From: roma@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Jon Roma)
Subject: Re: Trains Magazine
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 19:19:11 GMT

ehr@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Ernest H. Robl) writes:

>A few thoughts on railroad magazines in general:

... which I largely agree with.

>I agree with previous posters' comments that both Trains and R&R
>reflect the biases of their editors -- but I think that's a common
>attribute of smaller magazines in general.

Indeed.  Any publication has biases that reflects its editorial staff's
interests and their perception of their audience's interests.  This is to be
expected and this contributes to each magazine's distinctive personality.

In an earlier posting, I commented on a few characteristics of  _Trains_ that
I felt needed improvement.  While _Trains_ has its flaws, I disagree with the
person that felt _Trains_ suffered from regional bias.  In my opinion,
_Trains_ gives quite balanced coverage to all areas of the U. S. and Canada.

>Both run only relatively brief news sections -- which are the most
>interesting to me -- and then often devote the remainder of the
>magazine to a handful of long features.  For my tastes, too many of
>these features and columns are about railfan activities.

I agree.  And I'm a bit overwhelmed with information on dinner trains, which
interest me only slightly.

>Yes, I've been known to go on fan trips and to visit museums, but, to
>me, these are secondary to operating railroads.

Again I agree.  Museums and fan trips are important ways to preserve and
celebrate the past.  However, few things compare with the monumental task
railroads face every day of safely and efficiently moving millions of people
and millions of tons of goods.  The railroad industry itself and the people
and machines that make railroading possible are far more important and
interesting to me than railfan activities.

While magazines like _Railfan_ serve a useful purpose, I find their coverage
to be somewhat superficial when compared with that found in _Trains_.  Not
surprisingly given the magazine's title, the focus seems to be more on the
railfan than on the railroad itself.  Don't get me wrong; I enjoy railfan
activities as much as anybody else.  But I'm far more interested in learning
about railroads themselves (e. g., history, geography, operations, and
prospects for the future) than I am in finding the best photo locations or
hearing about the latest steam fan trip.  This is not a criticism towards
the people that produce or read magazines like _Railfan_ but this sort of
magazine isn't my cup of tea.

One of the best things about _Trains_ is that its staff has a good working
knowledge about the industry itself and a fairly good relationship with
professional railroaders.  This tends to be a rarity in most other railfan
magazines, which generally lack insight and expertise into the nuts and
bolts of how a railroad works.  This difference is one reason that _Trains_
is the most respected publication in the railroad industry outside the trade
press.  Railroad management knows that, by and large, coverage in _Trains_
will be fair, accurate, and professional and hence accord opportunities to
_Trains_ writers that are not available to other publications.

While a number of positive things could come out of the revamping of _Trains_,
I certainly expect and hope that _Trains_ will NOT lose its professionalism
and that Kalmbach won't ``water down'' _Trains_ in order to appeal to
the masses.

>On the subject of regional emphasis in the both Trains and R&R:  I
>don't think either of these publications has any decent coverage of
>railroad activities outside the U.S. and Canada.  Trains runs one or
>two pieces a year on trips by George Drury -- but these are more
>travel pieces than stories about railroading elsewhere.

I too would prefer seeing more coverage of railroad activities outside
North America.  This is understandable in a sense because North American
readers tend to be interested in North American railroads.  However, a great
deal of fascinating activity is going on outside our borders and I think
it's a shame that this is largely ignored by the American railroad
publications.

>I also read Railway Age, which is the leading North American trade
>magazine, though I think it, too, has some major shortcomings in
>news coverage and too many of its shorter pieces sound like direct
>copies of manufactuers' PR pieces.

I try to read _Railway Age_ too, since it provides much information ignored
by the railroad enthusiast press and because it's a useful source for
facts and figures.  However, since _Railway Age_ focuses primarily on the
financial aspects of railroading, it tends to lack the detailed description
of operations and of new technology that many of us seek.  _Railway Age_ was
once issued weekly and was filled with detailed descriptions of major
projects and innovations; unfortunately, times have changed and the railroad
industry is no longer large enough to support a publication of this nature.
-- 
Jon Roma
Computing and Communications Services Office,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Internet:  roma@uiuc.edu      	UUCP:      uunet!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!roma