Over the past couple of weeks two proof-of-concept videos have been making the rounds that give a glimpse at where a tablet-centric magazine experience might go.
Here’s a look at both…
Time, Inc.
Time demos their robust tablet vision in the context of Sports Illustrated. SI is an ideal property to use to showcase how dynamic content can be integrated into a once-static medium.
Time’s device and experience are modeled against the following assumptions:
A print-inspired design approach will appeal to readers and differentiate the experience. The UI has additional views and layers to the experience, but at first blush this looks just like the familiar paper edition.
Consumers want the digital magazine experience to deliver functionality similar to a robust website. Dynamic data, content, and functionality should be woven into the magazine experience to bring another level of value to the editorial.
Bonnier
Bonnier’s Mag+ is much less refined than Time’s tablet and UI, but demonstrates more consideration of how the physical product integrates with our lifestyle.
Bonnier’s experience is built around these assumptions:
For the optimal device experience, a digital magazine’s page layout and behavior must be reinvented. Bonnier believes that an experience built around vertical scrolling will feel more intuitive. But in order to highlight one of the most important qualities of the magazine experience (namely, photography) the page paradigm must be reinvented.
The digital magazine experience is about reading, not connecting. In contrast to a bottomless RSS reader, the appeal of magazines are that they are a finite collection of curated content. Sure I can clip and share things, but, like the experience of reading a book, Bonnier keeps the experience more focused on the editorial, forgoing the bells and whistles.
My take…
While products like the iPhone have proven that we want more from our devices, I feel like Time’s tablet goes a bit too far. I certainly would be interested in having content from my website experience accessible and integrated into my magazine experience, but robust interactivity could get cumbersome. Do I really want to manage my Fantasy Football team from within my magazine? This more interactive approach likely influenced the larger form factor of the device - which I think was a bad choice. As SI‘s editor explains in the video, “To really focus on this article you can go to the text view”, I find myself wondering why the simpler, easier to read “text view” isn’t part of the primary experience.
Bonnier’s dynamic and fluid page layout, on the other hand, feels more user and reader friendly, which allows for a smaller form factor. But, this device-native approach is done at the expense of an ownable, editorial design aesthetic. In its printed form a publication’s design completes its editorial voice. So the question is, can a templated approach to digital publication design, across titles, influence consumer preference? Or put another way, will a more unique editorial experience give a publication valuable differentiation in this medium?
In terms of brand engagement, SI‘s experience is more on-track than Bonneir’s. I appreciate the purist approach of Bonnier’s model, but I think it fails to address how a title will deepen the brand relationship with its readership. The tablet experience doesn’t need to necessarily replicate its sister site’s functionality, but there needs to be some type of connection. My experience with the brand as I go from device to device should feel fluid.
To sum up…
Publishers are banking on a digitally-optimized magazine experience as a means to start charging readers for digital content. These are two very admirable attempts at visualizing an experience that might be worth paying for.
The robustness of Time’s model gives us some insight as to what Bonnier shed for simplicity. Though, if I had to pick one as a foundation to work from it would Bonnier’s. Here are my reason’s why:
- The small form factor is more portable and would have a greater consumer appeal.
- The simplicity and templated approach to the magazine experience would be easier to roll out in a shorter span of time.
- Readability and ease of use will win over editorial design, features and functions. I’m trying to imagine a commuter interacting with Time’s tablet standing on a train with one free hand.
Check out the videos and you be the judge.
Lastly, the fact that both of these publishers are pursing these experiments following talks with Apple about its upcoming tablet, makes you wonder if everyone is really ready to play ball here.