I looked up a Sports Illustrated magazine and scanned over the images. The photos in it made up about 40% of the overall issue, while words/print made up 60%. The images were decently diverse in terms of race (although certain sports seemed pigeon-holed on certain races). The pictures were either of a athlete or a sports fan, there wasn't much in between besides maybe a coach or stadium picture.
It seemed like the editors were only interested in actions shots, which wasn't totally surprising. Even a story that featured the off-court life of an NBA player didn't have images of him out in public or dressed in clothes besides his uniform. It seemed kind of unrealistic; like the player only wore his "work clothes" when lounging around the house. I understand the concept though; people don't watch sports to find out what LeBron James watches on TV. They want to see him yam the ball over a defender.
I think Sports Illustrated does a proficient job of connecting target audiences and their content. There's no doubt that sports audiences aren't that difficult to please, and whatever they've been doing is working. If it ain't broke don't fix it.
No comments:
Post a Comment