The "new" Bon Appetit (magazine)
Okay, so it's the 2nd issue of the revamped Bon Appetit magazine, and I'm wondering what others think.
Even though I am known for being a little weird with change, I don't think that comes in to play here. The bottom line is, I just plain hate it. As I was reading (or trying to read) the Febuary issue, I thought to myself, this magazine has been Rachel Rayed: Similar font and cover page presentation, pull out meal planners, quick fixes for supper, doing taste tests and miraculously finding that a regular advertiser's product is in the top 5 or 6 (that's not new with the revamping though) - and half the time I couldn't tell the difference between an advertisement (especially when Cat Cora's picture was included with a recipe) and the actual magazine.
I don't know why they decided to redo the mag, but I for one, HATE IT.
maisonbistro
Jan 06, 2008 07:52AM
I am so with you on this. I have been an ardent supporter of Bon Appetit on this board, as you can see from my previous post on the matter. I have always felt that the recipes were well tested and well chosen, and so I have been ignoring the annoying face lift over the last year or two. But now it has gone too far. The whole magazine has turned into a complete advertisement. If they didn't write "special advertising supplement" on most of the ads, I wouldn't know what is what! But the most egregious moment of the Feb. issue: My partner sees the wonderful photo of the whole wheat blueberry pancakes on the cover. So he turns to the recipe, and finds that one of the ingredients is a commercially prepared whole wheat pancake mix! How hard is it to make pancakes from scratch? Sure, include this recipe as a quick and easy dish if you want, but as the cover recipe? I just found that weird. The odd thing is that the other recipes in the issue seem to be fairly legit. But I am concerned that this is the start of a change in the recipes. I don't need to buy a magazine to tell me how to open boxes and cans, I've figured that out myself.
I've also noticed that the actual volume of content has dropped dramatically. It used to take me a couple of hours to go through the magazine. The Feb. Issue took me about 30-40 mintues. I spent more effort fllipping past ads than actually reading.
I'm in a bit of a quandary, as I have really liked some of the recipes from this magazine in the past. I guess I'll have to wait and see.
Permalink | Reply
I agree with you on the content taking a lot less time to read. I used to pick it up to read at least a couple of times before finishing it. I read the Jan edition in about 30 minutes. Picked it up the next night, and found I hadn't missed anything, I had finished. Disappointing.
Permalink | Reply
I thought I was the only one...the magazine has gone downhill. I always appreciated the lush photos in addition to the interesting recipes. Imagine my surprise upon seeing all those drawings that littered the magazine.
I used to make many recipes from this mag, but now I seem to just read it through and toss it aside. I'm hoping they will settle down and get things on track again.
Permalink | Reply
Unfortunately, it's become somewhat 'classless.'.
A shame
Permalink | Reply
As a former full-time magazine editor, I can tell you that it will take a bit of time for BON APPÉTIT to hit its new stride. I'm not crazy about the layouts, and I've never liked mixing serif and sans serif typefaces, which the new BA does relentlessly. But frankly, FINE COOKING is downright uglly, yet many of the recipes are very good indeed. As for the recipes in the "new" BON APPÉTIT, I think a lot of them are on the same level as before. I haven't read the February issue yet, but I found 11 recipes that I want to try. As for simplistic and box/can-oriented, there are very few like that in the January issue. What on earth is simple about Whole Fish Baked in Salt Crust?
All that said, I agree that there has been a gradual "dumbing-down" of recipes in most American cooking magazines. I think the editors are watching TVFN too closely for clues as to how people want to cook/eat.
Permalink | Reply
i thought i was the only one who hated the font...for some reason, i found the new print really hard to read...
Permalink | Reply
I'm glad it's not only me that's noticed my BA and Gourmet mag's getting thinner.
Permalink | Reply
Contrary to what a previous poster said, the magazine has taken a definitive turn for the worse. When I picked up the Jan issue, I attributed its thinness to it being January blah blah, but now that Feb is just like it, and chock full of ads, I was less than pleased.
As a full time chef, I was neither inspired nor impressed with the quality of the recipes or the new: get it done quicker focus. If I want quicker, I'll chew off my arm and buy Rachel Ray (well, you know what, no, I won't. I'll never buy Rachel Ray's mag... )
Permalink | Reply
Glad I'm not the only one who found Bon Appetit becoming very anemic. Yes, some months are just fatter than others, but this is NOT the BA I used to love and anticipate every month.
Please dont even put RR's magazine in the same category, however. BA can revitalize itself..... Rachael Ray Everyday hasn't got a prayer. And speaking of RR, I saw a dozen bottles of her EVOO on the shelf in the market recently -- every one of her pictures had been "decorated" with a mustache or horns.
Permalink | Reply
Ugh. Are you telling me I made the wrong choice for my free mag from Amazon? I hadn't seen Bon Appetit for a while and chose it b/c I read my friend's Gourmet. Too bad Cooks Illustrated wasn't one of the choices...
Permalink | Reply
slightly off topic question- i also was offered a free mag from amazon but have not had any issues arrive yet. how long am i supposed to wait?
Permalink | Reply
Don't know yet - I'm still waiting...
Permalink | Reply
I bet it could be as long as 6-8 weeks.
Permalink | Reply
I don't get Bon Appetit (used to get Food & Wine, but dropped that several years ago), but just had to comment - I broke out laughing when I read your last sentence about every bottle of RR's olive oil being "decorated." <vbg>
Permalink | Reply
I agree, also.
I have noticed Food & Wine is continuing to impress. The latest issue was great!
Permalink | Reply
I didn't really look at the Jan issue during the holidays but I just got the Feb and my first reaction was "this is not Bon Appetit" OK, I can take the color in the title but in the rest of the magazine as well...it looks cheap. And please, Amy Finley as a columnist? I am only hoping that it was for this issue only and won't be reoccuring. If the best Bon Appetit can do is use a realty show winner as a columnist, I can't see them turning this around. And I miss the Entertaining with Style feature every month. Yes, my sister and I would always make fun of how "perfect" each family was (so not like us!) but some of my best recipes are from those features. And RSVP is now "Letters"?
I HATE it too. I have a feeling that my subscription will not be renewed....
Permalink | Reply
I had the same reaction...a simple design refresh would have been most welcome, but this is just downscale. The teeny-tiny type at the top of most pages is also a real barrier to enjoying the read.
Permalink | Reply
i thought the january issue was ok but the feb issue was so uninteresting/boring, it took me all of 15 minutes to page through. it was their "green, eco-friendly" issue. if it were 1999, i am sure it would have been the no/low carb issue. simply following the masses of popular culture. thanx, but no thanx. i hope that my tossing it into the fireplace did not contribute to "global warming."
Permalink | Reply
I was going to comment about the "green" angle too! I have been subscribing to BS for about 7 years now and I really really hate the new layout! I have friend who is a trained chef (is now and NYC fireman) and he hates BS. He keeps trying to get me to try Saveur Magazine. Anybody read it?
Permalink | Reply
I go in and out of Saveur phases -- I like the articles, but I'm not generally inspired to try the recipes. Last year, I did make a fabulous lemon tart based on a recipe from Saveur, but that's one recipe over many years.
Permalink | Reply
i have read saveur for years. i enjoy it but rarely use their recipes. i think their features are a more in-depth focus on a place, a type of food, or an ingredient where you get a little history lesson and/or a little social commentary. in some ways, it is similar to a conde nast traveler, travel and lesiure, or even anthony bourdain's "no reseservations." just know what you are getting when you pick it up so you won't be disappointed if you are expecting a lot of fundamental nuts and bolts recipes.
Permalink | Reply
i LOVE saveur.... it's the only food mag i read regularly (we had a subscription for years). like a pp said, you get some very in depth articles. and i like their recipes - we've used many of them. it's very low on ads (only one or 2 register in my memory). if you're into reading about food ingredients, travels, local stuffs, etc, i'd urge you to pick up a copy and see if you like it.
Permalink | Reply
I liked this issue more than most this year, because of its focus on fresh, seasonal produce. I like the new graphics/photos a lot -- seems much fresher and not the same old/same old. And, frankly I don't care how someone else's family (almost always a VERY traditional one.) entertains...so I don't miss the entertaining style section at all.
I agree that recent issues have been thin on content, and I *refuse* to buy pancake mix for any recipe - even if it is "quicker". I find that I am mostly reading for inspiration, and am not making many of the recipes though. Perhaps I'll switch to Food & Wine when my subcriptions comes up again.
Permalink | Reply
All the articles are very short. I like sinking into a story, but with this issue I was just flipping pages. It's like junk food. Not satisfying. Also, I learned nothing new about their "green" issues. While I agree that buying and eating locally grown, organic, seasonal food is important, I didn't sense any real passion in the stories, rather that they'd had done a study and decided this was the way to go. It was all so superficial. Gourmet, while not perfect, has had some long, in-depth stories about environmental or ethical issues that have at least given me some new insights. (Those stories usually inspire angry letters, which proves at least they're pushing some buttons.) This issue of Bon Appetit seemed almost cynical, it was so by-the-numbers.
Permalink | Reply
Superficial is the perfect way to describe it. The only article I found somewhat interesting was the one on the Tuscan farm, and it felt like they had edited out all the interesting details and left in the fluff and platitudes. Too bad. The pictures were great, and I would have loved a lot more information on the farm.
Sometimes I think there is more content in the ads...
Permalink | Reply
Superficial is right. I didn't think much about it in January, as that issue is usually pretty slim, but the February issue seemed to say almost less. I'm another one not in favor of the new format/content.
Permalink | Reply
I was so disappointed that they didn't include more recipes from the article on the Tuscan farm. I was annoyed at the sheer volume of ads and "Fast/Easy recipes". I liked BA until the December issue came out. I thought that maybe it was the "shakedown cruise" with the new layout. The latest issue just made me mad. I went through it in half and hour and tossed it aside. Nothing caught my attention and as Glencora said, nothing they said about "green" issues was news to me.
As for the slimness of it... ironically, I was looking through my stack this morning and was really taken aback at how skinny the latest issue is compared to any past issue. I hope things don't stay this way... I still have another 10 issues on my subscription.
Permalink | Reply
January and Februrary are the two slowest ad revenue months, largely because agencies blow their budgets in November and December, so magazines ordinarily cut back on content for those months.
Permalink | Reply
So how do you explain the abudance of advertising in this month's issue??
The thing is, if this is the rule then all other magazines go through the same problem, but the Jan issue of Gourmet is pretty much the same as any other month's issue.
I just think that the powers that be at BA decided to take a different approach, and well, at least from the Chowhound's perspective, it might not have been such a good idea.
Permalink | Reply
Maybe that's their answer to the "green issue" -- fewer pages means less paper.
Back in the day, BA was such a classy rag. It feels very "Real Simple" to me now -- quickie tips for moms on the go and pseudo-celebs yakking about what makes life great for them. Ho hum.
Permalink | Reply
When was "back in the day"? Would the early 90's work? My mother has issues from '93, when she subscribed for a year. I should borrow them.
Love this big blue marble we're on, but they'd save more paper by removing those odious ads. ;) Guess advertising revenue trumps trees.
Permalink | Reply
You should borrow them even just to see how food fads have changed since then. And, for that matter, the ads. I wonder if there are more ads in the newly designed BA compared to the ones in the early 90's. Hmmmm. :o)
Permalink | Reply
hmm...maybe they are trying to reach a larger demographic, like Real Simple mag has?...i.e. not those of us who are passionate about cooking.
Permalink | Reply
I agree -- I am not a fan so far, and the cover looks awful -- hate the font and design. Even the celeb interview was too short at the end. I've tried two recipes from Feb (Pasta Putt and fish with olives, lemons, etc. and both were ho hum).
Permalink | Reply
complaining on chowhound won't help "fix" it. If you truly wish it were back the old way, write to Barbara Fairchild, the EIC! They don't want to lose subscribers!
Permalink | Reply
Did that already. I like to speak my mind all over the place LOL
Permalink | Reply
I just renewed my subscription about 2 weeks ago and as soon as the January issue can in I started regretting my decision. I don't really mind the graphic changes. That type of thing is always jarring until you get used to it but the lack of interesting or relevant content is upsetting. I assumed that it was just the dull, old January issue type thing, but now that I'm hearing you all say that the February issue is no imporvement (I still haven't received it) I'm definitely wondering why I renewed.
Permalink | Reply
oops, am I the only one who loves the new look? I think so. :(
I actually haven't been a regular reader of Bon Appetit, I always thought it too stodgy. But I have to say the new fresh look caught my eye at the newstands and I picked it up and bought it out of curiousity.
I have to say that I love the new graphic treatment. It's cleaner, fresher, and brighter. It made me feel more refreshed reading it. I also thought the photography was still of a high quality.
But I do agree that some of the recipes didn't seem as exciting or complex. They do feel dumbed down. I will agree with that point.
But from a graphic point of view, I like it. It accomplishes the job of being fresh and modern.
Permalink | Reply
I don't mind some of the look. I guess I am most frustrated by the lack of content, and I get testy when I can't tell what's advertising and what is not. And I absolutely agree that the photography is still fabulous.
The ads are quite beautiful, and sometimes seem to have just as much content as the articles. It almost seems they put more effort into the ads. Heck, they probably do...
Permalink | Reply
You know, thinking about it, aren't all food magazines all one big advertisement anyway? Kind of like the fashion mags. When you do an article on "beef" it ends up being an excuse for consumers to go out and buy "beef". Or "Persian cuisine". or whatever. It's all ads. So maybe I am being a bit hypocritical in my criticism.
That being said, I still hate the new format. Eye Candy, I say. I want more meat (figuratively speaking).
Permalink | Reply
I totally agree. I am not a longtime reader but I felt that the new look was clean, fresh and graphically interesting. Note that the vast majority of the comments are negative. Having had a career in a design/creative field, I can tell you that the vast majority of people who elect to speak their mind will be the negatives. The postives rarely speak out. I can't speak for the content because I am not a longtime reader and, thus, have no basis for comparison.
One also needs to realize that the quantity of editorial content is largely decided by the amount of advertising content. Higher circ yields more ads which, in turn, yields more content. (The exception to this rule is women's magazines like Cosmo, which are mostly ads) Advertorials, like the Cat Cora thing, are very high revenue for magazines.
Give it time everyone; you'll adjust, the editors will adjust and all will be right with the world again. A magazine can't stay the same forever and has to change to be fresh and modern. It will always ruffle some feathers.
Permalink | Reply
I'm glad my subscription is about to run out. Before the makeover, it was about 60% ads. Now it's closer to 70% adds. Not worth the money anymore.
Permalink | Reply
I just let my subscription lapse after receiving BA for over 10 years. It seems to me that the once elegant magazine has turned into another common place read. I'm now looking for something new. Any suggestions in addition to Food and Wine?
Permalink | Reply
Try Imbibe. It's drinks, not cooking, but very fresh and most of the recipes are for making your own mixes. (homemade Maraschino cherries are amazing!)
I think all mags go through phases. I almost cancelled Food and Wine about six months ago (sub. since '94) because it just seemed so repetitive and boring but didn't due to laziness...and now it's interesting again. We should probably give BA a chance, maybe just another 2-3 months or until SUMMER!
Permalink | Reply
I'm with you, and when my subscription runs out in a couple of months, that's it. What I really, REALLY hate is what I refer to as "S-U-G-A-R" -- Selling Under the Guise of Authentic Recipes. Look at all of those ads designed to make you think they're actual feature articles when they're nothing more than multi-page promotions for food companies. Shame on the editorial staff for believing they can slack off and fool their readers with promotional content instead of well-written features. With that amount of advertising, they ought to give the magazine away free.
Permalink | Reply
Magazines don't tell advertisers how to advertise. Advertisers make their ads look like editorial content because they think that will make readers spend more time looking at the ad, not because the editorial staff wants them to.
I find it kind of funny when people complain in knowing tones that a magazine is going "downhill" because it has "so many ads." Magazines ATTRACT ads by being SUCCESSFUL, and the ad money in turn makes them more successful. They can't just print up ads becausethey don't have compelling stories to fill the space. Someone has to BUY the ad.
That said, the new BA may suck. I haven't looked at it.
Permalink | Reply
I have to agree. I sometimes browse the magazine if I'm at the book store, but I let my subscription lapse years ago. I sensed the commercialization of the magazine about 7 years ago and just felt is has gone down hill ever since.
I 've noticed this with other mags recently as well. I prefer Cook's Illustrated...I avoid annoying advertising and it is better written. I also like Food & Wine from time to time. But my only subsciption is to Cook's Illustrated.
Permalink | Reply
i totally agree - i got this subscription free with the cookbook and will not be renewing. even their holiday promotion - 2 subscriptions for $10 - indicates how cheap the mag has become. i did enjoy the green issue, though i agree with another poster that it seemed halfhearted, as though that was the big consumer trend they picked up on and decided to exploit for the month. but i will pass that issue along to my non-foodie friends and hope they pick up a few good ideas to start doing their part for the planet. i'm going to do my part and save some trees - no more bon appetit for me.
Permalink | Reply
I've never really loved BA, but a couple years ago when my mom got me a gift subscription for XMAS, I didn't turn it down. Since then I've enjoyed it to some extent, enough to accept a continued annual gift from mom (who's been a subscriber for at least 20 years herself). After all, I don't want her to waste her money. I don't love the new look but I don't hate it either. However, the Feb. issue was really terrible, I read through it in less than 30 minutes and into the recycling it went. That's a new record, and it was intact, with nary a recipe having been clipped. January wasn't much better. I'll see how it goes this year.
My subscription to CI is about to run out and I'm not renewing, I'm bored with it and I realize that while some of the articles are interesting, I never cook from it. I have an issue with them always wanting to use "cheap" cuts of meat. Maybe it's the word. I re-upped Fine Cooking for 3 years, yes it's not very exciting but I like the content and recipes. Gourmet, I had for a year for super inexpensive, and I didn't renew (this from someone who subscribed for at least a decade, back in the 80's & 90's).
Permalink | Reply
I just recieved my February copy of B.A..........not impressed....what is with all the cartoon-ey stuff and drawings? And hardly a page would pass without two or three filled with adds..
Has BA had major budget cuts or something?? it looks cheapened.
Permalink | Reply
Their new logo looks like "Microsoft 1992". The graphic artist that created it must have been trapped in time at some Starbucks with WiFi access. As to the smaller page count, the reality of magazine publishing is that costs for commercial printing paper are going to increase 25% in 2008. Subscriptions to most publications are declining so they cannot ask for higher advertising rates to cover the increased production costs. A truly smart editor would increase the value of the content; instead, they are dumming it down.
It's ironic that a publication filled with recipes would follow one to disaster.
Permalink | Reply
I consistenly enjoy Cuisine at Home. They put out only 6 editions a year but each edition has recipes I enjoy and _zero_ advertising.
Also, add me to the list of people who hate, hate, hate the 4-1 ratio of advertisements masquerading as content to the real recipes and articles. They seem to feel that giving the magazine away for free (or $5/year) and loading it with ads is their best strategy. I have let my subscription expire but would seriously considering paying 3 to 5 times their current rate for an edition with far fewer or zero ads. Also, they certainly have the ability to control the format of the advertisements they include.
Permalink | Reply
Their new logo looks like "Microsoft 1992". I'm not sure why they would want to adapt a 15 year old look in the 21st century. What's next, a review of top Amish microwaves?