Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Mark Tucker" <mark@m...> 
wrote:
> It's a continuing source of hearty chuckles to pick up B/W 
> Magazine from time to time. I love to watch the subtle ways that 
> they continue to bash digital technology with one hand, and 
> somehow manage to accept advertising dollars from companies 
> that use digital techniques, with the other hand.
> 
> * Page 22: Funny ad from some photographer's group in Long 
> Island that have "dedicated themselves to preservation and 
> furthering of classical BW photography", blah blah blah. 
> 
> Then in the next paragraph they brag how their members' work 
> will be digitally archived via CD, DVD, and the Internet.
> 
> I wrote them a very serious tongue-in-cheek letter suggesting 
> that they all sell their computers and only correspond via manual 
> typewriters and USMail.
> 
> * Page 7: Publisher again makes note of their continued 
> defiance of digital photography. Even though they've featured 
> photographers who use digital, this came from a prior promise 
> before their philosophical shift. 
> 
> * Page 65: Magazine accepts money from full-page 
> advertisement from a company called Ataraxia Studio, which 
> claims to produce long lasting digital prints with pigments.
> 
> * Page 69: Magazine accepts money from full-page 
> advertisement for A&I Lab in Los Angeles, who mentions their 
> Iris and LightJet printing services.
> 
> * Page 142: Magazine accepts money from full-page 
> advertisement for Camera West store, which mentions their 
> stock of digital cameras.
> 
> *Page 144: Magazine accepts money from full-page 
> advertisement from PhotoVillage.com, featuring wide range of 
> film scanners, scanning services, and Piezo services.
> 
> -----------
> 
> You can't have it both ways, folks. If you're gonna take a stand, 
> take a stand; but with both your mouth AND your pocketbook.
> 
> Yet, having said all that, it's still a FINE magazine. One of the 
very 
> best on the stands. But it just makes you wonder what's 
> motivating this fear-based policy of resisting digital technology. 
> Can't we all just get along?
> 
> Just my opinion,
> 
> Mark Tucker, http://marktucker.com/
> 
> (cross-post)

Seems to me the problem here, to the extent there is one, is with the 
advertisers, not the magazine. If sellers of digital products choose 
to advertise in a magazine that on the editorial side doesn't care 
for their medium, why should the magazine turn their money down? The 
magazine is, after all, in business to make money. The suitability of 
the magazine as a vehicle for digital advertising is a decision made 
by the advertisers, not the magazine.