Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/03/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]once upon a time Sal DiMarco,Jr. wrote: > Harrison, Ted, > You are both wrong. LIFE did not deserve to die. >...SNIP... > People have to want to read LIFE. The > only way they will want it, it to make it interesting and exciting. The new > LIFE was boring. > The new LIFE was a very poor PEOPLE retread, but alive, it still had > hope. Dead it has done. Sal, I agree with what you have said above. I did not mean that LIFE deserved to die, simply that the LIFE on the stands today is not even a shadow if its old self, but a poor copy of PEPOPLE. As you said LIFE was a picture magazine giving glimpses into things most never see with new and interesting angles on things. The current thing is nothing like what we expect, and is, I think, the reason it failed....People were not looking for a rebagged PEOPLE magazine but a magazine that gives people a unique look on things. The magazine did not do that and hence its lack of success. IMHO. I, as an editorial photographer, am always saddened to see an outlet close. I have seen 3 of the 4 newspapers I worked for close their doors and one wire service that I worked for is now only in the history books. To succeed in the market today print media must offer something different, unfortunately I think most people in management that means along the entertainment lines, not the news/editorial documentary style. - -- Harrison McClary http://www.mcclary.net