Editorial Viewpoint
The straight and narrow
A publication’s form and content is shaped by its editors, readers, advertisers, donors, sponsors and every person who has an opinion. Journals do not, and cannot, function in isolation.
Larger organizations employ the services of market research specialists to scientifically gauge what their customers expect; small institutions have to rely on less expensive means of soliciting feedback.
At Parsiana in our subscription renewal form we ask readers what they perceive as our strengths and weaknesses. Many subscribers take the time to write their opinion and we keep their points of view in mind while editing the magazine.
A jotting from a lady in Dahanu must rank amongst the most favorable compliments we’ve received. “I love Parsiana. My sons enjoy reading it just as much as their Car and Bike magazine.” Some readers claim there is not enough material in Parsiana to enthuse the young. But even adults can be indifferent. One well-wisher who gifted several subscriptions did not renew a few when he found on a visit to a recipient’s home the magazine envelopes lying unopened on a table.
Just belonging to a particular faith is not sufficient grounds to read a community magazine. Many individuals are indifferent to Parsi/Irani developments, pursuing instead other interests. Zoroastrian associations overseas often note in their newsletters that Zoroastrians in the vicinity do not bother to join or support their local association, leave alone pay annual fees.
When Parsiana became a semimonthly in May 2005 some readers wrote in and complained they barely had time to finish reading the monthly issues. A few wrote recommending we make it a weekly while a gentleman from Hyderabad stated, “Parsiana contains more number of ads than reading material. Please increase the number of pages.” (Actually in only two issues in a year March 21 and August 21 do the advertisements outnumber the editorial pages.)
The decision to publish two issues a month instead of one was to be more timely. Not that a 15-day gap between issues can compete with news conveyed via e-mail, faxes, mobile phones, television, radio or even daily newspapers (a sunset industry in the West, but growing in India). With more issues being published and limited time, people are more selective in what they read.
So how do we know what people want? The feedback is not specific enough for us to ascertain. Many compliment us on our coverage. “A visit around the world every month,” is how one subscriber in Surat responded. Another subscriber from Coonoor stated our strength was reportage on “news and kuthlas” (bickering). A gentleman from Bangalore wrote “too much of controversy over small issues. I am completely embarrassed when my friends (non-Parsi ones) ask me why we are fighting over trivial issues.”
A lady from Colaba berated us for “no longer presenting an unbiased face and indulging in nasty responses to detractors (all of which) is severely damaging Parsiana’s standing in the community.” Some subscribers echo her point of view. “Very reformist,” stated a lady from Dadar, “I am an orthodox, hence I was thinking (whether) to renew the subscription or not.” Thankfully she did and that too for two years.
A male subscriber from Calcutta recommended “a page on Parsi jokes” (though some would contend the “Editorial Viewpoint” fits this brief). But some readers also expressed anguish: “People’s sentiments are not considered,” wrote a lady working at Nariman Point. “A lot of articles published in Mumbai Mirror are printed in Parsiana without knowing whether it was the truth or otherwise which is very humiliating for the families (about whom) the article is printed and their children.”
To that subscriber and all the people she alludes to we can only offer our sincere apologies. We assume that our fellow journalists have reported fairly and accurately. For ourselves we try and verify the information and present all sides of a story. But when one is writing or editing thousands of words of print with limited resources and scarce time, errors do creep in. It’s an occupational hazard and the only compensation is to carry a correction in a subsequent issue (no doubt after the damage is done). But this assumes the offended party writes to us, though in most cases they probably do not want more publicity, adverse or otherwise.
But the saddest letters we receive are those informing us of the demise of a subscriber. It’s akin to losing a dear friend, someone who welcomed you into his/her home and listened politely or even avidly to the stories you narrated. How many people do we know who let us have our say?
A regular letter writer from California who espouses the traditional point of view while complimenting us for our “editorial integrity which enables (you) to publish traditional viewpoints about our Zarathushtrian religion and culture” urges as to “bring about a civil and courteous dialog between the liberals and the traditionalists within our community through the forum of your magazine. Both groups could then talk ‘with’ each other with respect and civility instead of ‘at’ each other or ‘past’ each other, as at present.”
A gentleman from Ahmedabad perceived Parsiana’s strength as being “Brave, bold and beautiful.” And our shortcomings: “Trying to satisfy all the Parsis, at all places, all the time.”
We wish we could. But even satisfying some of the Parsis/Iranis/others, in some places at some times is an accomplishment. Our readers are discerning individuals, they are our judge, jury and executors. They reward us with their subscription and punish us by not renewing it. They are the ones who keep us on the straight and narrow path. And we wouldn’t have it any other way.
Larger organizations employ the services of market research specialists to scientifically gauge what their customers expect; small institutions have to rely on less expensive means of soliciting feedback.
At Parsiana in our subscription renewal form we ask readers what they perceive as our strengths and weaknesses. Many subscribers take the time to write their opinion and we keep their points of view in mind while editing the magazine.
A jotting from a lady in Dahanu must rank amongst the most favorable compliments we’ve received. “I love Parsiana. My sons enjoy reading it just as much as their Car and Bike magazine.” Some readers claim there is not enough material in Parsiana to enthuse the young. But even adults can be indifferent. One well-wisher who gifted several subscriptions did not renew a few when he found on a visit to a recipient’s home the magazine envelopes lying unopened on a table.
Just belonging to a particular faith is not sufficient grounds to read a community magazine. Many individuals are indifferent to Parsi/Irani developments, pursuing instead other interests. Zoroastrian associations overseas often note in their newsletters that Zoroastrians in the vicinity do not bother to join or support their local association, leave alone pay annual fees.
When Parsiana became a semimonthly in May 2005 some readers wrote in and complained they barely had time to finish reading the monthly issues. A few wrote recommending we make it a weekly while a gentleman from Hyderabad stated, “Parsiana contains more number of ads than reading material. Please increase the number of pages.” (Actually in only two issues in a year March 21 and August 21 do the advertisements outnumber the editorial pages.)
The decision to publish two issues a month instead of one was to be more timely. Not that a 15-day gap between issues can compete with news conveyed via e-mail, faxes, mobile phones, television, radio or even daily newspapers (a sunset industry in the West, but growing in India). With more issues being published and limited time, people are more selective in what they read.
So how do we know what people want? The feedback is not specific enough for us to ascertain. Many compliment us on our coverage. “A visit around the world every month,” is how one subscriber in Surat responded. Another subscriber from Coonoor stated our strength was reportage on “news and kuthlas” (bickering). A gentleman from Bangalore wrote “too much of controversy over small issues. I am completely embarrassed when my friends (non-Parsi ones) ask me why we are fighting over trivial issues.”
A lady from Colaba berated us for “no longer presenting an unbiased face and indulging in nasty responses to detractors (all of which) is severely damaging Parsiana’s standing in the community.” Some subscribers echo her point of view. “Very reformist,” stated a lady from Dadar, “I am an orthodox, hence I was thinking (whether) to renew the subscription or not.” Thankfully she did and that too for two years.
A male subscriber from Calcutta recommended “a page on Parsi jokes” (though some would contend the “Editorial Viewpoint” fits this brief). But some readers also expressed anguish: “People’s sentiments are not considered,” wrote a lady working at Nariman Point. “A lot of articles published in Mumbai Mirror are printed in Parsiana without knowing whether it was the truth or otherwise which is very humiliating for the families (about whom) the article is printed and their children.”
To that subscriber and all the people she alludes to we can only offer our sincere apologies. We assume that our fellow journalists have reported fairly and accurately. For ourselves we try and verify the information and present all sides of a story. But when one is writing or editing thousands of words of print with limited resources and scarce time, errors do creep in. It’s an occupational hazard and the only compensation is to carry a correction in a subsequent issue (no doubt after the damage is done). But this assumes the offended party writes to us, though in most cases they probably do not want more publicity, adverse or otherwise.
But the saddest letters we receive are those informing us of the demise of a subscriber. It’s akin to losing a dear friend, someone who welcomed you into his/her home and listened politely or even avidly to the stories you narrated. How many people do we know who let us have our say?
A regular letter writer from California who espouses the traditional point of view while complimenting us for our “editorial integrity which enables (you) to publish traditional viewpoints about our Zarathushtrian religion and culture” urges as to “bring about a civil and courteous dialog between the liberals and the traditionalists within our community through the forum of your magazine. Both groups could then talk ‘with’ each other with respect and civility instead of ‘at’ each other or ‘past’ each other, as at present.”
A gentleman from Ahmedabad perceived Parsiana’s strength as being “Brave, bold and beautiful.” And our shortcomings: “Trying to satisfy all the Parsis, at all places, all the time.”
We wish we could. But even satisfying some of the Parsis/Iranis/others, in some places at some times is an accomplishment. Our readers are discerning individuals, they are our judge, jury and executors. They reward us with their subscription and punish us by not renewing it. They are the ones who keep us on the straight and narrow path. And we wouldn’t have it any other way.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive