Shrinking of QST and the lack of interest by Techs in the ARRL is real
simple--the ARRL preoccupation with CW, an archaic mode of communication
that all commercial users and the military have long since dropped. CW is
fine for hobbyists but to make it a requirement to get an advanced ham
license is plain stupid as we head into the millinium. I find it real
interesting that Techs can legally use high power at frequencies more
dangerous and demanding than HF--go figure.
Andy K5VM
Jim Reid wrote:
> Mike wrote, in part:
>
> >The ARRL may be "all (we've) got" but that sure doesn't mean we have to
> >like it. ..............snip......... As an ARRL
> >life member (which I became >20 yrs ago in high school) I must say that
> >the quality of QST's technical articles has gone down hill as ARRL's
> >size has grown (it has, hasn't it?) The technical and competitive
> >aspects of amateur radio must now be addressed in separate magazines
>
> The ARRL membership is evidently shrinking, per info from them. Also,
> as new Tech's far exceed the number of new licenses of other classes,
> the ARRL has found that few Techs become members, and most,
> when they do, do not renew after the first year or so. Another
> problem is the decrease in applicants appearing at VE session,
> down around 25%.
>
> Thus the "thinning" of QST. Also, numbers of advertising pages has
> dropped in QST. Ad rates are lower in the specialized
> magazines, and, in some smaller outfits with ads in
> NCJ , QEX, never did have ads in QST, too costly, I guess.
>
> For example, consider the February issues of QST the last
> few years:
>
> February 1996.......208 pages inside the covers, ads on all
> but 89 pages, or 119 pages with ads (free new product
> announcements appear on several of the 89 editorial article
> pages; these are manufacturer's press release items, used
> by magazine editors as filler, to complete a page at the
> bottom, etc.).
>
> February 1997......192 pages, ads on all but 83 pages(again,
> some "free of cost" new product announcement items appear
> on many of the 83 article pages). and 109 pages with ads--10
> fewer ad pages than the previous year, 6 fewer article pages.
>
> February 1998........176 pages, ads on all but 73 pages, and
> 103 pages on which ads appear, 6 fewer than the previous
> year, 10 fewer article pages.
>
> February 1999.......160 pages, ads on all but 65 pages,
> and 95 pages on which ads appear, 8 fewer than previous
> year, and 8 fewer pages devoted only to articles/news.
>
> Or, now 24 fewer pages devoted to news and articles
> only!! So DX listings, propagation predictions, etc.
> are now gone, along with shorter section news
> items and such like.
>
> So, over the three elapsed years from Feb. '96 through
> to Feb issue '99, pure article/news content pages within
> QST have dropped 23%, and pages carrying ads have
> dropped about 20%. And the overall magazine has
> shrunk 23% in page count.
>
> Loss of advertising revenue, together with fewer members,
> while lobbying activities may have in fact increased, not
> sure, and today's higher employment costs, including
> higher payroll taxes/FICA/HMO, etc. result in fewer
> pages and services. However, it seems to me that
> services to members are still pretty high.
>
> I have not done a close look at article technical content/
> quality issues, but much of the stuff in the Feb. '99 issue
> appears to be pretty good quality. Maybe I should do a
> comparison of technical article pages vs. more news
> type article pages. I suspect they publish what is made
> available to them, also. If the overall technical skills
> of our ranks should drop, and it is from the ranks that
> much of the technical material comes, then the quantity
> and quality both of such will surly also go down.
>
> Just some thought about why the shrinking of QST magazine.
>
> 73, Jim, KH7M
>
> --
> FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
> Submissions: amps@contesting.com
> Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
> Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|