tradition, aesthetics, personal taste; yes, but there's no concrete evidence that it really hurts the publication. Do I want an ad on my cover; no, but only my personal taste is keeping me from selling one.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Richard Michem on April 29, 2009 at 8:54am

A good cover, should be an AD, for the editorial content inside the mag.

▶ Reply to This

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last