It’s my sorry duty to inform you that issue 13’s Editor’s Note summarizing the topic has been replaced by a Letter from the Publisher. Unlucky 13, I suppose. Not to worry – since we’re a weekly publication it’ll be only seven days until our Executive Editor returns.
Until then, I’m going to bore you by talking about advertising. Many of you wrote in to express feedback – or outrage – about our decision to place ads in issue 12. There’s ads in this issue, too, and you should expect them to be an ongoing part of the magazine from here on out. It’s a step that’s been planned from issue 1, but it was an important one for us to make. I’m especially pleased that our offering of big, attractive print-style ads has been successful.
I did want to respond to those of you who took umbrage at our decision to place a beer ad in a game magazine. I made a brief post on this issue on the CTRL-V blog, but I’d like to expand my thinking there a bit further. Would the Wall Street Journal be a better newspaper if it only hosted ads from investment banks? Should National Geographic only accept ads from travel companies? Nonsensical to imagine, yet all too often, game magazines only feature ads for games. It’s what’s expected, but I don’t think it’s a good trend. I feel strongly that one of the best ways for a magazine to ensure that the advertising-editorial border is not breached is by ensuring that it has a wide breadth and scope of advertisers outside its industry.
That’s not say that you will never see a game advertisement in The Escapist – far from it; indeed, we’ve already run one. But you should also expect to see ads from Fortune 500 brands, technology companies, consumer and luxury goods, a whole range of companies. I think it’s a good thing, and I hope you do, too.