Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!news.cs.indiana.edu!maytag!csg.waterloo.edu!giguere
From: giguere@csg.waterloo.edu (Eric Giguere)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Reality check: Amiga coverage is not a right, but a privilege
Message-ID: <1990Dec13.061622.13992@maytag.waterloo.edu>
Date: 13 Dec 90 06:16:22 GMT
Sender: daemon@maytag.waterloo.edu (Admin)
Organization: University of Waterloo
Lines: 91
Disclaimer: Flame me, not the university.

Someday I should really read the Mac or PC groups to see if they generate
the same kind of frenzy this group does... 

Various posters have asserted their offence at the lack of Amiga coverage
in industry publications.  First of all, freedom of expression does not
mean that you can DEMAND someone to publish something, only that that person
is free to do so if they wish.  Only the publishers can decide what they
want to publish.

Now freedom of expression means that you can express your displeasure
(yes, freedom to whine is just as important as freedom to protest) and I'm
not denying anyone's right to do so.  You can be offended, but I really 
don't see why you should be if you use common sense.

Publishing is a strange area, and computer magazines tend to be run in
strange ways, but there are some constants:

	1. Magazines are published by companies that want a return on
	   their money (profit).  Even if they're non-profit, they have
	   to have money flowing in to pay staff salaries, printing costs, etc.
    2. Companies advertise in a magazine because they are looking to
	   target their products at the magazine's readership, or a portion
	   of that readership.
    3. Readers buy/subscribe to a magazine because the magazine's articles
	   are of interest to them and/or they want to see product advertisements.
    4. Articles are written either by staff members or freelancers.  Some
	   magazines (especially the technically-oriented) will depend almost
	   entirely on freelance submissions.
    5. A magazine's main source of income is either its advertisers or
	   its subscribers, but not both.
    6. The editor of a magazine is not the boss, but will have day-to-day
	   control over editorial content.

Magazine publishing works like this:  the publisher of a magazine will
set its eye on a certain type of reader and aim for a certain circulation.
If there is no advertising, then the publisher must get subscriptions and
charge large fees for those subscriptions.  Otherwise the publisher phones
up potential advertisers and says "Geez, my magazine sells XXX copies per
month, the typical reader is male, age 25-40, etc. etc."  Based on this
information, the advertisers pay for ads.  If the publisher has done its
figures correctly, enough ads/subscriptions are sold to pay for printing
costs, overhead, salaries, etc. and still return some kind of a profit.

What about the editors?  They're tools the publisher uses to create a
magazine that attracts the readers it wants.  The publisher reserves
a certain amount of space in each issue for editorial content and sets
the general editorial direction of the magazine.  The editors must then
find articles that fulfill that mandate and attract the desired readers.  
The advertisers are then happy and keep placing more ads, and so the
cycle continues.

Finding the articles can be a challenge.  If the magazine is news-oriented,
it will often use its own writing staff and a stable of regulars to
get those articles.  Other magazines tend to depend on what freelancers
can offer, with perhaps some columnists and/or contributing editors to
offer some stability.  Once the articles are found, of course, they then
have to be edited, typeset, etc.  The mechanics are quite involved, but
they're really a separate process from the sourcing process.

Now before people flame me, I've presented a very general overview and
there are always exceptions and differences.  The large corporate publishers
tend to do their magazines like I've described.  A mom-and-pop operation
will probably have different motivations, but most of us only get exposed
to "professional" publications.

So, how does this all relate to the Amiga?  Simple:  if there are more people
using PCs, Macs and Unix, then there are going to be more articles (and
publications) devoted to those systems.  A larger market means more 
advertisers trying to reach the market.  This makes magazines target to
that market.  The writers then find themselves writing for these magazines
because there are more of them (and they probably pay better) and they
want to eat.  And so the cycle continues.

The point is, there is no "anti-Amiga conspiracy".  It's all a matter
of supply and demand.  And it's certainly NOT censorship!  Censorship is
when someone steps in and stops you from publishing what you want to 
publish.  You decide what you want to publish AND what you DON'T want
to publish.  Freedom of expression is also freedom of omission.
News organizations do it all the time, magazines are no
different.  They have to choose among articles and news items the ones
that best fit their targeted readership, otherwise they'll lose that
readership.

More Amiga coverage will happen only when the market is big enough.
Writing insulting letters to the editor won't help your case a bit.
Buying Amiga software will, as will using your Amiga for productive work
and telling others about it.

--
Eric Giguere                                       giguere@csg.UWaterloo.CA
           Quoth the raven: "Eat my shorts!" --- Poe & Groening