🚀 go-pugleaf

Jojo (jo...@xs4all.nl) wrote:

> >Ads are NOT considered content... Ads are just that ads... I do not
> >buy the magazine for the ads, I buy them for the articles...

> That's right. And like commercials on radio and tv it is not necessary 
> for ads in CGW to have anything to do with the editorial content. In 
> fact, magazines like CGW are quite lucky to be able to live off ads that 
> contribute to their editorials. But it's not common. In most types of 
> media the ads have little or nothing to do with the information that they 
> are placed in.

Actually CGW is a specialty magazine by its own mandate... And so they
are able to as you say, "live off ads that contribute to their
editorials"... I mean really, where do you draw the line??? How about
ads for feminine products like douche??? Or how about 1-976 numbers???
I mean really neither of those products belong in CGW... And neither
do XXX ads...

> You may find it "good" for a magazine to do what people with big mouths want 
> them to do. If find it good if a mag is a little more progressive than 
> that, if it challenges people's intellect and if it doesn't care much 
> about illogical ancient Victorian moral values. If they can get away with 
> it financially, then by all means, please let them continue.

Oh come now... These ads do not stimulate me intellectually or any
other way for that matter... They are simple trash... They belong in a
garbage can... By putting these ads in CGW, they aren't being
progressive, they are selling out... 

Selling out is not a term I like to use... It brings up ideas of
cliques and groups... But in this case its very fitting... In my
opinion, someone sells out when they disregard their own standards for
material gain... I had always felt that CGW provided a wholesome and
quality product, but now they have sold out for quick short term
profit... I find this unacceptable...

You've made some interesting points along the way, but say that these
ads are intellectually challenging is just plain dumb... I'm going to
forget that you even said that... And if you want to read something
that challenges the status quo, go and get a copy of the Advocate... I
want my nice safe CGW...

> Like you and I already agree: ads don't belong to the contents of the 
> mag. They are there for the money. If they happen to contribute to the 
> very meaning of the magazine itself, then hurray, we have a quite unique 
> product here. If they don't, no problem.

Well, I'm as capitalistic as the next guy, but there is something to
be said for quality too... I mean, in my opinion, CGW is jeopardizing
quality for increased profit... And really, these ads in question
don't offend me, per se, I just don't see the place for them in CGW...
I find they detract from the magazine to the point where it hurts the
quality...



----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sean Kaye
2nd Year Arts
Carleton University

Email address: sk...@chat.carleton.ca
----------------------------------------------------------------------