Bike mags are really scared of upsetting the big advertisers and thus all bikes are good just that some are 'marginally' better than others.

That's why Honda win every group test the mags do. If it isn't the best bike, they'll dream up some contrived excuse as to why it's the bike you should buy.

Video: Yamaha R1 v Honda Fireblade v Suzuki GSX-R1000 v Ducati 1198 v Kawasaki ZX-10R - Motorcycle News,

Listen to the excuses from about 3:30 onwards in the video. I reckon the overall result that they'll print in the mag is that you should buy the 'blade because it's the best on real roads and the R1 too track focused, due to lack of engine braking. At the very worst, the Fireblade will come 2nd overall even though it was 2nd last (out of 5) on this test.

Also, has anyone else noticed that both the big glossy bike mags and MCN are using the same "hired guns" to track test bikes? (I bet they get more than £150.) Now they want HU members to write articles for them! Do these guys actually do anything themselves that's worth paying for?

Strikes me as a sort of lottery. You do the ride and write up as you'd do anyway and post to TWO. If they use it you win £150, the Hamster or whoever has to rethink his latest 600cc group test/fawning appreciation of plastic missile that'll rust in a fortnight and the mag's publishers might get the idea that they should be thinking about facts not advertising. I dare TWO to publish the first report they recieve where the bike throws it's toys out of the pram just past Calais :innocent:

I was bored last week, stuck on a motorway services due to a cancelled meeting. I spent £1.90 on MCN. I went cover to cover in under 20 minutes. The only articles of interest were the new Norton and a bit about two-stoke technology. Both were so shallow and lacking in detail you have to wonder what was going on. OK, Norton can't tell you how much the new bike will cost, but they should be pressed far enough to say if Joe public should wait or buy a Triumph now, especially when you put pictures and little comments about three other bikes. Finding ways to sneak in Norton advertising with lines like "Whose brake levers will you be using", "Oh, we only buy high quality from...." was just feeble. If Norton won't talk boys, they get two column inches on page 5 saying there'll be info in a few week. If Honda exclude you from the next press launch for not been nice, that's the story you publish, they've obviously got something to hide. "New MCN" is just Old MCN with fewer references to getting your knee down. :rolleyes2:

Andy

heh I felt the same way with MCN last year when I was trapped on the Santander ferry for 22 hours, went and bought one about the new VFR and the history of , not a single article caught my eye.

This discussion has a lot in common with this one http://www.horizonsunlimited.com/hub...articles-38717

This is one of my favorites (repost), there is a lot of good points here
YouTube - Harlan Ellison -- Pay the Writer

Great rant by Harlan - whoever he is.

That's how it works these days, and not just publishing.

Like H says, they may pay you after 6 months hassle then don't even send you a copy of a publication! That is why I don't bother with mags these days, esp the UK - unless they ask.

Scanned though that other thread to but it got bogged down in camera tech. The idea of a freelancer fluttering from mag to mag like a hummingbird selliing their wares is a myth. You need to study the market and know your publication intimately, know they very language they use. Does UK Bike run 5-page spread on trans-Af? Not for 25 years last time I looked unless you're a celeb so don't even bother. But if you get a foot in the door you can offer other ideas. That's what I meant by 'being in favour with the editor' earlier on. When they move on, as they so often do these days, you may have to start again. Fortune favours the pushy and hard [net]working. No news there.

My experience is that the mag/editorial scene in the US is more professional than the UK. I've even had NG ringing me up from New York fact checking an article. It's commonplace out there - can you imagine it in the UK!?

There's another factor worth mentioning. I suspect that getting published (and sponsored/noticed for that matter) in non-Anglo countries (especially Europe) is much easier because 'you're a bigger fish in a small bowl' and they like to see/support plucky locals do their stuff instead of more foreign/Anglo content.

Ch

My impression is that most people are open to good ideas, but you need to present them in a professional way. You need something to grab their attention, photos are one way…

That’s true – and not.
There is also less money in a smaller bowl but it’s true that a lot of magazines like articles written by someone from the same country.
In Norway there are only two magazines and one of them is not willing to pay so the small bowl is filled with even smaller fish.

On the other hand some magazines are represented in multiple countries. They share a pool of articles/information they can use and this makes the bowl bigger but the cost of translation is added.

A slightly differnt point of view
 

I Admit I know nothing about publishing in UK bike mags.

As some of you may know I am a scientist and our career value is based on publishing. You may have heard “publish or perish”. It is very true. I bring this up only to draw a (scary) comparison.

Many years ago, “Journals” (the boffin word for magazine) used to pay honorariums, many scientist used these to fund their work. Over time, the honorariums got less and less. By the time, I started my career if was no payment at all, but at least the editors/ journals did some editing (text, vocabulary, page formatting, fact checking…) although they were still reviewed by “experts in the field”.

Very soon after I started my career, the journals stop editing for anything but page formatting, although there was strict “guidelines” how the paper should be laid out in the first place. So at this point, most journals get a “perfect” article for free, that they only need to page format.

Today there is a large number of journals that even make the authors do the page-formatting (you are sent a template and have to shoe horn your article in). To exacerbate things there is a growing number or journals that are even charging for submission and another charge for printing per page per photo/image/graph. THEY STILL CHARGE TO READ IT. Yes they get paid twice.

At the rate the stock images are being produced and sold at cheep prices, the rate that websites like Facebook and Google’s picasa are claiming copy-write for both text and images, and finally the way I read things in this post. I can see in a few years no one will get paid at all or will have to pay for the right to publish.

Most of use have read and use Chris’s AMH, if he had to pay for it to get published he may not have done it and we will all lose out.

My suggestion FIGHT IT NOW. Don’t publish for free. Don’t let the 15seconds of fame kill the next generation. Stand up for your value. If you are donating your work to something make sure that some one else is not getting paid for it. If they get paid so should you.

Some interesting replies.
The offer of £150 for a story is an amount I have been given to offer, not what I would view as enough to cover anyones expenses but that wasn't the point. If you think you're story is worth more than that, and it probably is, then good for you and best of luck trying to get it published.
One thing I don't understand is everyones assumption that we (bike journo's) don't travel as well as anyone else. Before I worked at TWO I was in the army for ten years. Travel and adventure is something that appealed to me, as was writing, so I took a gamble and pushed to get into the industry. Now that I'm in it I find that I have to suffer the wrath of people that assume, because I'm fortunate enough (through luck and hard work) to wear fancy kit and ride shiny bikes that I'm incapable of having a 'real adventure', what a crock of shit. If you don't like the idea of being published because the offer of money isn't high enough, fine, thanks for taking a look. But don't assume all mags and all journo's are the same, I posted on here thinking I would get some educated responses and because I thought this could be a good chance to get some great stories in TWO. Thanks to those that have responded already.

I have a completely different view. First, most of the publishing industry is being crushed by forces unleashed the internet. Newspapers closing, magazines going out of business or moving to online-only (ie, no print) versions. Many of them don't pay more because they can't. Like it or not, it is simply a fact of life.

Second, if there were a magazine that I thought highly of, I would gladly spend some time to create and contribute an article/photos to share with other readers, even if unpaid--I don't see how this is different from contributing posts here, or ride reports to somewhere like ADVRider.com. On the other hand, I wouldn't do so just for the "15 seconds of fame" if I didn't think much of the magazine. I'm not standing up for my value because this isn't my job, its hobby, so doesn't have any real value to me.

Third, you say that if authors have to pay to publish there will be much less interesting material published. In fact, it is now easier and cheaper than ever for authors to print and distribute their own materials (either via "print on demand" or digitally), cutting out publishers altogether. In a niche market like motorcycle adventure travel, I think we should expect to see much more (self) published, rather than less, as I think that very few authors (including Chris) currently have a chance of convincing publishers to print their works; if people can self-publish it will give an opportunity to a much broader circle of potential authors, even though the resulting quality will be uneven.

I think people are missing the point somewhat. John is offering £150 to non-proffesional writers. I expect the article will be introduced along the lines of "TWO reader Joe Public went to x and did y, here he tells us all about it..." I could be wrong about this of course, but I don't think this is intended as a direct replacement for a proffesionally written article.

I'd make a couple of points:

A lot of people write up their stories for free on websites like this. Suggesting that making a few quid out of selling it to a mag is tantamount to selling your soul is a lot of pish. Who knows, you might inspire some poor desk bound biker to jack it all in and take a trip.

It's all very well saying "You should be getting x amount for articles and pictures". A few years ago I tried selling words and pix as a freelancer to outdoor mags and, because I had no experience, no one wanted to know. Some editors were downright rude. Far easier to get their staff writer to write some vapid nonsense on the 'Top Gear' model. Getting just this kind of experience could be the way in for young writers who want to turn pro.*

The fact the magazine trade is going down the tubes just makes me laugh. It's entirely a result of the poor quality and unimaginative nature of the contents. Most stories seem to be extended adverts for travel companies who've offered freebies. Perhaps getting in ordinary riders, who have no agendas, have recieved no freebies, have ridden REAL journeys, then getting them to tell their stories, will inject much needed originality into the world of magazine journalism.

Before you criticise this guy too roundly, think about what makes most bike mags so uninteresting. Essentially they seem (to me) to be an endless, childish round of superbike test rides. This guys is trying to put REAL rider tales from around the world in his mag. OK, he's not got to finance anyones next RTW, but it's a start, right?

*In the end I sold some stuff to a snowboard mag - earned a few hundred quid and a trip to Austria. Even if you don't make a living out of it, the results can be fun!

Matt :)


PS- The 'fifteen minutes of fame' thing seems to be being sneered at pretty heavily by some of the people here. What's so wrong with that? I challenge any writer to say with absolute truth that seeing their work in print for the first time wasn't the thrill of a lifetime. If you can say that, what the hell are you writing for?

Nice point!
I think most mags are boring because the writers are not good enough. Sadly the more people that work for free (or almost free) the harder it will be to get paid for the professionals.
The mags will be filled with amateur-stuff, and why should we pay for it? We can read that stuff free on internet.

I see what you're saying, however, Bike Mags (and travel and outdoor mags) currently seem to be written, almost exclusively, by professional writers (willing to be corrected on this point) and are almost universally toss. How does maintaining the status quo improve things?

Matt :)

Some professionals are good, other are not. If the good ones are not satisfied they will move on.
I know a few people that used to write a lot (freelance) but most of them stopped, it doesn’t pay enough.
Did you see the video-clip I posted?

It doesn’t, nor does it help to make it worse for the professionals.

My point isn’t to try to stop people from writing, but you should get paid for it.

Matt: Well Said Sir!

I don't employ a Chauffer, a candle maker, a lamp lighter, a skullery maid, a **** boy, a chimney sweep or a host of other people I might have found vital in the 18th or 19th centuries. Their jobs have been replaced by a combination of technology (vehicles with automated mixture control, electric light, vacuum cleaners, flush toilets, gas central heating etc.) and DIY.

In the information age, publishing has to change. You can't publish a million (expensive paper) copies of a one size fits all article and expect to sell them when the competition is the WWW that somewhere includes the exact subject I choose to read that day. The audience has come to expect more as well as (perhaps) the quality falling.

Find a way for the "quality" writer to edit the stuff produced by millions writing from first hand knowledge and you've maybe got a product that sells. (Maybe there is some way to detect bad grammer or fifty word sentences without punctuation?). Otherwise I'm betting the amateurs are here long after the professionals give up the ghost at least for disposable media (books are different).

In terms of payment, something like MCN is incredably poor value. £1.90 for fifteen minutes rummaging and five minutes unsatisfactory reading. The net isn't free, but even at 50p for a mobile connection is cheaper than MCN and will bring me to some article of better content. Again, invent a searchable, high quality, variable content, mobile source employing your high quality writers and I think you'll have a product you could maybe get an few extra pence for. If these few pence can support writers only turning out a few articles a week, I'd doubt. Maybe the porn sites lead the way, or do most pervs stick to the free ones for that too?

Andy