Re: Content, now ads

In a message dated 12/26/02 7:27:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
cottagegardener@plantcollector.us writes:


> In my opinion, these are the only two that focus on gardening and leave out
> the ads.

I would take exception to ads being present.  The magazine will be able to 
offer more editorial material with ads.  But the part that I find useful to a 
gardener is that they connect the gardener to sources he may not otherwise 
find.  Many ads carry website addresses now, catalogs are offered to those 
who are not yet searching the Internet plus many small businesses can find 
you and vice versa.  Advertising, like it or not, keeps the cost down to the 
subscriber.  Website info is littered with ads unless .org or some other 
non-profit.  Note that non-profit sites are often not much use.

In the localized PPP (New England), any trip you might want to take for a day 
or weekend will be filled with garden related stops via the ads carried by 
this magazine.  Do you not think that horticultural magazines carry very few 
non-hort. ads making them a source rather than an annoyance?    

We still get some professional stuff still, though office closed for several 
years, and these publications consist entirely of ads and a minute amount of 
true information.  They are subscribed to and read by contractors for new 
product information. Nursery professional magazines are a valuable source and 
again are half ads.   Not a fan of advertising (in the middle of any cable 
movie for example) there is merit for some.  When first a gardener, I 
searched the magazines for sources.  Those without Internet access probably 
still do.

Claire Peplowski
NYS z4

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE PERENNIALS
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index