USGA shuts down Golf Journal

[Brad Klein]

On Monday, USGA exec. dir. David Fay announced that effective immediately, the USGA was shutting down publication of "Golf Journal." After 56 years, a leading magazine has been silenced.

As someone who wrote occasionally for them over the years and who enjoyed the historical and offbeat approach that editor Brett Avery had recently brought to the publication, I'm going to miss the magazine. I also feel awful for the colleagues who are out of work as a result of the decision. For more detail, you can find an item on it at Golfweek.com.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Article from GWB

* USGA SHUTTERS GOLF JOURNAL

By Ron Sirak
  Golf Journal, the magazine of the U.S. Golf Association for 55 years,
will cease publication after the March/April issue. A memo to staff from
USGA executive director David Fay said seven out of nine jobs were
eliminated. Fay said the decision "is primarily driven by the rapidly
changing nature of communications vehicles through which we provide and
receive our news: E-mail, cell phones, 'Headline News'--the so-called
'24/7' mentality."
  In a letter to USGA members dated Feb. 24, USGA president Reid Mackenzie
said the organization would launch a print newsletter in May called Inside
the Ropes, which initially will be distributed six times a year. Mackenzie
said the frequency of Inside the Ropes would be based on "our experience
and your reaction." He said most issues would cover a variety of USGA
topics but that a few may focus on a single topic.
  Mackenzie also said USGA members would receive, in addition to the Rules
of Golf every other year:
  --The official U.S. Open Program which, beginning in 2004, will include
a special section that will preview each USGA national championship to be
played that year.
  --Beginning this year, a book published in November or December that
will review each USGA championship from that year.
  --An expanded e-mail product about newsworthy events.
  --A more aggressive updating of the USGA website.
  According to the USGA annual report, Golf Journal cost $4,045,000 to
produce last year. The USGA annual report says the organization has
720,000 members. Member dues and contributions totalled $18,195,000 in
2002, according to the annual report, an average of $25.27 per member.

[MBL]

Brad-
Was there any (credible) explanation beyond cost-containment?  Golf Journal has been a staple, and the only non-over-commercialized golf mag of which I am familiar.  This is a sad state....

-------
Jim-
Thanks for the post.

[ForkaB]

This is sad.  GJ was the main reason I joined the USGA in the first place.  The writing was usually a cut above the other golf mags, and I got to know one of the old editors, George Eberl, a bit in the 80's.  He was a fine person.

So, what are they going to spend our money on now.....?

[THuckaby2]

So, what are they going to spend our money on now.....?

OUR money?  You, Rich Goodale, domiciled in Scotland, vilifier of the USGA handicap system, remain a USGA member?

I must say you do never cease to surprise and amaze.  

TH

[ForkaB]

Tom

I've been a member since 1979, I think, and do you now that those bastards excluded me from the Win a Trip to the US Open with Arnold Palmer Sweepstakes for all the years Ive lived in Scotland???!!!

I'm chucking it in now that GJ is gone.  Those guys in Far Hills have as many clues as a dyslectic crossword composer.

[John Bernhardt]

I too am very sad about this. I feel we are losing another communication tool for the orgainization to reach its members. It seems we continue to see our parent organization losing touch with the needs of its members.

[john stiles]

I thoroughly enjoyed the Golf Journal.  Newsletter doesn't sound very interesting or a suitable replacement even I get the bonus (??) of email and a few more newsletters with USGA event stats.

If according to the USGA annual report, Golf Journal cost $4,045,000 to produce last year and the USGA annual report says the organization has 720,000 members .... it is about $6 per member.

GJ was also one of the reasons I have renewed all these years.  

If the USGA wants to quit anything, the USGA should quit the annual tradition of renovating US Open courses and putting a Fazio or Jones is at the end of every course's architects.

[hootey]

The Golf Journal has turned in to a publication that quickly finds its way to the recycle bin.
The reason for the demise of the Journal is not changing times, it is covers with Hollywood, Hootie and the Blowfish, and dumb catch lines as if they were selling the thing on the news stand.

[Nick Jones]

Good riddance.  The magazine has suffered in recent years.

For those who lament its passing: What do you think of the recent Great Golf Holes of recent years?  My point exactly.

The old magazine was special, the newer one a waste of paper.

[Geoff_Shackelford]

I know many USGA members who remained members just to get Golf Journal. I don't think a newsletter will fill the void.

At $4 million a year to operate the Golf Journal, they could have passed on the Russian Tea Room purchase and gotten Journal to its 60th anniversary. Ah but then they wouldn't have that all important city presence that will grow the game!

[Jason Hines]

Does anyone remember if they were touting the Golf Journal when they were asking you to write a check?  Granted, when it came in the mail it was like a little bonus rather than something you really looked forward to, but I guess its the principle of the thing.

J.

[Brad Klein]

One of the many reasons to lament the passing of "Golf Journal" is that it further dries up potential outlets for golf writers. In case any of you has tried lately, getting published is harder than ever now that freelance budgets have shrunk and outlets have been closed down.

[Bill_McBride]

I hope somebody with clout at the USGA is reading this thread.  I agree this is a poor decision.  I really enjoyed reading the detailed ("agate") results of USGA competitions, and my favorite feature every month was the excellent photo, drawing and detail of a "Great Golf Hole" (at least in their opinion).  Bummer...................

[Tommy_Naccarato]

When are USGA members going to finally be able to shut-down David Fay?

I'm glad I stopped being a member years ago.

I'm glad he won't be able to see this since "he doesn't read this stupid website!"

[Patrick_Mucci]

Nick Jones,

I tend to agree with you.

I too felt that the quality and format had suffered in recent years.

Still, I would have prefered its continued publication.

[Forrest Richardson]

It is a shame. I was always comforted by the idea of having a publication that did not cater to advertisers, albeit the USGA's forum for sure. I will miss it and the terrific art direction which is so lacking in most all of our golf periodicals.

[Brad Klein]

Tommy, it's not the place for personalizing the issue of who runs the USGA. The real issue here is whether the USGA is willing and able to do its job of preserving and shaping the game constructively. Shutting down "Golf Journal" raises some questions about that leadership role. Refusing to address head-on the issues that Shackelford so eloquently addresses in the LA Times article about distances on the PGA Tour is another, and I think, more significant, piece of evidence that basic stewardship of the game is sorely needed.

[Nick Jones]

Puhleeze.

Are you sure many of you aren't just using this as an excuse to dis the USGA yet again?

* If I made a post yesterday about how great Golf Journal is, I imagine there would have been a torrent of criticism of it, starting with how awful the Great Golf Hole part is.

* Without reference material, can anyone name 5 articles within the last 12 months he remembers?

The USGA deserves its share of criticism on various fronts, but I'm with 'em on this one.  No Golf Journal is better than the one of recent years.  Let's see what follows.

[Forrest Richardson]

Nick -- The writing in Golf Journal has been much better than in many publications. There have been some heartwarming accounts and a few good historical picces. I'm not sure a criteria for a magazine has to be memorization of any particular article. I think GCA is an excellent discussion site, but I can hardly say I've recalled even 10% of the threads. Does this make it a bad site? I think not. The issues of a magazine are not motion pictures or single events -- they are simply an ongoing source of entertainment and information that comes to your mailbox and enlightens and inspires.

[A_Clay_Man]

I of course saw it diferently and assume that they are doing away with an archaic form of communication. Maybe they are gonna listen what DK told them about entering the 21st Century? As for the impact on writers, if they do go electronic there still will be need for content, won't there?

Now, if they don't go online and are bag'in it cause it costs too much, then I say "where is all that money going?" and if it ain't going to JohnV, SCREW'EM.

[David Kelly]

We probably should have realized that Golf Journal's days were numbered when they published the profile of Kevin Nealon.  

[Brian Phillips]

I have been a member of the USGA for the last three years from Norway and now in Scotland.  I too only am a member because of the magazine.

How much revenue will they lose because of this?

Brian.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

I'm very sorry to see this magazine go. Golf Journal was major factor in sparking my interest in golf architecture. Interesting profiles on golf courses that I had heard of, but knew nothing about--like SFGC, Seminole and NGLA. Jim Finegan's articles on County Down, Aberdovey, Ashdown Forest, Cruden Bay. Hannigan's article introducing Tillinghast to the world, as well as similar articles by other authors on Macdonald, MacKenzie, Hunter and Ross. Articles on the Redan and Cape. The famous golf hole each issue, David Eger seem to produce the most appealing choices. The magazine was full of architectural related information, although I must say it strayed in the last few years from the formula I preferred.

What I don't understand is the reason why-the magazine was not profit driven. GJ has been adv free for a couple decades. It seems to me it was a tool to entice membership into the USGA, it was the primary reason I was a member. If it was losing too much money, increase the membership dues or start advertising again, it had advertising in the 70's. There might be an issue of conflict of interest but they could figure some way around it. I wonder if this says something about the current powers at the USGA and their attitudes about the game.

[JohnV]

Adam,

I get no money from the USGA.  The WPGA does get money to help pay for our P.J. Boatwright Summer Intern and we get some money back from the entry fees for USGA Qualifiers we run.  Both of those pretty much match our costs.  They were going to pay some of my expenses to go to a class there next month, but the Kings Putter and the Golfweek Bandon outing got in the way of that.

I've always enjoyed Golf Journal and will miss it.  There are two large stacks of them on my office floor.  As a USGA Committee Member, I am required to be a USGA Member so I will continue to send them my money every year.  If the items that were mentioned in the article will be sent to members, I think we'll still be getting out money's worth.  The book that reviews the championships should contain all the agate type information that some others said they like, but now in one place which will be nice.

I will miss some of the features such as the rules column and the "Great Golf Hole".  If it wasn't for the Golf Journal, I would never had played Cruden Bay back in 1988 and I would have missed one of the best experiences of my life.

I am a little miffed that they didn't send e-mail out to all the members telling us this and are just letting us find out in a press release.  They have my e-mail address and are able to remind me to re-up every year via it.