Confessions of a membership magazine editor | 25 Jan 2012

Working as a contract publisher on membership magazines can pose challenges for the editor in terms of tact, diplomacy and political awareness.

For a start there is the age-old tension between the aims and outlooks of private and public sector organisations – many of CPL’s membership clients represent both sectors. Whereas members who are part of the public sector may want to alert readers to the challenges of providing a good service at the lowest possible cost, private sector members would like readers to appreciate (and buy) the latest, often highly expensive, system or service.

Press releases sent in by local authority press officers will often be couched in ‘council speak’ aimed at defusing (or even hiding) the less welcome aspects of any announcement, all sprinkled with fluffy words of praise from members of the public. Press releases from private companies are usually relentlessly optimistic, and fail completely to resist the lure of adjectives such as ‘world-class’, ‘cutting edge’ or ‘state-of-the-art’, even when the release is dealing with such mundane matters as (say) doormats or drink dispensers.

It is the editor’s job to re-write these releases and give them an angle that will engage readers and give a worthwhile and honest account, without over-selling a product or giving free publicity when there is no real story to tell.

This in itself causes problems. A canny PR officer will ask to see a final copy of the article before it goes to press; a rookie editor will acquiesce. After getting his or her fingers burnt a few times, an editor will learn to refuse to allow final approval by PR people.

However, these are issues that editors everywhere face. The real hot potato for the contract publishing editor working in the membership sector is the fine line between reporting stories with proper journalistic integrity – and writing the story that the client wants its members to hear.

A membership body will naturally want its members to see as much good news as possible – and, equally naturally, will be keen for bad news stories to be given the most positive spin possible, if reported at all.

What qualifies as ‘bad news’ for a membership body? Could be falling membership numbers, or a rise in membership fees (or both!)… Perhaps a prominent member caught out not obeying her industry’s own code of conduct… Or how about a furious disagreement at the highest levels as to the future direction of the organisation? None of these developments are welcome to the client, and it is only human nature for a client to say, “Do we have to carry that?”

And this is where the editor needs to make a call. Does he or she toe the line for the client, and present the news through rose-tinted pages? Or should negotiating skills be used to persuade the client that the members need to know the truth – warts and all? After all, members talk to each other all the time, and the story is going to get out whether the magazine covers it or not; and the members will also realise that – on this unwelcome but important bit of news – the magazine had been strangely silent. That tells them two simple things: the magazine can’t be trusted, and by implication the membership organisation itself can’t be trusted. And that’s not good.

This is the point at which the value of an honest and transparent relationship with the main client contact is apparent. The decision on what and how much to publish, the tone to adopt and the response to any complaint should be worked through and prepared in advance. You and your client need to be speaking with one voice.

Sarah Juggins is an editor at CPL