I posted this as a reply to another post on the YCCC reflector. I was asked
to cross-post it here:
I don't think anyone is asking HQ to make a decision that would result in
less profit or a loss for ARRL. The argument isn't over whether editorial
pages need to be cut. It's over which pages get cut. We asked for the
rationale behind the decision, and K1RO has promptly, graciously, and
intelligently replied. Basically, it boils down to the number of readers who
read each editorial feature -- kind of a popularity contest. Some of us are
questioning whether this is the right way to make this particular decision.
Relying on straight polling results might be appropriate for the typical
magazine business, but QST's mission and readership are anything but
typical.
Although the number of readers who are contesters, DXers and part of the
Field Organization is a small percentage of the readership, we tend to be
more active, more vocal, take on more leadership roles, vote more
consistently in elections, and spend a *heck* of a lot more money on amateur
radio than the average ham. We're the people who make ham radio go. We get
Field Day and hamfests going. We organize and run the clubs. We're the ones
who run for office and choose the office holders. We're the ones who buy the
products of the companies that advertise in QST. We're the one's who donate
to the frequency defense funds. We're the ones who keep the HF bands busy.
We're the people who attract new hams to the hobby and train them -- we're
the Elmers. We're also the VECs who test new licensees. Our numbers may be
small, but our impact on amateur radio is disproportionately large.
What will be the cost of alienating this important constituency? I think a
case can be made that deleting contest results, Honor Roll and section
news, which are deeply cherished by a very active segment of the membership,
could cost ARRL and amateur radio a lot more in the long run than it will
save in publishing costs. HQ should be aware that this could have a
significant impact on the new development program: it's going to be mighty
tough to ask that rich old contester with twenty towers to remeber ARRL in
his will after cutting the parts of QST he loves the most. Penny wise and
pound foolish?
I suppose another way of saying all this is that the survey responses should
be weighted by the activity level (and perhaps license class) of the
respondents.
I also believe an argument can be made (and has been made) that ARRL needs
to lead opinion, not follow it. If ARRL leadership believes that HF
activities are important, then they need more coverage regardless of the
survey results. The magazine is not just a business -- it's also a vehicle
for communicating the organization's view of the world. Besides, there's a
pied piper effect: when HF activities are exposed in the magazine, and
portrayed as fun and fulfilling, prospective hams looking at a newsstand
copy might just get the bug. The hobby will grow, membership will grow, and
readership will grow. Are we ready to throw in the towel and say "Ham Radio
= HT"?
A case can also be made that other features can be deleted or moved to the
website without alienating any readers at all -- I, for one, would gladly
trade the pages and pages of contest rules for the Honor Roll. Do pictures
of messy shacks advance the cause of amateur radio more than contest
results?
Finally, unlike most magazine subscribers, many of us have the right to
question this decision because we are ARRL members (i.e., stakeholders in
ARRL and QST.) There's no harm in asking one's representatives why a
decision was made and perhaps debating the basis for that decision. ARRL is,
after all, not just the QST business -- it's a membership organization. If
the members decide that certain editorial content has value and importance
beyond simple appeal to the majority of readers, then we can decide to cut
less important features or subsidize what we want with higher dues.
My bottom line? My wife is impressed when I show her my call printed in a
glossy magazine. That buys me more antennas, more equipment and more
operating time. Showing her my call on the computer screen just ain't the
same thing. I feel the same way about the Honor Roll. It took 17 years of
busting my butt to make that list. I always dreamed of seeing my call
published in the QST Honor Roll, but that feature was deleted shortly before
I made it. I think the feelings of ARRL's most active, loyal and supportive
members should count when decisions like that are made.
73, Dick WC1M
>
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|