Here’s an entry from our very own Reuters New York equities team summer intern Chavon Sutton. (Thanks, Chavon!)

Did Vibe magazine, the print ambassador of hip-hop culture, voice and style, pass up a chance to survive last year?

Vibe, the baby of acclaimed producer Quincy Jones (the composer who produced the late Michael Jackson’s mega-hit albums, “Thriller” and “Off the Wall,”), said earlier this week that it was shutting down immediately.

A partnership with an online gossip website serving African-American readers, might have given it room to keep producing, according to the site’s founder and editor.

Fred Mwangaguhunga, who runs Mediatakeout.com, told us that in the year before Vibe’s collapse, it offered the magazine a revenue-share deal, but Vibe refused.

“We came to Vibe and offered it a deal where they’d sell our ads and in return, they’d get a stake in the ads they sold,” Mwangagunhunga said.

The partnership could have given Vibe “$1 million a month, but they didn’t want it,” he said.
$1 million a month? Hard to say. (For what it’s worth, Mwangaguhunga says Mediatakeout.com gets 3 to 5 million unique viewers and 150 million page impressions per month.)

We tried to reach Vibe, or whatever is left of it, but a computerized voicemail message at the magazine’s office said: “Message quota exceeded. Goodbye.”

Did Vibe take a wise pass in the hopes of striking a better online deal? Or do its actions suggest that it is another example of entrenched print types avoiding imminent change?

It could be a pointless question. Jones told EbonyJet.com that he plans to buy back the magazine, which had a circulation of over 800,000, according to The New York Times.

Incidentally, Ebony apparently isn’t interested in working with Mediatakeout either.

“We made the same proposal to Ebony [magazine] which is facing pressure now,” he said.  “I’m not sure why they’re saying no.”

(Photo: Reuters)

They moved your markets. Now you can move their bank accounts.

The Society of American Business Editors and Writers, or SABEW, is hosting an event next week at Columbia University’s School of Journalism to help business journalists who have lost their jobs or found themselves in other tough straits because of the biggest story on every business reporter’s beat — the financial crisis. Here is the text of the invitation:

Former Wall Street Journal Managing Editor and ProPublica founder Paul Steiger, and New York Times Business Editor Larry Ingrassia invite you to join them at an event to benefit business journalism and the Society of American Business Editors and Writers (SABEW).

SABEW needs your support to help displaced business journalists and train business journalists for the digital age and new media landscape. Among SABEW’s programs are a revamped job listing site, a market for freelancers to find work, a mentor program for displaced journalists, teletraining on multimedia and business journalism topics, scholarships to attend conferences and training, and a revamp of our website to provide more robust services to members.

The event is free but donations to the SABEW Fund for the Future are requested as SABEW must raise $50,000 by August to qualify for a matching amount from four foundations.

Many of the business reporters who have recently lost their jobs worked at newspapers and magazines that have been shedding employees right and left because advertising revenue is plunging. Some of that is because of the recession, but much of it is because advertisers see fewer people reading those publications and are moving their ad dollars elsewhere.

So here is one way that you can help even if you can’t make the reception: Subscribe to your local paper or subscribe to some magazines. It doesn’t come with cocktails and canapes, but it’s pretty effective if enough people do it.

(Photo: Reuters)

The Web is abuzz over Eric Schmidt’s speech on Tuesday at the Newspaper Association of America’s annual meeting in San Diego — a speech, as the New York Times points out, in which the Google leader sidestepped any controversy and instead delivered “a lengthy discourse on the importance of newspapers and the challenges and opportunities brought about by technologies like mobile phones.”

So why all the fuss? Because newspapers are in deep trouble, and Google is an easy target for blame. The web search leader is weathering the recession relatively well and some have argued that Google News is making money off the back of newspaper publishers.

As Reuters puts it, “Some journalists have complained that search engines run by Google and Yahoo Inc make millions of dollars off their news, and that it should belong to them instead.”

Publishers from The New York Times Co to EW Scripps Co are struggling with a decline in advertising revenue that threatens the survival of some of their newspapers.

They are trying to find ways to make more money online to make up for what they are losing on their print editions.”

Google contends that it helps newspapers make more of that money by referring readers back to their websites. Newspapers, for their part, simply haven’t changed their business models to keep pace with the web.

“Schmidt told the Newspaper Association that newspaper websites someday would need to use several business models, including ads that support free news delivery, subscriptions and micro-payments, which are small fees to read articles,” Reuters reported.

The message is pretty clear: Start thinking about your own business instead of worrying about mine.

Keep an eye on:

• Cutbacks and budget troubles at National Public Radio Inc. are adding to tensions with some of its member stations (WSJ.com)
• In his new role, Peter Rice, recently appointed head of Fox Broadcasting, is faced with trying to remove some of the burden for the network’s ratings from “American Idol.” (New York Times)
• With magazines losing advertisers, the lines between advertising and editorial content are blurring (New York Times)

(Photo: Reuters)

There comes a time when you launch a magazine, but you don’t call it a magazine. Forbes, publisher of its namesake business magazine and luxury business title ForbesLife — and fresh off layoffs that are bruising most of the U.S. print media business – is starting ForbesWoman.

Rather than a magazine, the publisher is calling it a “brand,” which moves with the prevailing wisdom these days that you want to attract readers wherever they are, so you put the “brand” wherever it is. In that case, this means a quarterly magazine, bagged with copies of Forbes for female subscribers. It also means a website, which even a guy like me can read. In addition, it promises research, conferences and other events for its audience: women in the business world.

ForbesWoman’s press materials talk about its official launch, though it’s worth nothing that this is a retooling of something that you have seen before: ForbesLife Executive Woman, the somewhat awkardly named title that it started in 2007. Moira Forbes, daughter of Forbes Chief Steve Forbes, will publish the new magazine and Carol Hymowitz will edit it.

Here’s a sample of what to expect. From the press release:

ForbesWoman on Forbes.com will serve as the premier destination for professional women, with breaking news, prominent voices, regular features, in-depth reports and columns, peer-driven social networking and numerous opportunities for dialogue and interactivity. ForbesWoman content areas include: Leadership, Power Women, Entrepreneurs, Net Worth, Style, Wellbeing and Time. It will also offer a video series, “Smart Women Now,” and featured columnists who include Moira Forbes and economist Sylvia Ann Hewlett.

ForbesWoman online launches with a special report entitled “The New Executive Woman,” sponsored by Audi, which profiles the modern day female executive. This report includes: “Rule Breakers,” a story about how more women are taking greater control of their careers; “Making Money in a Downturn,” profiling how women have stayed on top of their game in these challenging economic times; “The Year’s Savviest Celebrity Businesswomen,” a look at the most successful celebrity businesswomen; “Managing a Family,” about how women manage high-powered careers with children; “How She Leads,” a study that investigates if women have what it takes to be leaders; and “How She Gets Ahead,” which provides networking and management strategies.

(Photo: Courtesy of Forbes)

Maybe it’s something about magazines that have the word “Life” in their titles. Rodale, publisher of magazines such as Runner’s World and Prevention, is closing the book on Best Life, it’s its luxury magazine for men. Here are the first two paragraphs of the press release:

EMMAUS, PA AND NEW YORK, NY–March 11, 2009-Rodale Inc. announced today that the company will cease publication of Best Life magazine, effective immediately. The May issue, on newsstands next month, will be the last.

“Despite the great work of the sales team and the talent of the editorial staff, given the challenges of the advertising market and general conditions, Best Life could not meet our internal benchmarks, and we have made the decision to focus our resources on our core brands,” said Steven Pleshette Murphy, president and CEO of Rodale Inc. “Both VP/Editor-in-Chief Stephen Perrine and VP/Publisher Michael Wolfe have been outstanding leaders and ambassadors for the brand, and we are so proud of the work of the Best Life team.”

Rodale started the magazine five years ago, and, as it also said in its press release, emphasized “literary writing, humor and in-depth research,” none of which stands much of a chance these days against anemic advertising revenue.

Maybe the Life curse has upside. Life magazine has been resurrected how many times now?

* Thanks for the refresher course in “its” versus “it’s.” That’s known as an error of haste, not one of knowledge. They make you learn its/it’s before you get your journalism license. (Kidding. There is no journalism license in the United States.)

The Online Publishers Association got a bunch of Web publishers (including Reuters) to agree to test a new series of ad formats that it says will “stimulate a renaissance of creative advertising on the Internet.”

Renaissance? Indeed, says the OPA. The ads will:

• Inspire creativity and high-quality advertising
• Provide a greater share of voice for the advertisers
• Introduce a measurement to capture impact
• Enhance interactivity to build user engagement with brands

Or, roughly translated: The new online ad formats are supposed to work because there will be fewer of them, they will be larger, they theoretically could command a higher fee for advertisers who buy the space, and more people will buy stuff because of them.

Here are the formats:

• The Fixed Panel (recommended dimension is 336 wide x 860 tall), which looks naturally embedded into the page layout and scrolls to the top and bottom of the page as a user scrolls.
• The XXL Box (recommended dimension is 468 wide x 648 tall), which has page-turn functionality with video capability.
• The Pushdown (recommended dimension is 970 wide x 418 tall), which opens to display the advertisement and then rolls up to the top of the page.

This is intended as a way to succeed the era of banner ads because who, after all, looks at them except as a prelude to irritation? (No one, according to lots of studies)

But wait! MediaMemo blog author Peter Kafka at All Things Digital raises an interesting point in his headline from earlier on Tuesday about the OPA ad formats:

Coming to a Web Site Near You: Bigger, More Obnoxious Ads

Kafka explains:

The key point is that the ads are going to be ginormous and gaudy-think monster trucks with sirens and flashing lights. … The reasonable thing to point out here is that there’s nothing that prohibits advertisers and publishers from doing interesting and creative stuff with these formats-just like Apple. And if you’re really lucky, you’ll find that the ads are even about stuff you’re interested in learning about. … But if the ads aren’t interesting and aren’t relevant to you? It’s the kind of thing that could drive a mild-mannered person to install ad-blocking software.

Here are the companies whose sites will start using the new ad formats:

BabyCenter, Bizjournals, Bloomberg, BusinessWeek, CBS Interactive, CNN, Condé Nast Digital, Discovery Communications, ESPN, Forbes.com, FOXNews Digital, IDG, iVillage Network, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Meredith Interactive, msnbc.com, MTV Networks, NBC Universal, New York Media, The New York Times, Reed Business Information, Reuters, Time Inc., USA Today, Wall Street Journal Digital Network and Weather.com, with more OPA members to be announced.

(These photos, which show a G.I. Joe ad in “open” format above, and “closed’ format below, are courtesy of Online Publishers Association.)

The interests of the paranoid and the preservers of the free press are converging: Mainstream media’s coverage of Washington, D.C., has shrunk to the point where big stories are being left uncovered. Meanwhile, more “niche” media outlets are moving in, but catering to the interests of the wealthy few.

That’s the essence of a 28-page report from the Project for Excellence in Journalism, which says that the number of journalists covering D.C. at the beginning of the Obama administration “is not so much smaller as it is dramatically transformed.”

You can read Howard Kurtz’s narrative in Wednesday’s Washington Post, or you could take a look at the main points we found in the release, presented bullet-point style for busy folks.

• A new sector of niche media has grown… offering more specialized and detailed information than the general media to smaller, elite audiences, often built around narrowly targeted financial, lobbying and political interests. Some of these niche outlets are financed by an economic model of high-priced subscriptions, others by image advertising from big companies like defense contractors, oil companies and mobile phone alliances trying to influence policymakers. [News you can use, and pay for. It may deprive the public of its low-cost right to know, but at least it's a business model. -ed]
• The contingent of foreign reporters in Washington has grown to nearly 10 times the size it was a generation ago.
• In 2008, newspapers from only 23 states had reporters based in Washington covering federal government… That is down from 35 states listed in the director’s 1985 edition — and that was before a host of further cutbacks in 2008.
• Since the 1980s, the number of newspapers accredited to cover Congress has fallen by two thirds. The number claiming a presence in Washington generally, according to Capitol directories, has fallen by more than half.
• Since the mid-1980s, the number of U.S. wire services and newspapers accredited to cover Congress… has fallen 72 percent… In 1985, reporters representing 564 of these outlets carried Hill credentials. By the early months of 2007, well before the latest round of cutbacks, that number had fallen to 160.
• The number of local TV and radio stations with access to feeds and news stories from corporate news bureaus in Washington has fallen 37 percent from the mid-1980s to 92 stations. [Does that mean fewer TV crews smacking me in the head with their cameras while I'm trying to cover a Senate presser? That used to irk me when I covered the Hill. -ed]
• The two most prominent [weekly magazines], Time and Newsweek, now operate with less than half the Washington staff they had in the mid-1980s.
• Today, many of Washington’s most experienced and talented journalists no longer explain the workings of the federal government to those in the general public, but to specialty audiences whose interests tend to be both narrow and deep. [Examples: ClimateWire, Energy Trader, Traffic World, Government Executive, Food Chemical News.]
• In short, those influencing poliyc have access to more information than ever, while those affected by those policies — but not organized to shape them — are likely to be less informed.

As always, we want to know what you think. How is DC coverage at your local news outlet? Is there any? Write to us.

(Photo: Reuters)

April Fool’s Day is still a few months away, giving magazine publisher Conde Nast some time to pull a few practice gags. The latest is its decision to kill Domino magazine — days after appointing a new chief to run it.

Here’s the press release, sent on Wednesday:

Domino magazine will cease publication, it was announced today by Charles H. Townsend, President and CEO of Condé Nast. The final issue will be published in March 2009.

“This decision to cease publication of the magazine and its website is driven entirely by the economy,” Mr. Townsend said. “Although readership and advertising response was encouraging in the early years, we have concluded that this economic market will not support our business expectations.”

Domino was launched in April 2005. The magazine’s current ratebase is 800,000.

It is one of the latest “shelter” magazines — titles dealing with the home — to go under. (Kind of ironic, really, when so many people are spending more time at home because they can’t afford to go out anymore.)

Things were different not so long ago, the New York Observer reported earlier this month:

Back in November, CEO Chuck Townsend, in a statement through a spokeswoman, conceded that there were problems at the magazine: “Ad revenue is off at Domino like it is across the industry, but the magazine is way ahead of our original plans to circulate it in the marketplace.”

Some other reports said at the time that appointing a new “publishing director” to oversee the publisher was a sign that Conde Nast had enough faith in the magazine to keep it alive.

Just kidding!