Not that there's anything wrong with that.
I take loving care of mine and keep them on display in my home.
I have them in my office and well organized.
One is next to the toilet right now.
They are somewhere in the office, house or car.
I pitch the darn things right away after a quick look at the centerfold, wait, wrong magazine.
I read and reread them often.
I rarely open them, let alone read them.
I shower with mine!
I steal the ones I am missing from my fellow planners.
I have every one ever published.
I read and mock the articles.
I read the articles and become even more excited about my profession.
Mine are in a secret underground vault that is hermetically sealed
Mine absorb Parrot doo one page at a time.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
I agree that for the money my employer pays for me to be an APA (and now AICP) member, I do not get squat. Ok, I get discounts on overpriced books and 4 page "Zoning News" publications, but where is my money really going? Lobbying efforts by the APA? Research that I still have to pay for? A lousy website with no substance? A crappy magazine that is 1) Too short 2) Too irrelevant, and 3) Lacking real information that planners can use.
The magazine needs a major overhaul. They need new and improved (and more) sections, features, opinions, etc. They need a new cover design. That BORING white cover with the dumb circle may be their "style" but even classic magazines like Rolling Stone and Sports Illustrated change their covers every once in a while.
I look at what people discuss on this website and realize that this is the stuff that is of most interest to planners. I have learned more from discussion threads on here than I ever have from that magazine. Planning magazine seems intent on focusing on what their writers feel like writing about, not what their readers want to read about.
Of course that is just my opinion. I could be wrong.
Last edited by Repo Man; 02 Aug 2002 at 3:42 PM.
"I'm a white male, age 18 to 49. Everyone listens to me, no matter how dumb my suggestions are."
- Homer Simpson
I didn't renew last year. Ten months later, and they still apparently don't realize it. I've called and e-mailed a combined total of four times - thinking to save you PAYING members a little scratch, but they still can't seem to get it together and purge me from the system.
Sorry, 'cause I know I'm getting this wonderful magazine on your dime, but I've called the last time.
I guess what I'm saying is I'm a member for free, and it's still not worth the price...
"The fanatical Muslims despise America because it's all lapdancing and gay porn; the secular Europeans despise America because it's all born-again Christians hung up on abortion; the anti-Semites despise America because it's controlled by Jews. Too Jewish, too Christian, too Godless, America is also too isolationist, except when it's too imperialist." -- Mark Steyn
I was beginning to wonder if there was something wrong with me, that I tend to skip over most articles in the magazine. If I am lucky, I find one or two articles in each issue that I really find worth reading. Why can't Planning be more like Urban Land? Or for that matter why can't APA be more like ULI?
ULI took the issue of smart growth and championed it unlike any other organization. APA sat on the sidelines - oh, sure, they wrote the growing smart tome - but tell me that is really going to make a difference. APA is filled with too many ideological technocrats. I saw this when I was involved in re-writing the policy on wetlands. Comments on needing to balance community development and wetland protection? brushed aside. This is all too common. We need the kind of debate in APA, and in Planning Magazine, that we get on Cyburbia. Maybe a little humor as well.
I too read Planning Magazine less and less, but feel guilty about recycling it. Rather, I delegate that task to my wife, who gets rid of it when the next issue arrives in the mail. A legitimate question, however, is how many planners would subscribe to the magazine if their employer was not paying their APA dues and it instead had to come out of a person's pocket. Planning Magazine's quality, or lack thereof, may be a consequence of most planners getting somebody else to pay their dues, and by default, their magazine subscription. If Planning Magazine had to compete for all of its readers via the private marketplace, I bet it would be a lot more fun to read!
Strangely enough, the Planning magazine is the only membership benefit besides the so-called discount conference rate (which is a joke) and constant ads for the PAS book service. It's cheaper to subscribe to the magazine rather than pay APA dues, especially if you don't go to the conferences.
"A witty woman is a treasure, a witty beauty is a power!"