You’re Not Cosmopolitan

Music to quietly hum to yourself every time a vendor calls with this “problem.”

Update: The artist who took the self portrait for the cover in question, Ana Alvarez-Errecalde contacted me this afternoon requestion the following clarification. After Facebook censored the cover image, it was the artist, Ana Alvarez who changed the image by placing the red dot on her chest. In her words, this solved the problem by both drawing attention to the magazine and pointing out the double standards in society. It also made two versions of the cover, the censored going out to the newsstand, and the uncensored out to subscribers. In the end, this was a consensus decision reached by both the artist and Hip Mama.

A number of years ago, my client list included an “alternative art” magazine that had the tendency to include NSFW pictures inside it’s book. I had no problem with this, and as near as I could tell, neither did anyone else who actually read the magazine. On the other hand, one of our major retailers had a significant problem with the content and would periodically relegate the magazine to the back of the rack or require the publisher to polybag.

Eventually, the retailer wound up requiring the publisher to polybag every single issue. The upside of this was that sales went up (Forbidden fruit anyone?).

During a conversation with the publisher about this issue, the subject of Cosmopolitan and some of their objectionable cover lines and images was brought up. “So why do they pick on us?” the client wanted to know.

“It’s simple,” I replied, “You’re not Cosmopolitan.”

It would be nice if the world and it’s participants would play fair. But tsunamis wash over the righteous and the unrighteous. Houses burn down, terminal illnesses blossom. And large vertical corporate entities get to decide who they want to mess with and who they will reward by whatever rules they decide to abide by at that particular time. If you don’t like it, feel free to complain to your consultant. It’s what we’re paid for.

Hip Mama magazine is a small, buzz worthy magazine with a small newsstand footprint.

Recently their editor did the smart thing, placed an image of their upcoming cover on their Facebook page. The readers responded. Apparently mostly positively.

Editor’s note: Dear Publishers, there is no reason all of you can not start immediately doing this simple task. Thank you.

The cover image in question was of a Spanish based artist  who wore a Spider Man mask and was breastfeeding her son.

It kind of makes sense for a magazine called Hip Mama.

The artist is topless, her son is wearing is wearing the rest of the Spider Man costume. He’s four years old.

The latest issue of Hip Mama

The latest issue of Hip Mama

Frankly, I see nothing wrong with the image. But unfortunately I can  understand that a distributor or retailer, even one that would happily carry Hip Mama may hesitate for a moment. It turned out that Facebook had a problem with this image and had them take it down. Then Hip Mama‘s newsstand vendor contacted them and told them they had some problems with the cover.

Of course, regular readers of this blog may remember this:

So 2012...

So 2012…

Yes, we have passed this way, again.  And again and again.

Periodically, larger magazines like Time, or Marie Claire, or Cosmopolitan, have something on their cover that incites someone, somewhere and the issue gets pulled. It gets placed behind other titles, covered up, what have you. Usually this will only happen in one or two retailers of any note.


A number of years back, Marie Claire got "censored" rather publicly... Source: FishbowlNY

A number of years back, Marie Claire got “censored” rather publicly… Source: FishbowlNY

It is a little rare these days for the majority of a shipment to get censored.

You have to hand it to the editor at Hip Mama and the artist. They came up with a very clever and sensible solution. The tag line for the publication is “No Supermom’s Here” and they put it in a large red dot over the artists chest. Everything got covered up.

Ready to ship!

Ready to ship!

The publisher also invited readers to buy the “uncensored” cover directly from them therefore bypassing those squeamish vendors and retailers.

My simple unpaid, unsolicited and uninvited advice to the publisher is this: I love it. Keep it up. Keep pushing the boundaries. But be prepared. You’re not Cosmopolitan.





Posted in Covers, Covers That Work, Debates, Magazines | Tagged , , , , | 5 Comments

Some More Kick Ass Music Covers

One of the services many consultants provide for magazine publishers is a cover analysis. Over the years, I’ve developed a template that can dive deeply into the single copy sales of a title. Consequently I feel pretty qualified to weigh in on how a cover looks and how it may sell. However, if you really want some input on cover and magazine design turn to Robert Newman. Mr. Newman is the former design director of Real Simple and served as the creative director of such iconic magazines as Entertainment Weekly, Details and Vibe.

Do you want to keep up on the happenings in the magazine design world? Follow his very active and entertaining  Twitter feed, or visit his Tumblr page.

Earlier this week he published an article on Adweek titled “101 Kick Ass Music Covers. The most awesome, iconic and controversial magazine images of the last 80 years.”

Newman explained it this way:

“…they also have chronicled the changes in the culture and the sounds of the times—consider Bob Dylan’s various transformations across 24(!) Rolling Stone covers. Not only have covers become part of music history and culture at large, but they also remain a potent tool for marketing artists.”

He’s right and he pointed out that fans will obsess over the images and artists on the covers. I certainly did both as a youth and today as an adult. The 101 selections are deep and cover the broad spectrum of magazines from such classic music titles as Down Beat to the cultural icon Rolling Stone to the very controversial Kayne West/Kim Kardashian cover on Vogue last month. They are all valid choices presented in a way that will make you say out loud “Yes! I loved that!” Or perhaps “What? Why that?”

But I confess, there were a few issues and covers that I remember seeing or collecting over the years that I thought should be included.

For example, one of my favorite premiere issues is the first release of Spin Magazine featuring Madonna. It was a great kick off to an interesting title that had a good run. I was a little surprised that it wasn’t included in Newman’s collection. You may recall that I used to work for the former Capital Distributing Company, the sister national distributor to copy cat publisher Charlton Publications.  I  would have included Hit Parader covers from the titles  ’80’s and ‘90’s rennaissance weren’t included.

Time Magazine‘s Bruce Springsteen cover was included. What about Newsweek’s? What about Eddie Van Halen’s Guitar World cover. I can think of a bunch of people wondering where that was.

I submit this for your consideration and not as a counterpoint to Robert Newman’s list. Here are some additional music covers to think about and maybe smile over. Because this is a blog about the newsstand, celebrate the sales history of.

Spin Magazine's Launch Issue Featuring Madonna

Spin Magazine’s Launch Issue Featuring Madonna

Spin Magazine's Second Anniversary Issue - Also Featuring Madonna

Spin Magazine’s Second Anniversary Issue – Also Featuring Madonna

Creem Magazine Featuring Grace Slick. December 1977

Creem Magazine Featuring Grace Slick. December 1977. This made the rounds of our high school newspaper office for a few months.

Guitar Player April 2001 Featuring Eddie Van Halen

Guitar Player April 2001 Featuring Eddie Van Halen

Rock & Soul Magazine Featuring Michael Jackson. September 1981

Rock & Soul Magazine Featuring Michael Jackson. September 1981

Another "version" of Michael Jackson. Rock & Soul Magazine. July 1979

Another “version” of Michael Jackson. Rock & Soul Magazine. July 1979

I love how the “cool” logo of Rock and Soul now seems so “retro”.

Down Beat Magazine November 1955

Down Beat Magazine November 1955. I picked this up at a garage sale years ago, and may have re-sold it because it is nowhere to be found.

Circus Magazine. October 1969

Circus Magazine Featuring The Beatles October 1969

New Music Express Featuring Florence and the Machine. April 2010

New Music Express Featuring Florence and the Machine. April 2010

There’s a reason these are all strictly music titles. Consider this: Music titles that report to the AAM (Alliance for Audited Media, formerly the ABC) have declined significantly. For the last reporting period (Second half 2013), the AAM “Snapshot” showed only 6 titles reporting as compared to the second half of 2008 when 10 titles reported.

Even more ominously, unit sales were down 79% and on the retail dollars side of the ledger, sales were down -$16,180,626. That got your attention, huh?

Do music magazines still have viability on the newsstand and in print. Well, far more titles don’t report to AAM than do. And, as Newman’s list showed, there are a lot of great music oriented covers and articles out there in magazines that are not totally devoted to the music industry.

If you have any covers you want included in this list, please send them along.





Posted in Covers, Covers That Work, Magazines | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Things Placed In Front Of The Magazine Rack: The Clerk Edition

So how does this deal sound?

  • You’ll get a generous discount.
  • We’ll give you Scan Based Trading so you don’t have any inventory to concern your accountants.
  • We’ll pay you a Retail Display Allowance. Heck, we’ll make it “Advanced RDA”. Will that work for you?
  • Your suppliers trucks will drop off new deliveries, merchandise the product and return those pesky unsolds that will never disgrace your accountants’ ledgers.
  • Representatives of your suppliers will advise you on product mix, placement and keep you apprised of all the latest new launches, manage, market and sell your promotional programs.

Sounds good? Great! Thank you for being a magazine retailer! Now, where will you display our merchandise in your stores?

Oh, I don’t know. How about in the “dead” lane?

Lots of traffic here...

Lots of traffic here…

Jim Sturdivant, one of the founders of mediaShepherd sent me the above photo from his local drugstore. This is the aisle that leads to the cashier station. The swinging door in front of the rack is, as you can see, open. Clearly this does not invite the customer to browse the magazine rack.

Unfortunately, this is not an unusual scenario.


Not so inviting a space, is it?

Anyone who has traveled the country on behalf of magazine publishers, wholesalers or national distributors can regale you with tales of how they walked the aisles of a major national or regional retailer only to find the magazine rack located at the back corner of the store in a “dead” aisle. I’ve even seen the mainline placed on the exit aisle on the other side of the check outs (If you wanted to buy a magazine, you’d have to go back to the cashier to pay for it – or steal it).

A national chain store near my office has the magazine rack in the last aisle of the least busy section of the store. The magazines face the wall. It’s this way in at least four other stores I’ve visited in other parts of the country. This position is clearly something I take into consideration every time one of my clients wants to purchase their “Mainline Feature Pocket Program.” On the other hand, when I check sales in these stores, copies are being purchased. I know they aren’t being “stolen”. It’s an SBT chain.

So how do we fix this? We’re currently in a fight to maintain the space we have. How do we get a better position?

Editor’s Note: Please keep the flow of pictures coming. It’s great to see what is going on out in the world. They also don’t have to be of display disasters. Good stuff happens everyday.

Posted in Gurus, Magazines, Marketing Fail | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

A Fellow ‘Rep’ Chimes In…

A buddy and I were marveling at the changes here in the Chicago marketplace over the past year or two. Like me, my friend spent many years working in the Midwest and recalls calling on many of the former wholesalers discussed in a post last month.

The changes out here in the central Midwest are significant. Source and News Group had reached what felt like holding pattern in the last decade. The acquisition of all Kroger banners by News Group last year did not significantly impact this market. TheNews Group already serviced the Michigan, Cincinnati and Columbus banners. When Source took over CVS and Rite Aid Drugs last fall, that too was not a big change. These had been Source accounts since the fall of UniMag in the late 1990′s. The only big changes we had seen in metro Chicago was the transition of the airports and Meijer’s Discount to News Group. But in 2014, this is old news.

But now in the first and second quarter of this year we will really see the impact of the closing of the Dominick’s Supermarket chain on newsstand sales. The venerable Jewel/Osco supermarket chain has moved suppliers from the Source McCook, IL facility to the Jackson, MI News Group DC. In late Spring, the Roundy’s chain of supermarkets, which  includes the fast growing upscale upscale Mariano’s  stores in Chicago, will move to News Group service. The rest of the Roundy’s banners in Wisconsin and Minnesota also move to News Group.

Let’s be clear: No one can fault either of these wholesale distributors for trying to make a profit, expand their business horizons, or increase their market share by taking on national or regional chains. The issue, as some magazine publishers have expressed to me is that no matter how hard they work (and they do work hard), how hard they try (and they do try hard), there no longer appears to be any marginal benefit for a publisher when a retailer shifts from one wholesale supplier to another. In fact, the disruption to the distribution can significantly hurt sales.

With a promise to remain anonymous and only a little light editing, I wanted to share with you what my friend had to say. I could feel the frustration coming from the monitor in waves:

            “I have a client who has lost significant sales in CVS and Rite Aid out on the east coast due to the CVS and Rite Aid transitions. This benefited the publisher how? They get to explain this to their advertisers (especially the ones  based in Manhattan) how? Will TNG tie product in Central Michigan for delivery to the Chicago and Wisconsin market. I have a local publisher in Chicago. How does this improve things for them?

You know who newsstand consolidation really benefited? Right from start of this big mess right up until the beginning of 2008? It’s got to be the accountants and the Wall Street guys. All of this must have made their books look better. Maybe it added some cash to their bottom line. SBT has to make the bottom line look real pretty too. The inventory gets stuck with the wholesaler.

So we “modernize” and “fix an ancient and creaky distribution system” (Remember those awful UniMag Power Points?) we’ve blown up something that worked kind of OK and replaced it with something that does not work all that well for any of the suppliers in the chain, the wholesalers and national distributors, or the producers – the publishers. But it has to have worked out OK for the retailers.

That buyer from Wal-Mart Canada who was in Harrington’s a few months ago that BoSacks blasted all over the place? She is right to want to see publishers step up. She is right to want to see publishers take some ownership for the newsstand and the sub offers and the high newsstand prices.

But I want to see these retailers take some ownership for the changes and challenges they put on us. I hear a lot of complaints but we didn’t make the system this way. They did. (Emphasis mine)”

It went on this vein for some more but you get the gist. And it’s an interesting point. In all the writing you see about the “broken” newsstand system, you see call out after call out after call out for the publishers, the national distributor, the wholesalers, someone, anyone, to do something. But this started with something the retailers wanted.

Personally, I wonder if the supply side of the distribution chain has the will or ability to “fix” what is broken. There are too many disparate needs and viewpoints. The true leaders of the industry, the larger publishers, are focusing their talents, money and attention elsewhere. The small and medium sized publishers don’t have the cash, the experience or the clout to make changes.

The real advances that we will see in marketing, display and call outs to readers to come into bricks and mortar stores to buy magazines will take place on an ad hoc, piece by piece basis. We’ve seen much of this in the past few years from advances in electronic covers to social media campaigns like the Miley Cyrus cover from last year. The question is: Will we reach a critical mass in time to save the system?

In light of all these things, I still find it endlessly fascinating that once again, in the dawn of what looks to be another down year, I am working with publishers who are willing to launch new product into this “ancient and creaky” system. Heck, beyond my personal experience in the launch venue, in the past two months, Mr. Magazine ™  has ID’d another 32 regular frequency launches and 103 specials. Does that mean the world is crazy? Or hopeful?

I’m always “cautiously hopeful.” After all, I’m on the Titanic. But I’m also on the foredeck. If you recall, it’s easier to get off the ship from here.

Posted in Conventional Wisdom? Hah!, Debates | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Edit Thyself! Some Advice for Kelly Blazek from a Former First Grade Teacher

The very first research paper I ever wrote was in seventh grade for Mr. Mackler’s Social Studies class.  We were studying colonial America and I chose to write about the lost colony of Roanoke Island. I sweated for a long hot Indian Summer week writing up note cards and then typing up the first draft on my portable Smith-Corona. When I was done, I proudly showed it to my mother, a first grade teacher and former editor of her high school newspaper.  After carefully reading it she gave me one of the best pieces of advice I’ve ever received.

“This is good, but who are you writing it for?”

I probably did some sort of early adolescent shrug because her question was clearly too subtle for me.

She then said something like this:

“Don’t ever forget about who you are writing for. This paper is for Mr. Mackler. He’s your teacher, not your pen pal. Write like you are a scholar just like him. When you write for your school paper, you write the news like you are a  newspaper reporter because that is who you are.  When you write your short stories, think about who you readers will be. Who is going to buy your books? Always remember who your audience is.”

Kelly Blazek forgot who her audience was.

Ms. Blazek is a Cleveland based marketer who in her spare time, runs a job bank for marketers in north eastern Ohio. Apparently she is very picky about who she adds to her email list. That’s certainly her prerogative.

But when the 26-year-old Diana Merkota broke the rules about how to approach Ms. Blazek, the job board founder unloaded on Merkota  with a passionate and brutal take down that clearly included some “Baby Boomer” ire pointed at the younger “Millennial” generation.

“I love the sense of entitlement of your generation” she wrote, “And therefore I enjoy Denying your invite, and giving you the dreaded “I Don’t Know” … because it’s the truth.”

You can read more about this marvelous blow up by clicking on the highlighted links.

Careful now! You don't want your face all over Twitter, do you? Source:

Careful now! You don’t want your face all over Twitter, do you? Source:

This is an easy trick bag to get caught up in, especially for those of us who came up in a time when inter office communication was created on an IBM Selectric and then transferred from office to office a yellow envelope that slowly moved from desk to desk. We tend to forget  how easy it is for our recipient to forward what we wrote to the entire world. And if you don’t think carefully about what you say, it can be a career killer.

Like the Justine Saco blow up late last year, the Blazek-Merkota internet kerfuffle has a life of it’s own with parody twitter accounts, and some pretty brutal memes. None of us would know anything about this, of course, if the receiver of the poison email hadn’t been a twenty-something millennial with easy access to Twitter, Imgur and Reddit. It also didn’t help that this wasn’t a one-off experience. Other victims of Ms. Blazek’s steel tipped email responses chimed have chimed in with their own stories.

I don’t think it’s fair for me to try to guess Ms. Blazek’s reason for writing this type of message or why she apparently has a tendancy to do so. In my own world, I often have to stop, think and consider who it is I am writing to and why. It’s a hard thing to remember to do. Especially when you also want to try to edit your work and there’s thirty other things you need to complete that afternoon.

But the message is simple, and sadly easy to forget. Don’t forget who you’re writing to. Write it out once, read it out loud, edit, edit, edit.

In the great state of Texas, they advise people to “Drive Friendly.” Clearly out on the internet we should be advising people to “Write Friendly.”

Posted in Corporate Wisdom, Marketing Fail | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

For Your Consideration

This is offered for your considertion. I will leave out my own comments and snarkiness.

Below is a quote directly from this mornings reading of Shelf Awareness. It is a discussion of a very interesting article in The New Yorker by George Packer entitled, “Cheap Words.” You can find a link to the article here. The editors at Shelf Awareness  have this to say:

Another “former Amazon employee” who worked in the Kindle division said, Packer writes, “that few of his colleagues in Seattle had a real interest in books: ‘You never heard people say, ‘Hey, what are you reading?’ Everyone there is so engineering-oriented. They don’t know how to talk to novelists.’ “

Packer doesn’t talk much about alternatives to Amazon, including independent booksellers, Barnes & Noble or nonbook retailers who sell books, saying that publishers’ “long-term outlook is discouraging. This is partly because Americans don’t read as many books as they used to–they are too busy doing other things with their devices–but also because of the relentless downward pressure on prices that Amazon enforces. The digital market is awash with millions of barely edited titles, most of it dreck, while readers are being conditioned to think that books are worth as little as a sandwich. ‘Amazon has successfully fostered the idea that a book is a thing of minimal value,’ [Dennis] Johnson said. ‘It’s a widget.’ “

Packer quotes a literary agent saying that book world trends are leading to ” ‘the rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer.’ A few brand names at the top, a mass of unwashed titles down below, the middle hollowed out: the book business in the age of Amazon mirrors the widening inequality of the broader economy.”

Packer concludes: “Bezos is right: gatekeepers are inherently élitist, and some of them have been weakened, in no small part, because of their complacency and short-term thinking. But gatekeepers are also barriers against the complete commercialization of ideas, allowing new talent the time to develop and learn to tell difficult truths. When the last gatekeeper but one is gone, will Amazon care whether a book is any good?”

Posted in Books, Corporate Wisdom | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Is A Transformation Coming, Or Is Our Bow Underwater?

Those of us who worked on the front lines of newsstand distribution in the mid 1990′s made a few assumptions when rapid consolidation hit the business. One was that the ID wholesalers who remained in the business were there because they were tough, hard working and had more options than the colleagues who sold out. That’s still a decent estimation of their capabilities.

But we also thought that category of small wholesaler would rebound because we saw some small newspaper operators and adult bookstore suppliers jump into the mainstream newsstand business. The Detroit metro area, for example, saw four such wholesalers enter the market. Almost twenty years later, two remain. 

The other presumption some of us made was that both the large wholesalers (i.e.: Source, News Group, Hudson, etc.) and some new actors would make inroads into the “non-traditional” marketplace. This would be a good, but not large space for magazines.

That happened. Source Interlinks’ Retail Vision division has an extensive list of retail clients as does News Groups’ Select Media and Hudson News’ Hudson Direct. HDA in St. Louis jumped into the arena and serviced Michael’s Arts and Crafts and other stores. Ingram Periodicals has a good foothold in categories such as outdoor sports stores and art supplies.

For a long time, however, profits in newsstand distribution have been elusive.

Late last week, we heard news that international supplier PMG, a company that mostly exited US wholesale distribution market in the mid ’90′s consolidation was shuttering its overseas and Caribbean operations. Last month we received the shocking (to us veterans) news that Gopher News of Minneapolis, MN was closing its doors immediately and that Benjamin News was closing all of its Canadian operations this coming April.

Early this week, it was announced that specialty distributor HDA was shutting down.

Does anyone out there really think wholesalers can make a profit in this market?

In 2013 we lost two small wholesalers: Erie, PA and Pembroke, NH. The list of ID wholesalers continues to shrink so clearly our presumption about this being a growth category was very wrong.

To make a comparison relevant to this blogs title: Last year we sprang a leak.

This year, what do you think? Is the bow is down in the water about 15 degrees?

It’s been clear for a long time that the wholesale community is operating under some pretty miserable conditions. A colleague called last week and started to rant.  I had to interrupt and ask: At this point, who cares? Do we really need to argue twenty years later if this is a business problem of their own choosing? It really wasn’t and it really doesn’t matter anymore.

It’s also clear that our major national publishers will not or can not operate in any sort of concert to promote the sale of single copies at the newsstand. A few years ago, we saw the “Power of Print” video and a few of them will occasionally promote on social media or with a limited advertisement for a single title. But that’s the best they can do.

The national distributors are not only trying to stay relevant, they’re also still fighting a rather expensive lawsuit that dates back to the Anderson News debacle of 2009. Apparently the Anderson company maintains that the national distributors and their competitor wholesalers and some publishers met face to face to plan their demise and they’re willing to spend their remaining fortune to prove this.

My point: The ND’s are a little busy right now and can’t be expected to lead the promotion of the category.

Every link in this distribution chain has a different way of scoring their success and clearly what we are doing is not working if our goal is to sell more, not less. Publishers are reinventing themselves, national distributors have their attention focused elsewhere. Wholesalers are too financially stressed. Their innovations at the moment are focused on reducing expenses, innovating in the warehouse and out in the field. Let’s not forget, they deliver and merchandise the magazines on the rack. They don’t create the product they sell.

Retailers supply space and customers. We know magazines are profitable for them but it’s a very small piece of what they carry. Even national bookstore chains don’t (for whatever reason) advertise magazines much to their customers. While we may not have lost much space yet despite our lost unit sales, my guess is that the promotional dollars publishers now spend to prop up their unit sales goals are keeping the space available to us.

We do know that retailers frequently ask publishers to step up and participate in coupon promotions or ask publishers to come to them with “Out of The Box” ideas. My guess is that the response rate is less than enthusiastic. Most of what I have seen is either too complicated, too outside most small publishers niche, or too expensive for all but the most deeply pocketed publishers. The timing often has nothing to do with the publishers’ editorial calendar.

So here we are. Maybe the bow is now down 20 degrees. Is that cracking noise the keel?

This week and well into next, for better or worse, we’re may see a lot of ink and bytes about single copy. MagNet has released their data. It’s not good. Pretty soon AdWeekAd AgeFolioAudience Development and everyone else could weigh in on the “Continuing Problems of The Newsstand”. Numerous opinionators, prognosticators and harumphers are going to give us their deep thoughts on “What Should be Done About Newsstand”* and “Why Aren’t the Major Publishers Listening to Me?!”**

Last November I offered five and a half steps to “fix” the newsstand. Here’s a few more thoughts:

6. Stop selling other sources of circulation at the expense of newsstand. If you offer a deal digitally or via subscription, offer “deals” for single copies. Go ahead and test it. Be a part of the solution.

7. There is no reason anymore to wait for someone else to “promote” the category. Small, large and medium-sized publishers can, on their own, promote single copy sales of their own titles to their own audiences via a host of social media. Learn it. Do it. Be a part of the solution.

8. If you are a publisher and you are not satisfied with the responses of your national distributor or wholesaler or retailer with regards to your display or sales, go and make some noise until you get your answer. You’re the one who invested in the product in the first place.

No one person, company or idea can save the newsstand. You have to wonder if this year, we will have a fundamental transformation in how we do business because it was forced on us.

The demise of this industry was not set in stone in 1995 or 1997 or 2009 or even with the unsettling events of this year. It doesn’t have to happen.

Of course, we could continue to drift, bow down 30 degrees. Then we may see this:

*: It’s usually some variation on ‘Let’s all work together to solve this! Oh, and stop wasting so many copies. It’s disgraceful.”

**: Most likely because they are very busy right now trying to stay in business, thank you.

Posted in Debates, Magazines, Marketing Fail | Tagged , , | 3 Comments