I feel that, overall, my magazine was quite successful. Having showed my magazine to a range of people aged 16-18, both from within my target audience and outside, I found that the comments received were very positive. It seemed that my use of colours, breaking away from the usual reds and blacks in favour of bolder colours, was indeed a good idea, breaking the norm and attracting my audience, who found them "exciting." Given that this colour scheme was opted for by my audience during my research stage, I feel I have been able to carry through my audience's wants from idea to creation . But whilst most enjoyed the bright colours, it was commented by one of my interviewees that my excessive use of blue in fact gave her the impression of depression, not the cool calmness I had been trying to portray.
It also seemed that I targeted my audience successfully, especially by including both male and female models on the cover and so not excluding either gender. It was also noted that by having included models of the audience's age, the reader feels more able to engage with the magazine. That I used the models, colour, and an unconventional layout of tilted text and mastheads was said to have helped enforce the idea that the magazine was intended for young people.
The articles I used in my magazine, both suggested by my contents page and the double page spread itself, were mainly popular, and my use of rhetoric on articles such as "Electric or Acoustic?" were noted to have interested the reader. Because my double page spread in particular was about young musicians, my audience was especially interested, as they felt they could "connect" with the band members and their truthful accounts of juggling teen life with musical ambitions - that the bands were up and coming and not mainstream was also appealing. Not all of the people I interviewed, however, found the language I used suitable for the magazine, one saying that they would expect slang and swearing, as this was how they considered teenagers would interact with each other. This reaction might mean that I had not been clear enough in presenting my magazine as a tool for education as well as entertainment; I had not included such language as suggested because this would have given my magazine a more rebellious, violent and possibly more down-market slant and made it less readable for some of my audience, whereas the magazine I had intended to create was more upmarket and open to as large an audience as possible considering my niche market, especially as I wanted to target a C - A demographic. I did, however, try to keep the language used informal, keeping it approachable, which in most cases appeared to be effective.
As an extra, I additionally asked if they felt the magazine would be useful to both them and the music industry itself as a tool of education and promotion, as this was one of my main intentions for my magazine. It was mainly agreed it would be, because it bolstered the attentions given to new, small bands and also included the audience in the success of the bands, as was the case with the Amplified competition, for example.
Most of my interviewees, both inside my genre and those less targeted by my genre, said they would buy my magazine, with reasons ranging from its low price, to my inclusion of more popular bands favoured by some interviewees. That I also included information on new bands in the area of my audience also influenced some to buy it. However, due to its particular genre, one interviewee admitted she would not buy the magazine, not able to connect with it because she did not know the bands I included.
It seems that my magazine on the whole was a success, and it is clear that by having done much audience research I was able to clearly express what my audience looked for in a magazine.
No comments:
Post a Comment