Earlier, in my “formative years”, magazines were my eye on the world. I read them voraciously (still do) and would sneak out of elementary-school (a big no-no) to spend my lunch money on the latest Sports Car graphic, Road & Track,Hot-Rod and CarCraft magazines (plus, of course, Drag Cartoons, as Pete Millar was the ultimate artist).

It wasn’t really advisable for a type-1 diabetic to not eat lunch and buy magazines instead (not to mention escaping the protection of the school grounds), but, thanks to a guardian angel who worked overtime, I survived.

Later on, when I was working at one of the Automotive-aftermarket manufacturers, I got a taste of how the magazine business really works.

This may be common knowledge for many, but if you’re not aware, it can make a profound difference in how you perceive various magazine articles.

Back in the day, one of the biggest reasons the original LIFE magazine went bust was because they were losing money on each magazine they sent out. The subscription rates just couldn’t cover the publishing costs, and the more subscriptions they received (something which you’d think to be a good thing) the more money they lost. That’s why most magazines operate on the “advertiser” principal rather than the “reader” principal.

Have you ever read an article about a product (say a digital-camera for instance) that you know to be, at best, average, but the author of the article has written a glowing review of that same product?

How, you wonder to yourself, can this guy find this product so compelling? At the same time, you notice that the same product, or the same manufacturer of that product, has taken out a very-expensive multi-page, multi-color ad in that same magazine? Think there’s a correlation between the 2-observations you’ve just made? Think chickens lay eggs?

The magazines, in order to survive, have to have advertising-rates that can support the publishing costs associated with that magazine. Now of course, those ad rates are partially based on the number of subscribers to the magazine, the more subscribers, the higher the price of the ads. makes sense.

Although the magazines are made to be attractive to the readers (the subscribers), who do you really think pushes the content of the articles in the magazines? Is it the guy (or girl) who gets 3-years of a monthly magazine for only $3.99? Or is it, the High-end manufacturer who just paid $50,000.00 for a one-month 4-color spread in that same magazine?

Part of the above paragraph reveal a clue as to how you can start evaluating the content of the articles and reviews you’re reading. if you’re getting a great magazine for only $4.99 a year, chances are they’re more focused on the advertisers rather than you, the lowly reader.

Another giveaway is the above mentioned big-advertising-spread in the same (or close to the same) month as the appearance of the glowing-review article in that magazine.

Think that “Car of the year” award didn’t influence the advertisers to spend some good money on that nice insert-ad in the same magazine that gave the award? and, maybe, vicea-versa?

Now, to be sure, nobody is intending to do any harm, but just knowing this much about the magazine business (and the internet and TV are no different) can help you better judge the contents of the articles you read.

This is why, also, word-of-mouth is so powerful. People usually have no vested interest in the product they bought and use, so they’re more apt to tell you what they think (a word of caution though…if they just spent big-bucks on a crappy product, sheer ego may make them tell no more of the truth than a paid advertiser).

Another good thing, for us the consumer, is the fact that many a magazine writer, really doesn’t want to lie to their readers (paycheck pressure aside), so they tend to write things between the lines. Good things to look out for when reading articles or reviews are “qualifiers”.

As you read, look for phrases like “this is absolutely THE BEST digital-camera ever made with a blue-stripe and yellow dots!!!”

Now, it’s usually not that obvious, but if you look at the article, you’ll see these qualifiers spread throughout the article. It’s your job to ask yourself “Well, how many cameras have been made with blue-stripes and yellow dots?” if the answer is “Not many”, there’s your first clue that something might be amiss in this review.

This is a subtle way the authors can alert the reader, and still not alienate the advertiser and lose tons of advertising revenue (and perhaps their job).

You might see things like “Up to ISO 100, this camera is absolutely noise-free!!!” Well, since that particular camera starts at ISO-100 and goes up to ISO-800, the assumption is, at ISO 125 and above the noise is just unbearable.

Many of the foreign magazines (the British publications come to mind), don’t seem so advertiser-focused. I’ve read scathing reviews of a product, only to see a nice advertisement for that same product that just went down in flames, but, there still has to be some balance between publishing costs, advertiser rates, and magazine content….I’m just sayin.

So, in recapping, a few things to be aware of are:

-Low Subscription rates (if you’re paying $300+ a year for a magazine, chances are it’s reader-supported and not advertiser supported)

-Qualifiers

-Flashy ads

I still read magazines voraciously, I certainly wouldn’t want to steer anybody away from them. They provide a lot of up-to-date info, how-to’s, and good articles for an amazing price. it seems a fair trade as long as you’re aware that it’s a 2-way street. I subscribe to a couple of dozen magazines, and buy many more at the newsstand. I, for one, enjoy a low subscription rate.

So, dear reader, be alert in how much weight you give to that magazine (or blog, or internet review), make sure you have your awareness-meter on high whenever you read.