National Geographic December issue

[Michael 182]

The Dec issue is mostly dedicated to flying, given the centenniel.

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/

Not sure if NG is sold at news stands, but if it is it is worth getting.

Michael

[Big John]

Michael

Saw that issue on rack in front of check out at Barnes & Noble
yesterday. 12/05/03

Bg John


On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 19:57:16 GMT, "Michael 182"
> wrote:

>The Dec issue is mostly dedicated to flying, given the centenniel.
>
>http://www.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/
>
>Not sure if NG is sold at news stands, but if it is it is worth getting.
>
>Michael
>

[Jay Honeck]

> Saw that issue on rack in front of check out at Barnes & Noble
> yesterday. 12/05/03

The magazine, as always, is extremely well done.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[G.R. Patterson III]

Big John wrote:
>
> Saw that issue on rack in front of check out at Barnes & Noble
> yesterday. 12/05/03

Go back and buy it.

George Patterson
Some people think they hear a call to the priesthood when what they really
hear is a tiny voice whispering "It's indoor work with no heavy lifting".

[Big John]

George

Don't have to buy. B & N has a policy you can sit in their reading
room and read anything on their shelves.

My post to thread by the way was in reply to a query if National
Geographic was sold on news stands vs by subscription only.

Big John


On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 11:15:35 -0500, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:

>
>
>Big John wrote:
>>
>> Saw that issue on rack in front of check out at Barnes & Noble
>> yesterday. 12/05/03
>
>Go back and buy it.
>
>George Patterson
> Some people think they hear a call to the priesthood when what they really
> hear is a tiny voice whispering "It's indoor work with no heavy lifting".

[Rob Perkins]

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 14:32:24 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>> Saw that issue on rack in front of check out at Barnes & Noble
>> yesterday. 12/05/03
>
>The magazine, as always, is extremely well done.

It has fantasting production quality, as has always been the case. But
the choice of topics has been too uncomfortably connected with
whichever political story happens to be in the forefront, so much so
that three years ago I cancelled our subscription.

Great Maps. Wonderful Pictures. Obvious Agenda Since About 1995. The
reporting on the history of flight is probably enough of an exception
that I'll consider thinking about making an effort to suggest buying a
newsstand copy.

Rob

[MLenoch]

>Obvious Agenda Since About 1995

They do seem to have topics that have an agenda. I agree. For the sake of the
discussion, what's your take on it? To sell more magazines? To be more
contemporary? Etc.??
Thx,
VL

[Dave Stadt]

"MLenoch" > wrote in message
...
> >Obvious Agenda Since About 1995
>
> They do seem to have topics that have an agenda. I agree. For the sake
of the
> discussion, what's your take on it? To sell more magazines? To be more
> contemporary? Etc.??
> Thx,
> VL

The _agenda_ they base their TV programs on makes it unwatchable. It has
become just like watching any of the network news programs. I see it as a
lack of creativity. NG has gone from a leader to a me to.

[Casey Wilson]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
.com...
>
> "MLenoch" > wrote in message
> ...
> > >Obvious Agenda Since About 1995
> >
> > They do seem to have topics that have an agenda. I agree. For the sake
> of the
> > discussion, what's your take on it? To sell more magazines? To be more
> > contemporary? Etc.??
> > Thx,
> > VL
>
> The _agenda_ they base their TV programs on makes it unwatchable. It has
> become just like watching any of the network news programs. I see it as a
> lack of creativity. NG has gone from a leader to a me to.
>
You've lost me here. How are you defining _agenda_? The question is
directed to both you and Mr. Lenoch.

[Dave Stadt]

"Casey Wilson" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
> .com...
> >
> > "MLenoch" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > >Obvious Agenda Since About 1995
> > >
> > > They do seem to have topics that have an agenda. I agree. For the
sake
> > of the
> > > discussion, what's your take on it? To sell more magazines? To be
more
> > > contemporary? Etc.??
> > > Thx,
> > > VL
> >
> > The _agenda_ they base their TV programs on makes it unwatchable. It
has
> > become just like watching any of the network news programs. I see it as
a
> > lack of creativity. NG has gone from a leader to a me to.
> >
> You've lost me here. How are you defining _agenda_? The question is
> directed to both you and Mr. Lenoch.

In my opinion it appears NG TV has taken up political agendas. Cute dumb
announcers and the whole bit.

[Rob Perkins]

On 06 Dec 2003 22:43:14 GMT, (MLenoch) wrote:

>>Obvious Agenda Since About 1995
>
>They do seem to have topics that have an agenda. I agree. For the sake of the
>discussion, what's your take on it? To sell more magazines? To be more
>contemporary? Etc.??

It's not that I think geographers should avoid a subject just because
there is some contemporary impact, but it began to feel like NGS was
dispatching photographers and documentatrians into areas that have
made the news, intentionally.

In that way they turned themselves into another news organization,
rather than a society of travelling scientists. Even the maps became
"timely". And when that happened, I lost interest. And yes, it really
did appear to me that they had particular sets of opinions about what
the United States government ought to do about whatever it was they
were covering.

So I lost interest. Doesn't stop them from continuing to mail me
stuff, offers and such, but I don't get the magazine anymore.

Rob

[S Narayan]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:YLlAb.446400$Fm2.440709@attbi_s04...
> > Saw that issue on rack in front of check out at Barnes & Noble
> > yesterday. 12/05/03
>
> The magazine, as always, is extremely well done.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

The ads now take up a 1/4 to 1/3 of the pages it seems like. It used to be 4
to 5 pages many years ago.

[G.R. Patterson III]

S Narayan wrote:
>
> The ads now take up a 1/4 to 1/3 of the pages it seems like. It used to be 4
> to 5 pages many years ago.

The July issue (which was handy just now) had 39 pages of ads, out of a total
of 192 pages. That's more like 1/5. It looks like more because they place all
of the ads in the front and back of the magazine. There are none buried in the
articles themselves.

George Patterson
Some people think they hear a call to the priesthood when what they really
hear is a tiny voice whispering "It's indoor work with no heavy lifting".