ABC results serve you right, say Globe commenters

[The post has been updated] Masthead magazine editor Marco Ursi has gone to the trouble (and the pain) of trolling through and reporting on the comments received by the Globe and Mail in response to James Adams's article about the recent, apparently lamentable, Audit Bureau of Circulations (ABC) results for the first six months of 2008. Noting that the story received 27 comments, Ursi said:

While that number is hardly a representative sample of the Canadian population at large (it more likely represents the cranky 1% of the population that bothers to leave online comments), we thought some of the responses were worth sharing

Most respondents either objected to a) the cost of magazines, b) the amount of advertising they carry or c) their impact on the environment. Since readers don't pay the cost of production for magazines, it's a bit rich to complain about advertising from those who do. And research shows consistently that readers like magazines precisely for the advertising.

[UPDATE: It is pointed out by Masthead that there is a reason for the precipitate drop of single copy sales for some titles is due to rule changes at ABC. "Sponsored or bulk sales", previously lumped in with single copy or newsstand sales have now been removed, moved into the "total analyzed non-paid" category. Also changed, although with less impact, is that "verified" copies — essentially given away free or nearly so in hotel rooms and to targetted lists — have been separated from "paid" circulation.]