Does content draw advertising? I thought it was circulation that drew advertising.
Content builds readership which creates circulation which draws advertising.
It’s the circle of life.
This is so true. At least the amatuer porn stars LOOK LIKE they are actually enjoying it and not just waiting for another paycheck.
i wonder if the Playboy Clubs could make a nationwide comeback? Hooters with booze and better food?
If they’re going to hitch their wagon to naked celebrities, get real celebrities. Back in the day they had nude pics of Sophia Loren and Catherine Deneuve; now they get Chynna (sp?) and Heidi Montag. Pretty enough, I guess, but not someone I’d spend seven bucks to see nude photos of.
The quality of the cartoons is slipping, especially the full-page color ones. As much as I like Dean Yeagle and Frank Thorne, neither of them is fit to carry the croquille of Jack Cole or Eldon Dedini, both sadly deceased. Instead of running the best of what comes over the transom, they need to scout out better talent. Adam Hughes would be a great fit for an improved Playboy; so would Howard Chaykin.
They need better interview subjects. They used to interview heads of state and titans of literature, and now they interview…Woody Harrelson? I detect a serious lack of effort here.
They need a strong, consistent editorial voice, like they haven’t had since Hef stepped down. Tina Brown was all wrong for the New Yorker, but maybe Playboy could make better use of her skills?
Also: Get some playmates who don’t look like one of the blonde sextuplets living at the Mansion. If I were Hef and had a six-girl harem, two of them would be Asian and one would be Hispanic. A redhead in the mix would be nice. I like variety. The centerfolds should reflect more variety.
The Playboy Adviser used to advocate swinging and hedonism. That doesn’t seem to be the case anymore. He needs to be replaced with someone who remembers his college days. The woman who writes Esquire’s sex advice column should be hired away from them. I don’t live a particularly hedonistic life, but I like to read about people who do; Playboy is supposed to be aspirational.
But it has to be the right circulation. I wonder what their demographics are. How many people under 50 and not Internet challenged would bother to subscribe.
I actually think a nostalgia angle might be best, but I wouldn’t be very hopeful.
Newsweek has been deliberately cutting its circulation in half to concentrate on a wealthier demographic. If you cut costs by 50% and advertising goes down 30% you come out ahead. Or so the theory goes.
This chart confuses the heck of me in its particulars, but it does smack you in the face with some trend lines.
I can’t imagine a magazine about hedonism, nostalgia, and fine livin’ (plus or minus naked pictures) surviving in these days. I think there would be a very small readership, and when so many people have lost their jobs or are working two shitty jobs to get by, a magazine like that is just plain tacky. Also, reading above comments, ho-hum non-famous pictures of boobs are SO boring when there’s plenty of smut waiting on the computer. When Hefner croaks, that’ll be the end of Playboy unless it’s strictly something online.
Here’s a question: what DOES the oldest son of HH do, anyway, and why doesn’t the public know anything about him? Is there something wrong with him?
The problem with the Playboy Clubs has always been obtaining and keeping a license. However above-board and law-abiding Hef might be, there are enough crime figures (prostitution, drug-dealing, associates turning up mysteriously dead) peripheral to the Playboy empire that few licensing boards would view him in a sympathetic light.
Playboy, like The National Lampoon, was relevant for a very specific time and place and really needs the decency to disappear now that said time and place are gone. We need an online magazine more suited to today, like Wired with naked women and lifestyle articles (“Top ten media players! Mac-to-Linux! Megan Fox nude! How to throw a successful Roman orgy!”).
I can see Playboy coming back to some extent, given the success of Mad Men and the growing interest in early-1960s fashion and culture. Playboy defined what was considered good taste in that era. For Playboy to have a comeback, I think it’s got to latch onto the renewed interest in that point in time. In a way, a nevived Playboy has to exhibit class, but not be “classy”.
With the Playmates and other featured models, focus on the high-end girl-next-door types rather than the women with names that end in “i” and “ee”. No fake breasts, no stripper- or porn star-types.
High-quality writing and investigative journalism. No short laddie mag-style articles, top-10 lists, or anything that would hint at an overlap with Maxim, the late FHM, or Web sites like Cracked.
Has any magazine declined and recovered? Seems like there’s a lot that have declined from their glory days, but few that have bounced back; Car and Driver and Mad are a couple that come to mind in the “I’ve fallen, and I can’t get up” category.