This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

Re: another garden magazine ceases

Perhaps because it had no photos of actual gardens, it seemed to stay firmly in realm of the theoretical, rather than give readers information they could relate to in a visceral, practical way....
 
I don't know...it would be interesting to hear from gardeners and photographers on The Gardener. I thought that it wasn't appealing to novice gardeners (it seemed rather stuffy), but didn't have much new to say to the more experienced ones, so who was the audience? And these days we all expect glossy pictures, as well as good writing. All I know is that for me as a Canadian reader/garden writer, the subscription in US$ wasn't worth the cost.
 
Yvonne Cunnington
 
In a message dated 3/16/03 8:23:30 PM US Eastern Standard Time, ycunnington@sympatico.ca writes:

The Gardener was boring, I thought. It didn't offer anything I didn't already know or wasn't getting elsewhere. I didn't renew my subscription either.
 

Could this be because those of us that know about the stuff, write about it???.  Should we not be educatingt those that do not know?
What was the audience that it was trying ot attract? 
_______________________________________________
gardenwriters mailing list
gardenwriters@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/gardenwriters

GWL has searchable archives at:
http://www.hort.net/lists/gardenwriters

If you have photos for GWL, send them to gwlphotos@hort.net and they will
show up at: http://www.hort.net/lists/gwlphotos
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index