Stung by MPA, Myers plans to refine study

Folio: The Magazine for Magazine Management, April 1, 1991 by Alan E. Sanderfoot, Tony Silber

NEW YORK CITY--After weeks of jabbings insults at each other, Magazine Publishers of American (MPA) and Myers Marketing & Research have agreed to put away the boxing gloves and work together to revamp the research methods used in Myers' recent study of magazines.

Myers president Jack Myers met with MPA's research committee on March 6 to discuss his report, which seems to show how deeply pessimistic advertisers are about certain aspects of the magazine business. Talk focused primarily on the methodologies used by the Parsippany, New Jersey-based researchers in this study, their first about magazines. The firm's past research has concentrated on cable television.

The Myers report indicates that advertisers believe money is flowing out of print media, that general interest titles are in decline, and that publishers are not responsible well to systemic changes in the business.

After hearing Myers' presentation, Marian Confer, vice president of research for MPA, still called the study "fragile and unsound." For example, she says, the study doesn't account for no-answers, there are no comparisons made to other media, and some terms (such as "general interest" and "mass audience") are used interchangeably.

"The New Yorker is a general interest magazine, but it's certainly not a mass audience magazine," she points out, illustrating how the study's results could be confusing.

There is also a question about the statistical value of some of the responses. In the Myers list of the 25 hottest magazines of 1990, for example, the bottom eight magazines each received write-in votes from only 3 percent of the 450 respondents. Because there are so few responses, such a rating system "has no significance," Confers says.

Several sources also say the research shows signs of being conducted by someone with little understanding of the workings of magazine publishing. One executive who attended the Myers/MPA meeting points out that Myers was unfamiliar with the Audit Bureau of Circulations, and wrongly thought that MPA did circulations audits.

Mark Braff, senior vice president of Myers Marketing, says that's not true, but agrees that text in the report that ties MPA with circulation audits could have been better worded.

As a result of the meeting, MPA's research committee is drafting a position paper on the study and has formed a subcommittee to work with Myers on refining its research methods. "We recognize that it we had to do it again, we would seek the input of the MPA and other research groups," says Mark Braff, senior vice president at Myers Marketing.

First response

Soon after the study was made public, MPA fired back: In a newsletter article, MPA president Donald Kummerfeld belittled the report and cautioned members not to get "panicked or defensive." He added, "Let's spend our emotional energies solving the problems rather than getting angry and upset about detractors who seek to profit and get publicity from our problems." Kummerfeld described Myers as a company that "has spent the last 10 years serving the interests of cable television."

Jack Myers responded: "In their Hotline, they talk about 'let's not be defensive, let's be constructive,' but I think it was a very defensive response." As for charges that the researcher is servicing the interests of cable, Myers says: "We're not limited to one medium, nor do we favor one medium over another."

Says Braff: "We welcome the MPA's expertise. But the objective is not to get the MPA stamp of approval00it's to establish a good working relationship."

Myers was funded for this research by members of the industry being studied. For this report, subscribers so far are Murdoch Magazines, Meredith Corporation's Metropolitan Home, Gruner Jahr USA Publishing and Whittle Communications.

Kenneth Meltsner, corporate research director for Murdoch, says he hasn't seen the full presentation of the study yet. "But speaking for myself, I think the negative press against Myers is unjustified. I have no problem with their methodology or their background [in cable]. Myers doesn't sugar coat their findings, which is the problem the MPA had with them."