''Special Supplements'' - a honey trap that is killing us softly

It's a parasite that publishers have created, feeding on the soft underbelly of print media -- "independant supplements". Publishers like them, because they can sell the concept to advertisers more easily, packaging in "more value". Advertisers like them, because they're theoretically more targetted, and their brand can be associated more strongly with a particular topic. PRs like them, because it's easier to get reams of coverage than in the main body of the magazine.

And this is all because no-one is as fussed about standards of excellence or editorial integrity. The supplement is not in the body of the mag, so publishers can do an end-run around their editors in "pay for play" editorial -- the editors don't kick back as hard, because it's not the magazine, it's just a supplement.

But it's an insidious slippery slope. Advertisers would rather go into the supplement than the main mag 'cause they get more space, and perhaps a page or two "quasi-torial". The parent mag's revenues drop, causing publishers to panic, and do more supplements. Editors spend more time pumping out pages of second-rate advertorial for the supplement, spending less time on the quality copy the mag needs. Enter vicious circle from stage left.

It is a very vicious circle, because readers are (mostly) not stupid. They can smell advertorial, and will treat the special supplement with the contempt it deserves.

So advertisers waste their money, PRs become lazy (or frustrated) - the creativity and hard work required to get coverage in a good mag is cheapened by rubbish getting into the supplements (which are not read anyway), journos spend half the month writing material that compromises their principles, "but don't worry, it's just for the supplement, we'd never ask you to do this in the magazine..."

It's going to require a lot of discipline to kill this parasite, because it feels so good while it kills us all.