Does Model Railroader ever change to better meet the needs of its readers?
I just got done looking at the DCC Buyers Guide “Open Letter” topic (http://www.trains.com/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=49348) and it got me to wondering. That topic included several points of constructive criticism, with various posters describing ways they think Model Railroader could have improved the Buyers Guide, and how MR could better address this subject in the future.
I have read similar constructive criticisms on countless other topics in the past. I remember the pleas for MR to change their mind when they announced they were dropping the schedule of upcoming train shows. Yet no matter how sensible and well presented many of these ideas have been, it seems MR has never made any changes to their format based on these comments.
Can anyone point out any instances when MR changed its course for the better based on suggestions from this forum?
Boy, I sure agree, Tom. I also naively thought that they would surely change their mind on the train show schedules after seeing the overwhelming comments protesting it being dropped. I can only think that they routinely ignore our comments because they view us as “hard core” modelers not representative of their target audience.
Certainly they have every right to take suggestions made here or leave them alone… they ultimately are resonsible for the direction of their publication, not us. But I’m like you… I always wonder why forum users aren’t more viewed as their core readers worthy of paying attention to.
MR does change over time. I’m not sure if it’s in direct response to these forums. They also send out email surveys to people on the forum for evaluation of issues of their magazine. I suspect that changes are influenced by all of this - surveys, forum, letters/emails, talking with people at shows, etc.
I think a lot of people don’t understand what a buyer’s guide from MR is intended to do. Unlike Consumer Reports, MR is not a test and evaluate operation that does in depth comparative tests of an item across manufacturers. Their buyer’s guide is a survey of what’s available and what the main features are - in this case for DCC systems. Considering the amount of information on DCC that MR has published over time, I think they are covering the topic quite well.
Their main purpose is to provide us with information about the hobby of Model Railroading and how to do it. They have been doing it quite well for the over 30 years that I have subscribed.
Enjoy
Paul
p.s. every time they do make a change they get howls of protest. Just search back through the forums.
I’ve been going through some of my older ('80s) Model Railroaders recently (they were finally unearthed from my parent’s garage) and I made the startling discovery - they rarely had color photography in the articles back then.
More to the point, does MR listen to and consider the feedback of its readers, and the suggestions of those who post on this forum?
As one who has an occasional conversation with some of the MR staff, I can tell you I see our comments are noticed, and even acted upon at times. If they aren’t acted upon, MR usually has other considerations we’re typically not aware of as to why what they are doing is the better approach.
Sometimes, if it’s a suggestion for something new MR ought to be doing that they agree is a good idea, it can take a while to set things in motion, so you need to give it time.
The Upcoming events column is back in the mag but now they charge clubs 25 bucks to promote their shows. Not right if you ask me, they said it was removed to add more content when all along they just wanted to charge for the use of it. I know of a number of clubs that were upset by them doing that.
I would to know what happen to a thread that was started on this forum last Thur.or Fri. talking about Athearns poor running Mikes and the Pacifes which were the worst pulling engine I ever had, and which MR gave a glowing review to. anyway it was great to see others of you having the seem problems with them and all of a sudden the thread is gone.( did anyone else notice this or was it just me?)
But getting back to the main question here, yes they have changed and I hate to say it, its not for the better. Where i notice it is in the layouts, they are running theres more and more of a sameness if you know what i mean. More and more of a good ole boys club. Like there are only 5 or 6 modelers in the usa and 1 over in the old country that know what and how to properly model. Helps best to if you are a PRO RAILER! only way!
Don’t expect those kind of threads to hang around too long. They have been started before, and “POOF”, they were gone. The major point brought up before is that MR is not going to bite the hands that feed them (the advertisers). Then the integrity of the MR staff is brought into question (on a forum that they provide and maintain as free service). No win situation.
Yeah, it does strike me too. When they do that “about so-and-so” at the end of layout tours or other layout features, so often it’s “Jimmy Jack’s narrow gauge module was featured in issue X and his creative background painting techniques were in issue Z”…
And as someone else said here… “The Utah Belt… Again?”
I’m not sure exactly what you’re saying here, Smitty. Are you defeding MR or trashing them?
Are you sahing those threads are wiped out because they insult advertisers? That means the staff IS biased to advertisers.
Are you saying those threads are wiped out because they make clear that MR reviews are uniformly positive (even when the product isn’t)? That means the editors are either biased or incompetent.
Are you saying it’s true that MR ‘won’t bite the hand that feeds them?’ If so, then the assertions about integrity are 100% justified.
If the assertions are not justified, then why do the threads go “poof” and why are all the reviews a thumbs-up?
I know my thoughts on the matter, but would like to understand your point here.
I know that this will be vague, but I respect MR as a publication and what they do for the hobby. I am a subscriber myself. I appreciate the venue they offer here to exchange thoughts and ideas. They have to do what they have to do to remain a successful magazine. Giving bad reviews is not a way to make friends. The reviews are a great way to “feel” out a product, but as with anything else, get a second opinion.
In order to make a judgement on any subject, we need to be aware of “all” the facts, and I seriousl doubt that most of us are. What we see in the magazine is our “perception” of what MRR does or doesn’t do. If you feel strongly about a subject concerning the magazine, take the time to write to the editor, and a word of advice…don’t slam people, “I” don’t like it, I am sure “you” don’t like, and we should be constructive at all times with our criticism if we want to get anyone’s attention.
It is easy to slam, it takes intelligence to observe, decide what might be better, and present to the listener/reader in an open way that they will listen. Think duplex not simplex.
While “…Giving bad reviews is not a way to make friends…” it is within what most people expect from a magazine that publishes reviews. It is done by magazines in other topics of interest, for instance computer equipment, and is also done by other magazines within this hobby. Not pointing out difficulties with a product defeats the purpose of publishing a review in the first place. It is also a disservice to the readers of your magazine. What it winds up being is so many column inches of unpaid advertising.
Model Railroader has the highest circulation numbers in the industry, last time I noticed, and so it will remain the way for advertisers to reach the maximum number of potential buyers, whether or not the reviews are favorable. Manufacturers don’t purposely bring out bad products, and with the number of newsgroups out there, it’s highly unlikely that news of products defects will remain invisible for long. After that, word of mouth will take over. It’s better, in my opinion, for the information to be circulated rapidly back to the producer, who can then fix the problem, and circulate a news release about the new improved product. But glossing over what are perceived to be problems is not responsible coverage in reviews.
This is a good argument as to why MR should provide more critical reviews of products. If a manufacturer gets upset by the review and pulls their ads, they will be the real losers. Without the advertising, they won’t sell products and hence will go out of business. As for MR’s bottom line, if they lose a few advertisers because of their reviews, there’s a good chance the manufacturers of superior products will be willing to fill those empty pages with their ads.
What has Really changed?? Has Anything changed? Is there anything we do today that we didn’t do back in the 1980s?? 1970s, or 1960s?? Or for that matter, 1990s??
Just for grins, I pulled, at random a december issue from days gone by out of my collection… It happens to be 1991. The first and most obvious, the price… $2.95 then, $5.50 now… What did you get for your $2.95 then… 234 pages… What do we get for $5.50 now?? 145 pages… So the price went up, and the content went down… Right?? Well, let’s look at it a little closer… Open to 12/91 the toc and the first thing that becomes clear is where the content, I mean the substance of the magazine, begins… Page 80… It’s a rememberance article titled “Tips 'n Tales From the Cab”, a retired engineer’s perspective by Vernon Hart… This story amounts to a full page though it actually spans 2 and is flanked by paid ads. It’s an interesting story but it’s buried among the advertisements and unless you looked for it, you might miss it. Now everybody who has been reading the magazine for that many years knows that the Real content follows the At the Throttle article written by the editor, in this case, Andy Sperandeo. Always the next page and that editorial NEVER shared space with an advertiser. The first Real article, as defined within this post, begins on page 88. A visit to a club layout… Not good or bad, just your typical club layout story… What immediately follows, without any ads in between, “MR visits Japan” by Jim Kelly. Following that, “It’s the Little Things That Count” by Michael Tylick. Directly following that, "Readin’, Writin’, And Railrodin’ " by Howard Munson… This particular article and it Is a layout feature would be of interest to the Get the Kids involved crowd… The layout is built by 7th and 8th graders in this guys class… The article by the way is about on par with todays super layout features.
Then imediately following that article, the feature story “The 1947 Empire Builder” complete with a 4 page fold out o
What kind of review do people expect to see in a magazine?
I would not expect a magazine to trash a product like individuals do. If your were to read “acme locos suck” in a magazine article, written by professionals, I think you would lose respect for the magazine.
They seem to apply similar standards to each review. They tell you what was found in the box, how it looked and how it ran. You can find people that like or dislike about any product made.
A $40 loco should bring less expectations that a $300. I don’t think they need to add blogger language that says “it ain’t worth $300.”
As far as the price goes, everything goes up. I bought a new airplane in 1981 for $76k now the same plane is $340k. I bought a new Cadillac in 1982 for about $16k and one last month for $48k. Accordingly MRR should now be about 8-9 bucks.
With regard to what appears in MR product reviews, and the staff has openly admitted it here more than once, MR will not review a poor quality or clearly inaccurate model/item. What their reviews cover are the “better” items available on the market. As such, while a minor flaw or two might be pointed out, you would normally expect any review that appears to be rather favorable.
Do things change? That’s quite another question and largely depends on what your likes and dislikes regarding the magazine’s content are. Scratchbuilding and complex kitbashing articles are far less apparent today in the pages of MR than they were twenty years ago and earlier. Modeling articles tend to be less detailed and more liable to minor errors and omission of facts. And it seems no matter how much we ask for overview photos of layouts, they just don’t get published.
On the other hand, in the debate over film vs. digital photo contest entries, write-in protests did bring about the division of the contest into two categories. So, one can confirm that at least sometimes the editors certainly do listen to what the readers have to say.
At what price will you stop buying MRR mag, and maybe buy an occasional issue that has a subject that interest you? The answer to that question is as varied as the respondants to this thread. New people to the hobby will buy the mag because everything is new to them, and even the adds give them info of where to buy items. People who have been in the hobby a little longer time, will start to fall away as they perceive they are not seeing anything of interest to them, and can better spend the annual price on something else. Old timers may still buy the mag out of sheer loyalty.
It appears to me that MRR has tried to hold the price down by cutting the number of pages, and by increasing the number of adds. Now here is the dicotomy, if the mag doesn’t get enough sales revenue to cover their total cost to produce the mag, they must cover their costs with revenue from adds, like it or not. And, the manufacturers pay out some healthy bucks to run adds. What does that do for us? On one side it helps keep the annual subscription cost down, but on the other hand it drives up the cost we pay for goods that we purchase from that manufacturer because they have to recoup the millions they pay out in adds each year. Remember, they just don’t advertise in MRR. Marketing costs for advertising is HIGH. Granted this is not 30 seconds on TV for the Super Bowl game, but you get the point, the costs are *** high and increasing each year.
As for CONTENT, “we” the readers dictate that. We write to the editor and tell them what we want to see more of. And if they do not listen, or you are unhappy, don’t buy the mag. If the circulation drops 50,000, what do you think will happen? I would like to be a fly on the wall in the editors meeting with sales and marketing.
Gentlemen…results count…not excuses. WRITE TO THE EDITOR and COPY MARKETING!!!