When the editor is publisher, the reader is king; and advertisers pay court, knowing readers turn to the magazines again and again - Editorial

And advertisers pay court, knowing readers turn to the magazines again and again.

When people ask me what I do, I tell them that I am an editor/ publisher, and that it is the best job in America.

I add this last phrase perhaps a little defensively, because editor/publishers are often viewed with skepticism, if not alarm. The feeling seems to be that I must be a two-headed monster, a walking contradiction in terms, a kind of church-state train wreck from which little good can come. I've found, though, that being an editor/ publisher is the best way to get the most out of both my editor and publisher selves.

I've also learned all the reasons why an editor and publisher must work together, include each other in their planning sessions, and keep each other informed.

Three years ago, I was just a one-headed monster: editor in chief of Parents, Gruner+jahr USA's largest and most profitable magazine. If you'd held a gun to my head, I probably could have told you the difference between a CPM and a CPO, but I wouldn't have thought that such business-side stuff had much to do with my job. Although I enjoyed working with Parents' ad sales, production and circulation departments, I didn't believe that I needed to concern myself overmuch with the details of their business.

At that time, I had only the vaguest notion of what a publisher actually did all day, and the business folks in my company were equally hazy about the specifics of my job. There was one area of mutual understanding, though: The publisher represented the money-making end of things, and I was queen of the money-spenders.

Three years later, I've had a change of heart: I now believe that an editor has no business spending money if she doesn't know where it comes from. I also believe that being a businessperson has made me a better editor. And why not? Publishers and editors have a very important bond: their magazines' readers. Both have a passionate interest in these people, well. If publishers and editors keep this mutual interest firmly in mind, they'll see that there need not be a conflict of interest between their two points of view.

Working together helps forge reader loyalty. Unfortunately, this notion of an editor/publisher bond is not always embraced. The conventional wisdom is that one can serve either God (presumably the editor's guide in matters journalistic) or Mammon (who is believed to lurk at the publisher's right hand). Few editors I know will admit that there is much ethical and aesthetic common ground between these two sides of the magazine business. Like most extreme points of view, however, this one is more hot air than fact.

The fear that a publisher and an editor will inevitably wreck each other's careers if they get too cozy is a myth. The editor-friendly publisher won't forget the disciplines of his job just because he appreciates the editor's role. And, far from being compromised, an editor who understands business should see clearly how important it is to respect her readers' needs and desires. An understanding of manufacturing economics or circulation dynamics will only make an editor a stronger, smarter team member.

Everyone benefits from the editor/publisher team.

When the editor and the publisher arc allied, or when, as in my case, they actually inhabit one body, life can be surprisingly serene. A publisher who understands and learns from the editor's bond with the magazine's readers will have a stronger case to bring to potential advertisers. A circulation manager who really knows target-readers' attitudes and habits will find better ways to attract more of these people to his magazine. A production director who understands and appreciates the magazine's readers will be able to manufacture a publication whose paper, printing and binding enhance the magazine's image and message.

Better than most, the editor/publisher understands that the magazine's readers and the advertisers' customers are one and the same. This editor/publisher knows how her readers' involvement in the magazine translates into higher sales for the advertiser. And if, by any chance, there is a real gap between the people the editor is addressing and the audience the magazine's advertisers want to reach, it will become clear before the enterprise begins to totter. Editorial must come first. I don't know why it took so long for the editor/publisher to be born, but it was apparently thought that a divergent, uncoordinated approach to magazine publishing would be the best path to editorial purity and advertising success. in fact, though, this separate-but-unequal policy put a dangerous distance between editors and publishers, making it difficult for them to see how much they had in common.

Magazines consist of two kinds of pages, after all: advertising and editorial. The editor produces her share and no more. But if the editor is doing her job, readers will read every page-articles and ads alike-with interest, enthusiasm and trust.

In fact, the editor/publisher combination can work only under one condition: Editorial must come first. it's possible to be an editor/publisher, but I'm not sure that a publisher/editor would work. Why? In a good magazine, editorial leads the band. Advertising and circulation bring in the money, but they do so because of editorial.

Few readers have ever bought a magazine just because they hoped to find some really good ads in its pages. Ads become interesting and attractive to a reader because she likes and trusts the editorial she reads in the magazine. If an editor acquiesces to perversions of her pages like special advertising sections, she'll get what she deserves: a magazine that has betrayed the readers' trust. She'll have collaborated in creating a publication whose readers will approach both editorial and advertising warily. And that's a prescription for disaster.

The editor's unique bond with the reader has to dominate the ad sales approach, too. if, for instance, a publisher decides to negotiate the price of every page he sells, he'll be giving a clear and deleterious message to the advertiser, and he'll deserve the lower revenues and diminished respect he'll get. He will be saying, in essence, that there's nothing very special about the magazine's relationship with its readers. The implication will be that readers are just another commodity, and that the editor's passion for and understanding of her readers isn't worth a damn. The editor must be included in spending decisions. just as being an editor makes my publishing work easier, being an editor/publisher gives me better access to the tools I need to serve my readers better. Making magazines work takes money, and it's important for the editor to prioritize wisely how the money is spent.

Back when I was editor only, when the line between editorial and publishing seemed as wide as the Mississippi, I had a feeling that my job was incomplete. When decisions were made about paper weights or trim sizes, I was often the last to know. When a subscription-solicitation letter was brought to me for my signature, I usually okayed it cheerfully enough, but I didn't know the sales strategy it represented or the lists it would be sent to. Had I known, I would have been a better editor. Money has to come from somewhere, after all, and the editor needs to know exactly how and where the money is being made, and what the choices are for spending it.

This knowledge makes everyone's life easier. Editors tend to fight almost reflexively for whiter, brighter paper, for larger editorial budgets, and for more pages. They're right to do everything within their power to make their magazines more attractive to their readers, but in the real world, you can rarely have your entire wish list if your magazine is to make money. The more editors know about the business of publishing, the better they will be able spend their money on the stuff that really will make readers happier. Unless they understand the business of their business, decisions will be made for them, not with them.

The fear has always been that the dollar is mightier than the word, that a business-savvy editor's first act in office would be to betray his readers' trust. But a smart editor/publisher won't allow this to happen. My editor self wouldn't frivolously antagonize a powerful advertiser just to show who's boss, and my publisher self realizes that it's self-defeating to sell out the magazine's readers for an extra ad page. When the editor and the publisher think as one because they are one, you have a combination that will always put readers' interests first. if they aren't one, they should make every effort to work as a team. This will give them the knowledge to create a magazine that advertisers will gravitate to confidently, knowing that readers turn to its pages again and again, issue after issue.

Elizabeth Crow is president of Gruner + Jahr USA Publishing.

COPYRIGHT 1991 Copyright by Media Central Inc., A PRIMEDIA Company. All rights reserved.
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group