There’s a question that pops up in any interview I give. It goes something like this: “What is the state of the LGBT press?” Or, “Is the LGBT press going through the same issues that mainstream media is dealing with?”
There are several ways to answer that question, but let’s take the question apart and deal with each of the many issues it raises.
First, how does the mainstream situation differ from LGBT media? From my vantage point, on several journalist or media boards, it became apparent that many mainstream news organizations were spending barrels of money on their new web ventures without an understanding of where the web was headed or how to monatize their extreme spending on it. Many mortgaged the house, so to speak. Thus far, for most mainstream or traditional media, they haven’t seen a payday and, worse, they’ve had to cut back on their print versions, which has had a detrimental effect in the newsroom, as seasoned journalists have been put out to pasture. Not a good business move.
The web is still evolving, but a web presence is at least part of the future. You can only make that jump if you have good journalists, and have something that people want to see (or read in this case).
For LGBT publications, this should be a good time. Since we never saw much mainstream advertising (hey, when’s the last time you saw a Taco Bell, McDonald’s, GM or Ford ad in your local LGBT publication?), we have had to count on our local advertising. And since, as the president has stated, ours is the civil-rights struggle of this generation, that should bring interest to our fight for equality, as well as to our community. That should bring funding to LGBT organizations and advertising to LGBT media. Lots of companies want to be on the right side of history. And if you wonder where this comes from, take a look at the Latino or African-American media. There you will find Ford, GM, McDonald’s and Taco Bell advertising, among other mainstream companies. In some sense, seeing those ads in LGBT media, when they come, will make a statement of how far we have come. As to the difference between print (traditional) and new media (websites and blogs), print is still light years ahead. In almost every major city, there’s a local LGBT newspaper with numerous full-time staffers. And they, like ours, are excelling at fusing print and web. There are few, if any, local blogs/websites with any full-time employees. Nationally, it’s a different story. Out Magazine and the Advocate are both traditional and new media. And they are the top, as far as hits and clicks go, but their print editions are hurting. Querty and Towleroad also have become popular and have full-time staff. Aside from those, you might have a few out there with one or two staffers. Here’s the big problem for websites and blogs: It takes very little capital to start one. Therefore, each week scores of new websites and blogs pop up, all competing for that same audience and sponsor/advertising dollar. Print is an expensive start-up.
Traditional media must adapt to new media, and new media must appreciate the value of journalism, since good reporting of facts will serve you and our community well.
Mark Segal, PGN publisher, is the nation’s most-award-winning commentator in LGBT media. He can be reached at [email protected].