Entertainment Weekly gives a lesson Commentary: A magazine holds an unusual focus group By Jon Friedman, MarketWatch Last Update: 12:01 AM ET Dec. 23, 2005
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) - Magazines like to brag that they enjoy a special, intimate relationship with their readers. Now, I love touchy-feely marketing as much as the next guy, but I never quite bought into the publishing industry's brand of self-serving blather.
Then I attended an unorthodox and inventive focus group hosted by Entertainment Weekly - and got religion.
A property of Time Warner, EW asked 12 of its most dedicated subscribers -- seven men and five women who live in the New York metropolitan area -- to refrain from reading the magazine and its Web site throughout November. EW followed it up by inviting them to sit on a panel and discuss their lonely, wretched, EW-less existence at a dinner Dec. 14.
Suffice to say, I have seen the light! Gadzooks! Yes, brothers and sisters, magazines really do matter!
Well, EW sure does, anyway. It was endearing, even heartwarming, to observe the obsessive loyalty of these subscribers. The dinner occurred smack in the middle of a horrendous industry slump. Magazines are desperately seeking advertising dollars these days. (Underscoring the hard times, Time Inc., EW's publisher, announced layoffs of 105 employees a few days after the magazine's dinner.)
That said, I'd hasten to add that these 12 EW subscribers truly need to get out and smell the flowers once in a while, too. (One of them talked about renting a hotel room while in college so she could watch the Oscars ceremony without having her roommates milling around and distracting her from the broadcast. She said that, by the way, with a shrug, as if this amounted to perfectly normal behavior. I don't know about you, but I could barely afford to buy a slice of pizza when I was in college).
Focus group
The focus group warmed the heart of Rick Tetzeli, who moved over from Time Warner's Fortune magazine to become EW's managing editor in 2002.
Tetzeli is a dead ringer for English actor Daniel Craig, the new James Bond. He told me that the average EW reader is 34 - "(but) we try to write younger." The 12 individuals at the session seemed to be in their late 20s or early 30s.
Among EW's circulation of 1.7 million, you won't find many more dedicated readers than the dirty dozen at the focus group. But they aren't exactly sycophants. When Tetzeli announced that the cover subject of EW's next issue was going to be "King Kong," one of the panelists groaned, "AGAIN?" Man - this was a tough crowd.
Clearly, these people were born to read a magazine like EW, which, despite its generalist-sounding title, caters to movies (and television shows) and gives shorter shrift to music and books. Why does it? As the Kinks once sang: Give the people what they want. EW's subscriber list is a movie crowd.
They dearly missed EW during their period of deprivation. Zoe, a charming lawyer-turned-aspiring-actress, confessed to the group: "I felt lonely," before smiling gamely and adding reassuredly, "just to the not-pathetic-side of lonely."
The other panelists nodded knowingly.
A panelist named Kevin informed the room, "I go to A LOT of movies. EW is basically my gold standard. There was a void with no EW on the coffee table. This really confused me."
More nodding.
Juan commiserated with Kevin, saying: "It was like not having a pen-pal write to me." He then paused and added sheepishly: "You probably think it's kind of ... freaky."
Matilda, for her part, declared that she had come up with an unexpected solution for the void. "I actually read books!"
Upon hearing that bulletin, the suddenly impressed focus-group participants nodded their heads. I half-expected them to grab their notepads and scribble furiously, "Remember to read books when not scanning EW!"
EW readers are deeply protective of their favorite magazine. When a panelist named Jake had the chutzpah to say that the EW void didn't actually affect him much, one of his fellow guinea pigs looked him in the eye and said, "You're the anti-Christ!" (I'm pretty sure that she was kidding).
Indeed, EW readers do feel a weird kinship with the magazine. Some of the panelists made a show of pointing out that Tetzeli's shirt brilliantly set off his eyes (And when was the last time that a subscriber said that to the managing editor of Sports Illustrated or Money or Fortune?)
Of all the EW stalwarts, writer Dalton Ross got the heaviest praise because he had a penchant for writing in print what they had been thinking. "Oh my God," Jessica gushed at one point, "is he sitting on my couch?"
Many of the focus-group members said they had turned to Premiere magazine during the month away from EW and found it to be a deeply unsatisfying experience. When Kevin called Premiere the "worst magazine," Tetzeli good-naturedly cheered.
It's not that Premiere is bad, it's just that these folks are so slavishly devoted to EW. "It's FUN!" Jessica said. "It's a fun magazine to read. It's just fun."
The key word, apparently, is fun. But EW is also highly relevant.
"Nowhere else could I find my very thoughts on the page," Zoe murmured. Adria added: "The tone of the magazine is one big inside joke."
If it is, the EW writers get the joke as well. Its senior writer, Jessica Shaw, went on "Good Morning America" on Thursday to shower praise on the ABC show "Lost," which EW named Entertainer of the Year.
"We are geekily obsessed about this show," Shaw gushed, sounding just like one of the focus group panelists.
Lesson
All of this devotion translates into good business. EW says its circulation has been growing at a 20% clip, a trend that would sharply counter the usual state of slow or no growth in the publishing business.
Of course, EW's exercise also has a meaning that's much deeper than some movie geeks sitting around and talking shop.
Magazines drone on all the time and insist that they're in touch with their target audiences. But they seldom do research of this magnitude. It's no accident that EW has achieved such loyalty from its public.
For what it's worth, I confess that I haven't been a devout reader of the magazine lately. I prefer to read long narrative articles and tend to gloss over the reviews and survey stories ("The 100 Greatest Scary Movies of all Time" and the like).
I also liked to turn to the EW's back page when it consisted of a nostalgic story that described the anniversary of a major entertainment event. I used to turn first to that page as a jumping-off point. Lately, novelist Stephen King has been writing a well received column.
But I was impressed by the dedication of the EW subscribers at the focus group. I'll make a point of revisiting the magazine.