I have a friend who likes to introduce me to new people at our Rotary meetings as “the Queen of Social Media.” I’m flattered she feels that way, despite the fact that I don’t really consider myself an “expert” in the field. I was early to embrace the digital revolution, to see how social media could be used for business, and to start a marketing company that has narrowed it’s focus to working in this arena for marketing and business development. I love the constant change, the dynamic nature of online conversations, the astonishing amount of information, and the serendipitous nature of discovering new things every day through people on the web. “Evangelist for New Media” might be more descriptive.
It’s ironic sometimes how things can come out of nowhere and bring us up short in our own beliefs. As enthusiastic as I am about the power, breadth and depth of the web experience, I discovered today that I am not willing to give over every experience to it. I found that there is a line in the sand that I do not want to cross. I discovered that line existed when I was asked to give up something that matters to me: the Smithsonian Magazine.
I pulled the magazine out of the stack of mail today, and the white paper cover stapled to the outside asked me to consider going totally digital on my subscription in exchange for 2 extra months. I was flabbergasted. (Yes, I am using a term not often used to describe magazine subscriptions!) Give up my PAPER MAGAZINE? I couldn’t believe it!
If you don’t get the Smithsonian Magazine, you might think I’m a bit off my rocker, but please let me explain. I don’t get a lot of magazines, but I read religiously the ones that I do get: the Smithsonian, Fast Company, BusinessWeek, The Rotarian and Prevention. And I have a confession to make about that: I mostly read them at my kitchen table. It’s a confession because I do as an adult what I was never allowed to do as a child – read at the table during meals. Now mind you I don’t do it when eating with others (generally) but with three grown kids in the house, we don’t always eat at the same time. So the kitchen table serves as sort of . . . um . . . a library.
Okay, I will never be the woman my mother was – not as a parent, homemaker or hostess. I am more an absent-minded professor than a Martha Stewart. And I love to read. My kids love to read. I discovered early on that if I leave BusinessWeek sitting on the table and that’s all that is there, the kids read it while they eat a bowl of cereal or a sandwich. So we have gotten very casual over the last six years about leaving reading material on the table. You can do that with a magazine. You can’t do that with a digital article!
I had no trouble giving up newspapers – none at all. It’s mostly text anyway and the headlines are all over the Internet the minute you log on. People email, post and tweet links to all the best articles, saving me from having to sort through what’s what myself. I like that system and so far it’s free!
As for BusineesWeek and Fast Company, I read a lot of those articles online for the same reason as the newspapers – people send and post them. I follow Fast Company on Facebook and what I don’t see in the magazine first, I see there. If I had been asked to give up any of my other paper subscriptions, I would have been reluctant, but for the sake of the planet and reducing paper waste and postage, I could have done it.
I just won’t do it for the Smithsonian. I totally understand that the reasons are financial. The Smithsonian Institution has been hit hard by the recession and they don’t just publish a magazine, they operate the world’s foremost system of museums which are free to the public! I’ve seen and heard their pleas for financial support from a cash strapped public and I know I should be doing my part to help them stay viable through this. But give up my magazine? No.
People do not regularly twitter and post the beautifully written and researched articles from that magazine. I am often the one who posts Smithsonian articles for my various networks online. And the photographs! Seeing a little photograph on a computer screen does not compare with the full color photo layouts on paper. The photography is breathtaking and glorious. It would not be the same on my laptop. I would not be able to read those articles over breakfast in the morning at my kitchen table.
I feel guilty of course. I know there are people who are more deserving of the paper edition than I am – long time contributors who have given way more than me; older subscribers who don’t even use a computer; the waiting rooms that provide the Smithsonian as an alternative for thinking people who are stuck there. I know, I know. How could I be so selfish? What happened to my concern for the greater good? For the environment? For the financial health of one of the greatest institutions in the world? How could I not agree to this very simple request they are making out of necessity?
They can’t have my Smithsonian Magazine! Someone else can give up their copy. I’ve gone paperless every way I can think of – I do online billing and banking, I registered for the “stop the junk mail” website (which works by the way), and I recycle my magazines and paper refuse on a weekly basis. I won’t give up my paper copy of the Smithsonian until they pry it out of my cold stiff hands. Or until they no longer publish it – which I hope never happens.
What more can I say? Turns out there is a limit to what I am willing to do online versus “in real life.” Who knew until today?
Thanks also for your excellent blog about the Smithsonian magazine. I am also someone who reads at the table—although I do it at breakfast. It is too hard to try to handle my laptop while I slurp down my yogurt and tea. I also get a lot of my reading done on the subway commuting to and from work; again, it’s impossible to open your laptop and difficult to open a thick book while you’re hanging on to a strap, but not at all hard to read a relatively thin magazine. So like you I will resist giving up the paper copies of the magazines I love most.
My younger friends and colleagues just tell me I’m an old fart who doesn’t yet “get it.” But I’m the same way with music. When I listen to music on my large speakers, I get immersed in it in a way that I can’t do with poor-quality downloads. So I’m proud to be an old coot who cares about quality more than quantity or multitasking.
And of course we’re really pleased that you like the Smithsonian museums and their magazine. (Disclosure: I am the director of the Encyclopedia of Life, a project hosted by the Smithsonian. Note, too that the online version of the magazine allows embedded links. For example, species names in the Wild Things feature are linked to the relevant EOL species pages.)
Jim you rock my socks off! Old coots are my favorite kind! (Who ever heard of a young coot?) Those of us who cling to the vestiges of the “old ways” have to stick together. I will keep track of your Encyclopedia of Life project both online and IRL. The Smithsonian Institution is truly a national treasure in every sense of the word.
Great post and, well, me too! I only subscribe to two print magazines (Smithsonian and Wired); I still grab something at the airport, but both of those still have a visual dimension that adds to the experience.
And my disclosure, I work at the Smithsonian also, in the library and also for the Biodiversity Heritage Library project (which is digitizing legacy literature – 15 million pages and counting – for the EOL and other users): http://biodiversitylibrary.org/
Wow! Peel back the layers of the Smithsonian and look what you find! I’m so glad to have discovered other people who are passionate about their magazines. Not that I ever thought much about it up to this point. I think we should all hold out to the bitter end. I’m resisting the Kindle too. Not because I don’t see the value of it on every level, but I’m just not ready to transition. I will keep an eye on the progress of your project! Thanks so much for sharing the link.
I absolutely agree. I love the Smithsonian; I’m even more passionate about my paper copy of the New Yorker. I do also get that online, and on my phone. But old habits die hard; and for me, it’s a safety issue– because most of the magazine reading I do takes place in my bathtub!
Go Vicki! I can’t remember the last time I had a bath – but I like the sound of it! Even better with reading material, and paper would be a must in that case. What articles I get from the New Yorker tend to come by way of @johnabyrne on Twitter (he’s editor of BusinessWeek.) I discovered early on that I like what John reads in general, so following him means I know what’s great to read without finding it myself. I’ve passed along to so many people Malcolm Gladwell’s article from the New Yorker “How David Beats Goliath” and I would never have read it if John hadn’t put it on Twitter with a link. Truly, that is the “upside” of social media.