Chris Perez’s finger navigates the iPad, showing off the stop-motion, animated fashion editorial, the Instagram featured feed and the 360-degree movable shoe advertisement of the inaugural issue of Citygram, a blog/magazine hybrid crafted by Perez and a team of Austin bloggers.
Citygram is the newest Austin-lifestyle publication, boasting a gluten-free dining columnist and an inspirational columnist. The magazine’s repertoire of knowledgeable locals is not its sole claim to personalization, however.
The digital publication harnesses its iPad format to emphasize interaction between reader and writer by allowing readers to tweet or email writers straight from the app — utilizing communication Perez feels most magazines are lacking.
“Magazines are like ‘Hey, share this.’ But not ‘talk to the person who wrote this,’” Perez said. “I could tweet this writer and ask them what they would eat from this local
restaurant.”
Since the proliferation of tablets like the iPad, digital versions of print magazines have been lauded as the answer to the readership problems of the industry. Magazines such as GQ, The New Yorker and Vanity Fair all have iPad alternatives and the Atlantic announced recently that it would publish a weekly compilation of popular web content to an iPad app.
“Magazines have to adapt to the new kinds of ways of consuming content more than almost any other platform,” said Robert Quigley, a journalism professor in the College of Communication. “Because magazines are so visual, they’re really made for a tablet, as far as the reader experience.”
According to a study by the Pew Research Center in 2012, despite the innovations, only 22 percent of adults have tablets.
“The only thing that’s difficult about [Citygram] is that it’s specifically designed for the iPad,” said Joanna Wilkinson, Citygram fashion columnist. “I don’t know if everyone is wanting to get an iPad.”
Digital magazines now have some interactive features but mostly they’re just static, Perez said. Citygram fights to dismantle the deficits caused by a print-minded industry.
“With Citygram, everything is a button, but maybe doesn’t look like a button,” Perez said. “Being able to incorporate an Instagram feed or embed audio or video … My biggest challenge is overcoming the perception of a digital magazine.”
Citygram is also innovative in its use of advertisements, a useful skill in an industry that relies on advertisements to retain a profit — especially because Perez and his team plan to keep the issues free for now. The ads of the “glossy” magazine pages rely on the same philosophy as the rest of the magazine — engagement. Perez plans to make aesthetically pleasing ads with viewable photo galleries or click-through reservations.
The possibilities for specified analytics are promising and allow advertisers to pinpoint exactly how and where to use their money. Citygram will also be able to more firmly grasp its readers’ interests.
“Magazines can say this many people bought an issue, but we know how many people viewed this page or responded to a certain advertisement,” Perez said.
For now, Perez plans to keep his publication local, saying that Austin is more accepting of the digital era.
“I think people here aren’t scared of this,” Perez said. “And they go to this for a real people connection.”
Follow Taylor Prewitt on Twitter @TeeAaaPee
You are here
iPad
Columnists Tolly Mosely, Sarah Stacey, founder Chris Perez, advertising manager Jane Ko and columnist Kris Waggoner are all part of the Citygram staff.
Photo Credit: Guillermo Hernandez | Daily Texan Staff
Are Apple computers really greener?
In Apple’s distinctive promotional videos, it always seems as though lead-designer Jonathan Ive cannot fawn enough over his own products.
“When something exceeds your ability to understand how it works, it sort of becomes magical and that’s exactly what the iPad is,” Ive explained in 2010, referring to Apple’s mystical new tablet computer, the iPad. Since the first iPad launched, it seems that Apple’s marketing strategy has devolved further into self-congratulatory verbiage, as if to say with each new product, “We did it again, again.”
At one point, that same marketing strategy emphasized Apple’s participation in a program known as the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool, which lists out a number of criteria that determine how “green” a company’s products are. In other words, companies that use fewer toxic materials, have recycling programs, or attempt to reduce their carbon-footprint in some way are awarded certification by the program. Apple’s Macbook computers used to strongly advertise their limited impact on the environment.
This, however, is no longer the case.
Since revealing features like the “retina” display and flash memory, Apple has dropped out of the program because many of their products are no longer capable of meeting the standards set forth by the EPEAT. For the Macbook pro with retina, which has its battery glued onto the aluminum casing, recycling is more difficult for the average consumer since they can’t separate the two pieces.
Comparatively speaking, Apple still has a rather impressive recycling program nonetheless. While many PC companies like Hewlett-Packard and Dell currently feature EPEAT ratings, they do not have a comprehensive recycling program in the same way that Apple does. Turning in old computers (even PC computers) at certain Apple locations is completely free, and in some cases will earn customers an Apple Store giftcard.
To take a closer look at Apple’s environmental impact, here is a link to the company’s website that deals specifically with carbon emissions.