MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2221741366

The American Origins of the Modern Consumer Magazine in Inter-War Britain

2012· article· en· W2221741366 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Howard Cox

Notice bibliographique

RevueWorcester Research and Publications (University of Worcester) · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueCultural History and Identity Formation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPublishingAudience measurementRevenueNewspaperModernization theoryAppealEmpireOrder (exchange)AdvertisingBoomEconomic historyBusinessHistoryPolitical scienceLawEngineering
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The late Victorian era saw a major boom in the publication of popular consumer magazines. Beginning with the launch of Tit-Bits by George Newnes in 1881, a revolution in publishing occurred in Britain and during the following three decades the number of magazine titles available to consumers roughly tripled, to around 3,000. The most successful of these such as Pearson’s Weekly and Answers were selling the unprecedented volume of one million or more copies per issue. On the back of this rapidly growing market, mainly for weekly magazines, three firms had emerged by 1914 as industry leaders: George Newnes & Co., C. Arthur Pearson Ltd. and Alfred Harmsworth’s Amalgamated Press, This latter enterprise was one arm of a highly capital intensive publishing empire which by 1919 ranked in the top 20 among Britain’s privately owned modern industrial corporations. By contrast, the dynamism of the popular magazine industry rather waned between the wars as the modern mass circulation daily newspaper truly came of age. In the 1920s and 30s the established publishers of Britain’s consumer magazines, exploiting the advantages of large scale production and vertical integration, tended to adopt a simple strategy aimed at building the readership of their leading titles in order to expand revenues both directly, from consumer sales, and via the growing appeal that their periodicals held for the manufacturers and retailers of branded consumer products. Despite the formidable entry barriers which protected these incumbent magazine publishers and their leading titles, a largely American-inspired process of modernisation did take place in the magazine publishing industry between the wars. This paper analyses the three main new entrants whose operations underpinned this change. First it looks at the strategy adopted by American transplants: W.R. Hearst’s National Magazine Company and Condè Nast Inc. These enterprises both gained success in the fortnightly and monthly market for glossy magazines, which were carefully and deliberately aimed at a well-defined target audience that could be served up to suitable advertisers. Respectively, their leading titles Good Housekeeping and Vogue were U.S.-originated magazines that carved out a secure market in inter-war Britain. Second, the paper considers the strategy of Odhams Press Ltd, the printer and publisher of John Bull magazine, which used the success of its leading title to develop an increasingly sophisticated range of periodicals, before obtaining the UK-rights to the high-speed rotary photogravure technology developed by the U.S.-based Alco-Gravure Corporation. This development culminated in the launch of Woman, in 1937, which transformed the market for women’s weekly magazines. Finally, it shows how the new practice of photojournalism, utilising the hand-held Leica 35mm camera, was successfully adopted in Britain by Hulton Press for the launch in 1938 of the path-breaking weekly Picture Post, an innovative emulation of the American Henry Luce’s Life magazine. With the emergence in particular of Woman and Picture Post, the modern consumer magazine truly came of age in Britain. References Alford, Bernard W.E. (1965), ‘Business Enterprise and the Growth of the Commercial Letterpress Printing Industry, 1850-1914’, Business History, vol.7(1): 1-14. Ashley, Mike (2006), The Age of the Storytellers: British Popular Fiction Magazines, 1880-1950. British Library: London. Chase, Edna Woolman and Chase, Ilka (1954), Always in Vogue. Victor Gollancz: London. Cox, Howard and Mowatt, Simon (2011), “Vogue in Britain: Authenticity and the Creation of Competitive Advantage in the UK Magazine Industry”, Business History, vol.53(7). Dilnot, George (1925), The Romance of the Amalgamated Press. Amalgamated Press: London. Gerald, J. Edward (1956), The British Press Under Government Economic Controls. University of Minnesota Press: Minneapolis. Greenhill, Peter and Reynolds, Brian (2010), The Way of the Sun: The Story of Sun Engraving and Sun Printers. True to Type Books: Claremont, Ontario. Head, Alice (1939), It Could Never Have Happened. Heinnemann: London. Jackson, Kate (2001), George Newnes and the New Journalism in Britain, 1880-1910. Ashgate: Aldershot. Minney, R.J. (1954), Viscount Southwood. Odhams: London. Political and Economic Planning (PEP) (1938), Report on the British Press. PEP: London. Proctor, Ben (2007), William Randolph Hearst: Final Edition, 1911-1951. Oxford University Press: New York. Reed, David (1997), The Popular Magazine in Britain and the United States, 1880-1960. British Library: London. Seebohm, Caroline (1982), The Man who was Vogue: The Life and Times of Condé Nast. Viking Press: New York. Yoxall, Harry W. (1966), A Fashion of Life. Heinemann: London.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,039
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,077

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0050,006
Communication savante0,0060,002
Science ouverte0,0000,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0120,004

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,073
Tête enseignante GPT0,275
Écart entre enseignants0,202 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2012
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueWorcester Research and Publications (University of Worcester)Même sujetCultural History and Identity FormationTravaux en français237 207