An anonymous commenter going by the descriptive name “anonymous” has a good comment on my post about an improving Adweek…it is so good, despite disagreeing with me, that I just had to post about it, not to attack it but to clarify my own position.
I will do this line-by-line.
Meta message: I do not believe that Adweek has overtaken AdAge, has made AdAge irrelevant, is super-duper awesomer in every way than AdAge. I do believe, however, that Adweek has gone from being a total disaster to being a magazine that I feel like I have to read. And it has been a long time since I felt like that.
Now on to the comment:
Trying to land a gig at Adweek?
No, but even I can be bought. Cheaply.
Your perceptions don’t gibe with reality. Adweek writers engage in the blog experience? Yes, but usually to defend the franchise when their publication is rightly criticized.
True that perhaps most times they comment it is to defend themselves, but I have found that, especially compared with AdAge, they are more often commenting and much more polite and constructive when they do.
The Adweek guys ask how they could get better, the AdAge guys call you names and suggest that you are a hack…which may be true in my case, but is still bad form to actually say.
Ad Age not only engages the blog experience, they’ve also enhanced it, with their own blogs as well as things like the Ad Age Power 150.
There is a good argument to the AdAge blogs being a better engagement with the blog experience, but I have two issues with the way they manage the blogs. First, their blogs are all written by big names who write so rarely and irregularly that it’s really nothing more than a digital guest column (even guys like Armano are doing nothing more than running their content on AdAge.com). Second, the registration process for commenting on a post is even worse than Agency Spy’s and is therefore unusable.
I do think that the idea is salvagable and I do think that AdAge has clearly been exploring the best way to be successful online and therefore, because my point was not that they are terrible but that Adweek is relevant again, I will give them points and appreciation for experimenting.
As for the Power 150, I have a serious issue with it based on their unwillingness to actually e-mail me back about how to get on the list…it’s to the point now that, should they want to include me, I am going to get all Groucho Marx about being in a club that would have me and tell them to fuck off.
Adweek is moving its content beyond a digitized print version? When’s that gonna happen? Ad Age allows visitors to comment on virtually every story. Adweek barely accepts emails.
It is such a process to comment on AdAge that I would almost rather they just don’t let you. But again, you have a point that AdAge is farther ahead on this…I was more talking about something like the IQ newsletter which is a great aggregator of top content and is something that a journalist should do: separate the wheat from the chaff and aggregate information.
And much of the Adweek content is nothing more than press releases and Nielsen PowerPoint presentations.
I totally agree with you. It’s their biggest downfall and it drives me up the wall.
Yes, Ad Age still has a lot of old school columnists, although they cater to the old school dinosaurs still in the business. Adweek has just as many contributors teetering on the edge of irrelevance. The next insight to be found from, say, Mark Wnek will be the first.
True. I guess I just dislike the AdAge columnists more…it’s a matter of taste though.
It’s pretty clear that Ad Age has a much better grasp on where the industry is heading. They did, after all, publish an entire issue devoted to digital earlier this year. Sure, Morrissey’s a smart guy; but he hasn’t shown significantly more savvy than Matthew Creamer.
To go to my meta message, I wasn’t saying that Adweek had made AdAge irrelevant, I don’t believe that it has by any stretch, but rather that it is now relevant itself.
AdAge is still top of the heap in my estimation.
Yes, there are Adweek writers on Twitter; but do you really even connect those efforts with Adweek? I thought it was just those guys doing things on their personal time.
It may just be me, but I think that their Twitter feeds are pretty interesting, especially during big industry events like Cannes where you get the news from that milieu but from someone outside an agency and with a different perspective.
…Your dismissal of Ad Age, as well as your vision of Adweek’s resurrection, is pretty peculiar. Are you sure you haven’t accidentally been reading back issues of Adweek from the early 90s?
Back to my meta message, I was not trying to dismiss AdAge. It is still the leading trade. It’s just not the only trade that I feel I have to read anymore.
Adweek in the early 90s was on a roll.
Don’t get me wrong. I used to love Adweek, and would be happy to see them rise like the proverbial phoenix. Plus, they do have a small group of people who remain top-flight professionals. But honest to God, they actually reflect the advertising industry in that their organization has assumed a BDA stance. That is, a conglomerate has bought them out and brought corporate thinking and mandates to the enterprise.
I never said that they were perfect, just that they were rising. I still think that they are rising but there is still somewhere to go.
Unless they really are turning into a BDA…then they’re screwed.