Ugh...Sports Illustrated for Women is finito after December

This is very unfortunate news. I don't think it's a good thing when a women's sports magazine shuts down - even if it didn't focus on the sports news aspect (like I wish it would have).

This subject does remind me of some information I have been meaning to post on the boards. I will try to transcribe it and post it tomorrow night if I have time. I think it fits very well with this topic. Earlier this month I attended the California Governor's Conference for Women held out here in So Cal. They offer a wide range of seminars on various topics led by influential and/or successful women. Anyway, one of the seminars that I attended was titled "Images of Women: Are They Evolving?" and one of the panelists was Amy Love. I'm sure some of you will probably recognize her name. It was driving me crazy before she was introduced because it sounded so familiar. Well, she is the 'Title IX girl' and she also happens to be the creator and publisher of Real Sports magazine. I will try to post what she had to say tomorrow - some of it touches directly on this topic...and I think the rest is interesting as well.

 

hmmm.
Not really surprised. There already is a magazine that deals with fitness for women. Its called Shape.

Truthfully, I'd rather have seen SI feature more women's teams in their regular magazine. (Like that was/is going to happen seeing the uproar caused when WC2002 was covered).

Maybe, I'm just a dreamer..........

 

Good riddance to SIW. Really.

Yea, and Real Sports looks like it's actually a magazine about women's sports. About Real Sports.

The Spring 2002 collectors edition was entitled Best in WUSA 2002. There's an interesting preview of the WUSA season online (although now the season is over)

 

Unfortunately, Real Sports magazine has also suspended regular publication, though they will continue to produce special collector's issues. The parent company, ADL, Inc. will also continue to promote women's sporting events, beginning with the 2003 PAC-10 women's basketball tournament.

It is extremely difficult for an independent publication of any type to survive in today's market. It is difficult to market women's sports, as pure sport, period.

 

Hmmm...I just got done making fun of them last night. I suggested in an e-mail that they send jet set bubblehead Candace Bushnell to interview April H. about next year's WWC. Guess now it's all academic.

 

Disclaimer up front. Some of the following language is harsh and will read almost as if it's calculated to offend. Too bad.

Even while SIW was publishing, SI was covering women's sports. Their college basketball coverage is extensive. During the Olympics women's track and field gets prominent coverage. Women's tennis gets very prominent coverage. Other women's sports get lesser coverage, largely because they generate lesser public interest.

The reality that must be faced is that SI is not a publicity arm of Title IX advocates. It publishes what it thinks its readers actually care about, not what activists think SI's readers should care about.

Nor is SI's right to exist conditioned upon it unilaterally undertaking to re-shape attitudes of its readers. That is not its mission.

In any event, SI has long covered women's sports as sports and the athletes who play as athletes. There was, for example, far more emphasis in SI's WWC '99 coverage of Akers' heroics and Chastain's penalty-kick performance under pressure than there was on how Chastain celebrated her winning kick.

In fact, one of the hallmarks of greatness of the USWNT players, particularly the veterans, and one of their most admirable traits, is that they have NEVER advocated that people should be fans of women's soccer and watch their games just because women didn't have the same opportunities to play sports 40 years ago.

They have NEVER advocated affirmative action media coverage. Their claims for increased coverage have always rested on one foundation and one foundation alone -- they are worth watching because they play excellent entertaining soccer.

They have always understood that, ultimately, the product they put out on the field has to be worth watching. That means that they have to be true athletes dedicated to excellence in performance.

The veterans dedicated over a decade of their lives, much of it in relative anonymity, to becoming first and foremost excellent soccer players who played a fun style of soccer. They made themselves into players and a team worth watching. Along the way, their pitch to potential fans was always the same -- come watch us play once, and we promise you you'll enjoy it and want to come back and watch again.

Remember the '96 Olympics and the idiotic decision by NBC not to show the women's soccer final live on prime time TV? It was idiotic not because women's soccer "inherently" deserved the same coverage as men's soccer no matter how many fewer people might actually watch. It was idiotic because people really did want to watch, not because they had to, but because the team was genuinely worth watching (something over 76,000 fans in Stafford Stadium knew). The team had shown in snippets of play broadcast from the Norway semi-final game that it was a fun and talented team to watch, a team that played real soccer. Over 76,000 fans were willing to get tickets to a women's soccer match. The USWNT earned their right to prominent coverage.

And, to their extraordinary credit, even when their potential game of glory was not broadcast live in prime time, they took it in stride and resolved to redouble their efforts to show the country how great a sport women's soccer is.

Anybody who saw and heard the resolve in Michelle Akers when she told the country in a post-game interview (right after the team had been dissed by NBC) how much the team was looking forward to the USA hosting WWC '99 so that they could show the country what women's soccer was all about should have realized instantly that athletes of such class and commitment were going to dazzle the American public - as they deservedly did.

That verve is at the heart of what draws general sports fans to become women's soccer fans. As long as that verve has an outlet through which to flourish (a WUSA, an upcoming WWC '03), and as long as dedicated players continue to deliver an amazing product, the potential is there for coverage. And if it's not in SIW, it may well be in SI. Or perhaps it can serve as a launching point for a magazine dedicated to women's sports.

In essence, the message is this. Excellence precedes coverage. Or as a typical sports fan might say, "make it worth my while to watch."

 

Is the $9.95 issue of Real Sports worth the price? It looks like a good magazine. I wish they published regularly.

 

For anyone that is interested, here is the transcript of what Amy Love had to say at the seminar I mentioned in my post above. They make tapes of the seminars available shortly after it's over, so I picked this one up since Amy Love spoke about topics that might be of interest to the folks here. I've bolded the discussion of the women's sports magazine issue for those of you who don't really want to slog through the rest of it. (*sorry, bolding doesn't seem to be working, but it starts about half way through the whole thing).

I listed all the panelists just for background, but I only transcribed Amy Love's parts:

Meryl Marshall Daniels – president of Two Oceans Entertainment Group and M2 (produces original TV programming) and was a 2-term CEO and Chairman of the Board of the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.

Emy – Supermodel, TV host, author, full-figured clothing designer

Sylvia Martinez – editor-in-chief of Latina Magazine

Amy Love – CEO and Publisher of Real Sports magazine

 

will we be getting a refund if u paid for the two years thing??

 

oo i hope they forget that i'm getting mine for free and send me a refund!

*crosses fingers*

woohoo! lol

 

I won't miss it. They had some warmed over fitness tips, and occasional interesting pictoral interviews with some top atheletes, but their coverage of team sports was terrible, their coverage of college sports almost non-existant, and their blatant pimping for the products who advertised in the rag was shameful. i wish there was a really good magazine on women's sports.

 

I'm still gonna be able to get next months issue though right?




The reason SIW sucked so bad is because they think all women are really deeply concerned about fashion. I guess we are, but not when it comes to sports. A sports magazine is supposed to be about ATHLETES, not what cool sports bra is 'in' or the best sunglasses to buy. In a way it's useful information but SI is filled with STORIES ON ATHLETES.

They shouldn't have made it so different. I wonder, who ran SIW? Did he/she play sports? Or was it some bimbo who twirled her hair too much and smacked her gum and said 'Like' and 'Totally' exsessively?

Maybe some retired women athletes should get together and create a kick ass women's sports mag filled with articles and interviews of female ATHLETES. With of course a few pages dedicated to fashion... instead of it being the other way around.

I came in way late to this convo. Sorry 'bout that.

 

I'm jumping into this convo a lot later than you Pipey......



I paid for the 2 year thing. I, too, miss Women's Sports and Fitness..........but this just plain sucks.


......and to think I just talked my sister into getting a subscription a month ago

 

article

Good article. Also look for the second item, about the pending launch of a women's sport cable channel. One omission is an estimate on how many tv viewers the channel expects to reach.

 

The most telling statement in that linked article was, "now let's see if the audience tunes in."

Ultimately, that is the question. And if the audience doesn't, what does that mean?

 

Probably that if women don't tune in that we won't have any magazines or TV show's geared towards us except the one's that show us the right ways to cook and clean.

?

Then if we still suck we'll be stoned to death?



Here's a quote from that article that I don't really agree with:

I don't necessarily think that it's the subscribers who want to see the 'same ol' stuff'. I think it's the people who run the magazine and aren't satisfied with the numbers they get and then think that if they chage it to what everyother women's magazine offers then the numbers will increase because somehow their same will be different.

Not the case.

Most of the Women's Fitness magazines are full of women who aren't athletic or in shape. I mean, they're in shape AKA skinny, but just 'cause you're skinny doesn't mean your in shape. This is where lots of people get mixed up.

Example: One of my cousins. She's extremely skinny. But naturally skinny. That's just the way she is. If she were to run anywhere over a half mile without stopping she'd die.

Then again, having big muscles doesn't make you in shape either. I'd love to see anyone of those run without having a heart attack.

Damn, I wish I knew more about starting a Women's Sports magazine. I'd do it. And it'd last too.

 

Seems like the last couple of years there's been a kind of backlash effect surrounding women and athletics. Three sports magazines going down, dropping attendance for the WNBA and WUSA, and now some people wanting to abolish Title IX. I try to stay clear of politics but all of that does seem to coincide with Republicans getting back in the White House. Almost looks like some people are trying to use the sagging state of the economy as an excuse to get out the axe and do away with so many things women fought to get.

 

there is a coorlation but not a causation i think UP90, surely bush doesnt help with his anti title IX retoheric...however SIW was a poorly wiritten magazine...it had NOTHING to do with sports and ive seen articles in Tiger Beat that were better written...even SI writers complained that there was no competitive coverage...

as for things sagging, its the economy, stupid

if the leagues will last i think that womens sports will be here to stay...actually the WNBA and WUSA attendance numbers are no worse than what i predicted from day 1.

womens sports DOES have a market...and i think enough ppl realize it to keep going.