| COLLECTION SEARCH |
MY COLLECTION |
COLLECTION LIST |
MAD WEB SITE LINKS |
PLACES WITH MAD STUFF |
CONTACT ME |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
MAD
ACCEPTS ADVERTISING
What's YOUR
Opinion
By KENNY BYERLY
TO REPLY TO KENNY, CLICK HERE
As a 10-year reader of Mad, as well as one lucky enough to have been a Mad
intern and now a contributing writer, I have to say I'm disappointed by the
editorial decision to take ads.
I'm a purist, of course. I silently fumed each time the magazine changed its
table of contents over the last decade (in retrospect, only the one with the
masthead in the middle of the page was truly awful, aesthetically anyway). Once
I got used to changes in Mad, though, I learned to take them on their own terms.
Occasional use of color worked well; the yellow-border "reboot,"
though its changes mostly wore off, seemed to coincide with a surge in effort
and creativity. The expanded table of contents--Well, no one really liked that,
but the addition of the one-panel cartoons and the fake article helped a lot. I
still don't like the Alfred quote in the word balloon.
One thing I can say, however, is that throughout all the changes, I know the
editors have always carefully considered their options before changing Mad, and
always have the best interests of the magazine in mind and the spirit of Mad in
their hearts. I am confident that this is still the case. That is
not to say that I agree with the changes, at least at this point, but I know
they were made with the best of intentions. As for the effects, we'll have
to wait and see.
Personally, I don't feel color adds much (with the exception of style parodies
such as Entertain Me Weakly, f'rinstance, where color is used to match the
subject more directly). I never read the National Lampoon in its heyday, but
every other humor magazine I've seen with color never impressed me much.
Too often, the color is merely distracting and makes things less
funny. The writing and art, of course, are still the most important
things, but black-and-white print and even cheap paper has a certain
underground, subversive feel that, if anything, strengthens the humor.
As for ads, I can't say I support them, but if it's necessary, it's necessary.
Personally, I worry more about Mad's synergy with AOL/Time Warner as a whole
(Mad About the Movies WB Edition?!) than the influence of individual
advertisers.
However, given Mad's strong stance against accepting ads for so many years, it's
clear that this is a either a desperate situation or a move made with the
intention of averting one. That's not reflected in any of the statements
here by other official Mad folk, who have nobly put a positive spin on things,
but I feel that a certain amount of desperation here is undeniable.
Ad's aren't the end of the world. I have faith that Mad can maintain (or
improve!) quality in the face of changes. It can still be a good magazine, even
a great one.
But it will never quite be the same.
Kenny Byerly
[sheds a tear, moves on]
BACK HOME