2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

In part, I think these niche interests come from a sense of control and fulfillment. When a newspaper--like The Oregonian did today--has a story on a subject in my niche (in this case, Oregon wine) it comes as a pleasant surprise. I don't look forward every day to reading about my niche interest in the newspaper, but I know I can look forward every month to to a complete publication--like Karen's Imbibe--whose entire content is only about my interest. I can access this information when I want, not when the general-interest newspaper decides to cover it. But when I get the next issue of Karen's Imbibe, I know that every page will be relevant to my interest . . . the only surprise will be what angle the writers take, not that the newspaper finally ran something that fits my interest. And I will enjoy reading that content all the more because it is entirely about my interest.

By the way, I think this is equally true regardless of whether the content is print or online: just look at the proliferation of niche websites, shared-interest online communities, and the rest. It is the same appeal.

posted 4 years, 10 months ago
view in context

The "is print dying" debate is one of special interest to me, since I co-own a 21-year old Portland-based magazine.

It is my belief (and my business experience) that a key factor in the success of magazines versus newspapers is the magazine's appeal to niche audiences--those who share a specialized interest in a relatively narrow topic. Such audiences are unusually loyal, and place greater value on a printed product that reflects their particular interest, and that can let them explore their subject in more depth than a "general interest" publication (i.e., a newspaper) can.

Karen Foley has shown this with Imbibe, the folks at Atomic Ranch are proof positive, as--I like to think--is my magazine, Northwest Palate. Apparently The Oregonian itself sees this too, since part of their business reaction to the downturn in the newspaper business is to now build magazine initiatives that are mostly focused on narrower audiences than the newspaper as a whole. Niche is where it's at (which is as true online as it is in print . . . but that's a different, though related, subject).

Cole Danehower
Northwest Palate magazine

posted 4 years, 10 months ago
view in context

So try a market like New Seasons that features local ingredients. One of the finest blue cheeses in the world (as determined by a world competition in London) is made in Cave Junction, Oregon, and is widely available here in Portland.

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

Absolutely right . . . and paying a little more up front for locally grown food has tremendous ripple benefits in the economy, as well as ripple benefits to the ecology. Industrialized farms don't bring as much back to the local economy as small farmers do! I really recoil at the American society's emphasis on "cheap." As someone else pointed out, we have no trouble spending all kinds of money on non-essential items, but balk and spending a few dollars more on what goes into our bodies and sustains our health!

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context

It's not just about organics! It's not just about price! It's also about genetic idversity of our food supply, it's also about sustaining local agricultural economies. It's also about the choice between agricultural land use or luxury housing developments.

If all food choices are based solely on price, then food quality is economically encouraged to decline as cost efficiencies dictate practices such as mono-culture farms, mechanized production, and direct tie-ins to monopolistic seed producers (start looking into how seed is sold to farmers). Demand for local food goods encourages sustaining multiple genetic strains of all kinds of foodstocks, from wild salmon to multiple varieties of tomatoes, grains, and legumes, just to name a few.

And while organic choices are more healthful to the ecology (if not the body), local food choices are more healthy to the local economy by contributing to sustaining family farms. Land use issues in the Willamette Valley are huge issues.

It is frustrating to see the conversation framed essentially by "organics is good" and "buying local feels good". The issues are much more complex, and so far the discussion is missing a good part of them!

. . . though what I am hearing on the show now is beginning to address some of these issues . . . finally . . .

-Cole Danehower
Editor, Co-Publisher, Northwest Palate Magazine

posted 5 years, 1 month ago
view in context