The document argues that printed publications like magazines are still superior to online publications for three main reasons: 1) Print outlets employ experienced professional photographers, writers, and editors to ensure high journalistic quality, whereas most websites do not. 2) Producing high-quality print is much more expensive, so print pays creators more and can attract higher quality work. 3) Print acts as a filter for what is deemed newsworthy or artistic, while online there are few filters and all content is considered equal.

1. splatter
reasons why
the printed
page is still
the pinnacle
We realize this is a contentious subject, and all of us at Bike—
willing or not—are fairly active members of the all-too-cozy
global ‘online community.’ Like most publications these days,
we’ve long had our own websites, and we do our damndest to
make them as interesting and inspiring as possible. But we’d
be lying if we said our websites were dearer to our hearts than
our beloved magazines. Here is an effort to explain why:
Print—whether books, magazines or newspapers—is the
last bastion of journalistic competency. Most reputable print
outlets still take pains to ensure that their photographers,
writers and editors are experienced professionals. While
some websites uphold higher standards of journalism and
art, most exhibit the aesthetic sensibilities of a peasant in a
potato field.
Producing high-quality print materials costs
considerably more money than maintaining websites.
Simply put, magazines pay much more for words and
photographs than almost all websites. As a result,
the quality of the printed word and image tends to be
dramatically higher. You get what you pay for.
For generations of journalists, photographers and
artists, the established print media formed a professional
peer group that served as an educated filter for what was
newsworthy or demonstrated artistic merit. On the World
Wide Web, there are few filters. All photos, words and
opinions are regrettably considered equal.
Photographs must be of a high caliber to look exquisite
in a magazine. This is not true on the Internet, where any
schoolboy’s snapshot can look acceptable at 72 dpi.
The Internet is a pernicious breeding ground for
plagiarism, where inaccuracies are constantly recycled
with scant fear of reprisal. If you get something wrong
in print—or if you plagiarize from a print source—you are
definitely going to hear about it.
Print is permanent, or at least it feels like it. By
contrast, a Web story or image seems to evaporate into
the ether as quickly as it appears.
You can hold a magazine, newspaper or book in your
hand—and take it to the bathroom. Nobody takes a laptop
into the bog just to look at bike porn. —Brice Minnigh
044 I bikemag.com Photo: nicolas teichrob