Bauer Media, the Organisation behind the two publications FHM and Zoo have announced their intention to discontinue both magazines.
FHM mostly popular for its 100 sexiest women in the world and its counterpart Zoo are often graced by covers of scantily clad women and celebrities.
Branded as a "mainstream men’s lifestyle magazine delivering innovative content to an audience of modern 20-something men"
FHM and Zoo are to close by the end of the year, marking the end of the lads’ mag era that dominated UK magazine publishing in the late 90s and early 2000s.
Publisher Bauer Media described the closures, which are still subject to a consultation on the future of 20 jobs across the two titles, as a suspension, but the plan is to close both the print and digital versions of the magazines by 2016.
The closures reflect an overall decline in magazine sales, which has seen many titles close and others, such as Time Inc UK’s NME, dropping their cover price and distributing free copies, as readers have moved online.
Bauer Media, which publishes both 'men's lifestyle' titles, said falling sales combined with an increasing preference for digital content instead had prompted the move.
The lads’ mag market has been especially hard hit by new technology and changing habits due to the easy availability of nudity and pornography on the internet and the decline of the specific form of “lad culture” that helped make the titles so successful.
FHM and Zoo were the last of the big men’s magazines of the past 20 years, famed for a brash tone and copious nudity.
Both titles have seen steep declines from their heyday. FHM’s circulation fell to less than 67,000 for the first six months of this year, 20% less than in 2014, while Zoo was selling just over 24,000 copies, a fall of more than 12%.
That compares to the more than 700,000 copies FHM was selling in 2000, while Zoo launched in 2004 with a circulation of 200,000 before peaking in 2005 at more than 260,000.
Though both magazines were adding digital subscribers, numbers remained low, between them shifting not much more than 3,000 digital editions on average in the first six months of this year. Bauer claims the titles have a combined digital reach of 5 million people, but the publisher will have found it difficult to make as much money from ads online as it had done in print.
Bauer publisher Gareth Cherriman said: “I greatly appreciate [editor-in-chief] Damien McSorley’s leadership and the dedication and effort from both teams.
“I would like to thank our advertisers and retailers who have supported the brands and I’m sure that everyone who has worked on FHM and Zoo over the years will be sorry to hear this news.”
The websites of both Zoo and FHM issued their own statements expressing their regret at having to cease publication.
FHM was first published in 1985 as For Him Magazine, but changed its name and increased publication from a quarterly to a monthly print in 1994, with its popularity sparking numerous international editions.
Credits;
Guardian UK*
ITV News*
Yup, our team has experienced the decline of the lad culture too. I'm working for a charity organisation that up until recently used to do a charity calendar with both scantily clad men and women, having six calendar months with women and six with men, all portrayed by some of the members of the charity. While this setup generated a substantial income for many years after it was initiated, it seems that revenue has been steadily decreasing throughout the past few years. While we can't be completely sure about why, it's probably related to the decline of "lad culture" as well as changed demographics among out buyers (which are now primary female).
ReplyDeleteWhile this does not bode well for the calendar we still need the income, so simply discarding it is not a viable option as it generates the necessary revenue for several of our most crucial activities. Because of this, my manager has decided to do a male only calendar instead, having some of the male team members represent all 12 months in a hope to save the revenue. This has already disappointed some of the guys, both among team members and customers, and some of the guys have also mentioned that they think it's unfair for the guys. I can see where they are coming from, I'm definitely going to miss the mixed gender calendar too, as an activity in which both male and female team members participated. However, I also agree with my managers sentiment. Whether we'd like it or not there is a growing number of female buyers (85%), while the men have bailed out. Keeping on to a mixed calendar or trying a female models only calendar would probably be futile. Our team must realise that the times have changed and that we're doing this to enable us to continue som of our causes in the long run, and is thus about what generates revenue, not what's "fair".
In the end I didn't want to be one of the guys complaining about "unfairness", ending up saying yes to modeling for the calendar as it was hard enough for my manager to find good male candidates even when there were a mixed calendar (most team members are female by far). Finding 6 more guys among the male team members that's both willing to do it, has a good enough physique and is also willing to put in a huge effort in terms of diets and body sculpting has been hard. We're still lacking two guys for the calendar but hoping to convince to other guys at the start of next year.
If all goes well, we'll have a shirtless male-only calendar in 2017. 2016 will be the last year there are clad women in the calendar. Hopefully this post can inspire someone else who has experienced the lack of "lads mags" marketing effect too.
Sorry for any poor language, but english is not my mother tongue.
Ohhh Waohhh really long but insightful comment from you A guy! And No your English was great!
DeleteThanks for stopping by!