The last copy of Rolling Stone had the index on page 39.
It seems commonplace now for magazines to have their indices 20 or 30 pages deep. From what I remember, Wired was the first to do this; ttheir earlier editions had their indexes on page 12 or 14; now it’s 20 pages in or so.
Was Wired the first magazine to have their index deep in the publication? Why aren’t people getting upset about indexes that are now almost a third of the way through a magazine?
At least it had a page number
No, it’s been happening for a long time.
A ‘premium’ ad position is before the Table of Contents (ToC). The more ads and such they can cram in there the more $$$ they can get for each one.
It’s a well-established practice. You just haven’t been reading women’s magazines enough.
How did I know you were talking about Rolling Stone before I ever opened this thread? hehe
And yeah, they are one of the worst offenders. None of the other magazines I read have more than a few pages of ads up front.
Although Sports Illustrated and sometimes ESPN the Magazine put several pages of full-spread photographs before the index. Hey, at least it’s content…
If you want to see a really excessive use of ads before the index, go pick up a Vanity Fair one of these days.
Nah, Vogue is definitely the worst.
Isn’t life shit. The thing I fucking despise the most is the thing we can’t escape and it’s getting worse fast - Adverfuckingtising!
No wonder people go round shooting people, I feel like a shooting rampage sometimes when I have been bombarded with CRAP I don’t want.
The whole thing stinks, very little advertising of a product is about the merits of that product, it’s all lowlife trickery, getting us to subconsciously like something using sex, or lies, or fuckogg.
Tell you what…
Actually pay what some of the things cost that are supported by advertising and see how you like it.
Wanna pay $59.95 to watch a soccer match on TV? Or how about paying $15 for a magazine.
Advertising lowers your direct monetary cost enormously. Don’t whine.