Golfweek Editor Jeff Babineau was nice enough to take some time to answer a number of questions about the re-design of Golfweek, the demise of the newspaper golf writer, the importance of web-first stories and a number of other topics.
I will post Part 2 later tonight.
Enjoy.
Richard
Editor, The Golf Watch
RS: Jeff, congratulations on the new design of Golfweek. The magazine has a much more stylish look. Redesigns can take a very long time--when did you guys start planning this?
Jeff: The idea was presented last spring, not long after a high-ranking golf executive referred to Golfweek as a “golf trade publication,” and we really got started in late summer, with director of design Jason Lusk leading the way. We’re quite proud of our roots – the magazine is close to 35 years old – but wanted to promote a message that Golfweek has evolved into a consumer magazine. The move to be more mainstream in size and make our appearance more fresh and modern breaks from our roots as a trade and helps us tell that story. It hopefully will help attract new readers to the publication, too.
RS: You have already published four issues with the new design. What kind of response have you gotten from readers?
Jeff: We’ve been very pleased and encouraged by the feedback we have received, as a large majority of readers who have weighed in tell us they like the new look. It hasn’t been unanimously positive, and that’s fine. We knew going in that not everybody embraces change. I mean, what do you say to somebody who tells you they loved the magazine the way it was? But overall, people have been very positive about the new appearance and what we’re doing. We devoted 20-plus pages of our Jan. 31 issue to putting (Golfweek’s Putting Issue), which was something we’d never done so extensively, and the response we’ve heard back has been outstanding.
RS: The magazine has a new trim size. Does this save money on printing costs?
Jeff: We’re expecting our new size to save us some money on print
costs, yes. But it’s still a bit of an unknown how much we’ll actually save.
Going to a smaller trim size means the need for more editorial pages if we
continue to do all the things we do (our first redesigned magazine of 2009, for
example, had 10 more edit pages than our 2008 opener in the bigger size). Also,
part of taking on the project was hiring a great firm to do it, and so we made
a significant investment by retaining Garcia Media (which has helped oversee
redesigns at The Wall Street Journal, Crain’s
RS: Now that your magazine has a similar physical appearance to the other major golf newsweekly, how do you feel Golfweek is able to differentiate itself content-wise?
Jeff: The difference is in all the things we do. We preach quality
plus quantity. We put together a chart of what we do vs. our two weekly
competitors, and we’re confident we do a great deal more. We have The
Forecaddie, a popular feature which expanded from one page to three or four
pages. We’re running The Golf Life, a section of the magazine devoted to golf
destinations and lifestyle, every other week. We run at least two columns a
week. We have competition coverage not only from all the pro tours, but from
amateur, college and junior events. We have our own rankings, both for pro and
amateur players, as well as top-100 courses (and best state by state). We cover
business. We cover architecture. Our reader represents a good player (on
average a single-digit handicapper), and we run instruction aimed at the better
player (not the same old “Fix Your Slice” stuff.) We ran an instruction piece
early in 2008 showing readers the drills Lorena Ochoa uses to work on her game.
Pretty strong. And we also offer more scores and stats than people are getting
anywhere else. That’s a pretty comprehensive package.
Click here to read part two.
