The strange case of Giant Magazine.

This blog entry is just me working something out that is bothering me in my mind. I make no promises about it being funny, intelligent or interesting. You are warned.

 

Giant v1

I started reading Giant Magazine with the first issue (the one you see on my left). As I have mentioned before, I love magazines. And if there is one that even remotely seems like it might have one tiny article in it that interests me, I'll pick it up.

I picked up this issue when I was still dating my wife. I bought it at Hudson News in the Port Authority Bus Station as a result of a desperate attempt to find reading material for the bus ride home. I had never heard of Giant before but that didn't surprise me. The Hudson News kiosks must have every magazine ever made in the entire world in them. Stopping by them for me is like being a kid in the candy store. And discovering an old magazine for the first time was not new to me.

Since the cover featured Jack Black, and actor who I like, and promised an article about Star Wars, a movie I love, and a pictorial of Christina Ricci, who I sure like to look at, I decided to pick this up.

Little did I know that I was picking up the very first issue of the title--ever.

As a magazine, I kind of liked it. It straddled the line when it came to men's magazines. It wasn't as highbrow or pretentious as Esquire and GQ could be, yet it wasn't as fratboy-ish as Maxim, Stuff and FHM sometimes are. It was kind of, "here are some fun articles, with a little cheesecake on the side".

 

Giant v2

After that, I decided to buy it when ever I came across it on the newsstands. I even bought the one with Owen Wilson on the cover, and I can't stand Owen Wilson. And I must say I was consistently entertained.

After three issues, the magazine changed it's format slightly. The cover became devoted to the hot actress du jour who had the pictorial in the magazine--Mischa Barton (Right), Jennifer Love Hewitt, Denise Richards, etc.

This troubled me a bit. I'm sure it changed it's cover format to compete more directly with Maxim. But, to me, it was a bad decison. It was almost like admitting defeat. "Hey, we have given up trying to strike the middle ground between Esquire and Maxim. We're now going to become Maxim's slightly more sophisticated younger brother."

 

Little that I know that I should have been happy it was just a slight change. The content stayed pretty much the same, only the cover content ( and logo, let's not forget about the logo) was majorly different.

It was during this incarnation that I started subscribing to Giant. I know, I know. I just said that the change troubled me. But, after I bought a pair of tickets for a show, I filled out a survey about Ticketmaster (or whoever I bought the tickets from). As a "gift" for doing the survey, they offered me a free years subscription to 4 magazines of my choosing (only $2 for handling!!!). Again, as a magazine junkie, this was like getting free (or rather, $2) crack. Giant was one of the magazines listed, so I decided to pick it up.

 

Giantmag v3

So, the sexy-actress-of-the-month cover spanned about 9 covers (with, to be fair, two covers with Zach Braff and Jon Heder on the cover), until the issue to the right arrived at my doorstep. Giant had become an "Urban" magazine (its descrpition, not mine).

Now, I am not a huge  fan of hip-hop or urban culture. Needles to say, I wouldn't buy this on the newsstand. So it was a shock to see this in my mailbox.  

I am of many minds about this change. I admire Giant's tenacity in its attempt to find a foothold in the market (although the urban market is possibly more crowded than the "men's magazine" market, so good luck.) But I am sad that it had to change. It was just finding its identity when it changed, and it was, at least in my opinion, a good read.

I wonder if any other subscribers felt the same way. It was just a drastic change. Were they like me and decide to let their subscription run out just to give the magazine a chance? Or did they just cancel outright? Did the powers that be at Giant take this into consideration when they made the change? Did they figure they'd pick up enough new readers to more than make up for the ones they lost? And were they correct in that assumption?

See, this is how weird I am. I devote this much thought to a magazine.

Bill