Demassification of Magazines

     Way back when, magazines used to be one whole family thing. They had mom's recipes, dad's sports, and the kids' stories all rolled up in one. Today we have so many different magazines geared towards different audiences. For instance Home and Garden, for the gardeners, Seventeen, for the teenage girls, and ESPN Magazine, for your average guy. According to Mr. Miller not too long ago these magazines were one. Could you imagine a world in which make up tips were on the page opposite Dwayne Wade's basketball Q and A. That is not a magazine I would want. I like our modern magazines. There is a magazine for everyone. I like knowing what I am getting when I subscribe to magazines. If I subscribed to Cooking Light (I don't), I would expect to see healthy, family friendly recipes. I don't subscribe to Cooking Lite for a reason! I don't care about learning recipes, I wanna read about Kanye's latest media freak out. With past magazines we would get this as a total package deal. I am also assuming that the massified magazines would not have as much same topic content as today's modern magazines.

     Miller also said that the family would just pass around the magazine after one person was done. I don't know about  y'all, but when I read a magazine it is trashed by the end. I guess I am just not buying into this whole one-for-all ideal. It seems weird to think reading a magazine was a family event. Case and point: I am glad magazines demassified. It seems like people can subscribe to what they want and get that in return.