Slow action on eco-responsibility - includes related article

Folio: The Magazine for Magazine Management, Feb 1, 1993 by Esther Barbara D'Amico

Magazine professionals say they are committed to Earth-friendly publishing, but confusing options and contradictory information seem to be confounding real progress.

If our panel of folio: readers is any indication of how the magazine business stands on environmental issues, then the industry is in a quandary - caught between what it wishes to do and what it is actually doing.

Last summer, Folio: surveyed several hundred members of our reader panel about their attitudes and practices on environmental issues. Although 96 percent of the respondents described themselves as "environmentally conscious," and 89 percent reported that it was "important" to them to work for an environmentally conscious company, only about a third said they would personally spend more for a magazine printed on recycled paper. That percentage stayed the same when respondents were asked if they would pay more on behalf of their employers for recycled paper.

Yet, as the first set of numbers suggests, magazine professionals are rethinking and reevaluating from an environmentally responsible perspective how their companies operate. Growing environmental awareness among consumers, pending legislation and changing printing technology are all driving factors. But while the majority of magazine staffers express concern for the environment, it quickly becomes clear in looking at our survey results that environmental responsibility means many things to many people.

And at a time when budgets are lean, cost - or perceived cost - serves to limit how far publishers are willing to venture into environmentalism. As one editor puts it, "While I consider myself a very environmentally concerned person, and it would be nice if we could print on recycled paper and switch to the inks that make the paper more recyclable, people sort of forget that magazines are businesses. It's not going to be a reality until those products become equal in cost to what we use now."

Still, our survey shows the percentage of magazines planning to convert to recycled paper and/or alternative inks will more than triple by 1997. This is not surprising, given public pressure to save landfull space and clean up volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions. According to the American Paper Institute, U.S. paper companies are expected to invest more than $3 billion in the first half of this decade to expand recycling capacity. API also reports that in 1991, the largest percentage gains in collection were in high-grade de-inking papers, with some three million tons recovered - or an increase of 9.9 percent over 1990. This grade is widely used to produce recycled coated paper.

David Refkin, director of environmental affairs, and assistant director of paper purchasing at Time Inc., says that readers' concerns about the environment were part of the reason for the company's decision to switch five of its magazines to coated recycled paper containing 10 percent post-consumer and 40 percent preconsumer fiber. Time Inc. is unlikely to stop at the five titles, he adds, although he declines to comment further on the company's plans.

"Gradually, we began to recognize at Time Inc. that environmental issues had to be our concern because these issues were the concerns of our readers - especially our future readers - and of much of the populace," Retkin told a group of this peers at the American Magazine Conference last October. "After all, how credible can we be when the publication of the |Planet of the Year' issue of Time resulted in 1,000 tons of trash in local landfills of America?"

Right now, magazine publishers' use of recycled paper is completely voluntary. In spite of various groups' efforts, there is no federal law mandating it - and that situation is unlikely to change any time soon (see sidebar, next page). Nor is there any standardized definition of terms such as "pre-consumer" and "post-consumer," or rules about minimum-content standards. Although some mills, printers and publishers bristle at the idea of setting national guidelines, others would welcome definitive industry standards to end the confusion.

Debate over government regulation

"People are not going to switch on their own," says Kuumba Kazi-Ferrouillet, managing editor at The Black Collegian, which is printed on virgin paper and distributed to some 125,000 students nationwide. "I think there should be some clear standards. But, ultimately, people aren't going to do it unless they fear some repercussions from the law, or unless it affects their bottom lines."

Still, our survey indicates a preference for self-determination. "I think it's important that the government not tell the paper industry how to make its paper," says Kit Taylor, vice president of manufacturing at Times-Mirror Magazines, which uses recycled paper in market sections and classifieds. "We should work together to make sure that the legislators are educated to our business."

Nearly half of the survey respondents said they would sacrifice price before print quality in making the switch from virgin paper to recycled. Although critics argue that improved technology means more presses are now equipped to handle recycled paper, it's hard to forget stories of on-press ordeals. Problems reported about recycled paper include poor printability and runnability, and a decrease in fiber strength, paper whiteness, brightness and opacity.