You bet, Baby! At 15, I had hair:ultracool
New Tae Kwon Do Times
- Thread starter matt.m
- Start date
You bet, Baby! At 15, I had hair:ultracool
Sigh...I was hoping we wouldn't get into such melancholy territory....
No point in moping, though... it's a great avatar, for sure!
That is pretty cool. I think I'll do that, but with Playgirl Magazine, lol.
The older magazines were definately better. Less advertising and better content. Lately I have become a little disalusioned with the current magazines whether it is Tae Kwon Do times, Blackbelt, Inside Kung fu, etc. They have lost a certain appeal to someone like me. I hope that changes soon. However I have found multiple niche online newsletters and journals to fill the gap that are more over flowing with content.
(they also cost me about 1/10th as much
)
(they also cost me about 1/10th as much
Thanks for the peer review Matt!
The older magazines were definately better. Less advertising and better content. Lately I have become a little disalusioned with the current magazines whether it is Tae Kwon Do times, Blackbelt, Inside Kung fu, etc. They have lost a certain appeal to someone like me. I hope that changes soon. However I have found multiple niche online newsletters and journals to fill the gap that are more over flowing with content.
(they also cost me about 1/10th as much)
I agree all adds an no realmeat of the Art anymore.
I wonder if they made Chuck pay to be on the cover?
1984 Chuck Norris in the cover, this was a great issue, they just do not make it like this anymore.
not back then, it was a honor to be on it then and the bigger the name the better for the magizine.
Terry said:The older magazines were definately better. Less advertising and better content. Lately I have become a little disalusioned with the current magazines whether it is Tae Kwon Do times, Blackbelt, Inside Kung fu, etc. They have lost a certain appeal to someone like me. I hope that changes soon. However I have found multiple niche online newsletters and journals to fill the gap that are more over flowing with content.
(they also cost me about 1/10th as much)
I agree all adds an no realmeat of the Art anymore.
Guys—I've heard the British MA mags, including one called Taekwondo, are much better, along the lines of Brian's original post: less advertising, more content. I'm thinking of doing a subscription to a couple of those just to see... Tez seems to think they're really good.
searcher
Senior Master
OP
OP
matt.m
Senior Master
z, I can't agree with you more. I began the thread as what was to be considered a peer referred situation. Again, MA magazines - tv shows that sort of thing are at the discretion of others.
However, some of us do read stuff for the sake of reading about other orgs. or something other than our own training manuals. Also, if there is at least one decent article to be found spending 5 bucks isn't really that bad considering you can keep it forever or throw it away.
Laurentkd
Master Black Belt
I agree with you Matt, I end up buying them because I aways find a little something I like, though the good tidbits are few and far between. But I just can't stand not to buy it to at least try to find something good- I am always afraid I'll miss out if I don't.
FYI- you can now get a digital edition version of TKD Times. Normal 12 month (six issue) subscription is like 25 bucks, but you can get the digitals for a year for $9, so not a bad deal.
FYI- you can now get a digital edition version of TKD Times. Normal 12 month (six issue) subscription is like 25 bucks, but you can get the digitals for a year for $9, so not a bad deal.
Yeah, that's the sense I have. The fact is, much of the time I simply don't trust what I see in the mags—not convinced it's well-researched enough to place much stock in. But more than this is the sense I get that in many of the articles, what I'm seeing is refried filler material—clichés, or at least fairly obvious stuff, belabored and elaborated till the cows come home. Just as the actual article text constitutes an increasingly small fraction of the mag space, the amount of new material within each article is an increasingly small fraction of the article text. That seems to be a tendency across the board, not just TKDTimes.
Magazines these days have their backs against the wall and no longer have the, um, luxury of providing us with real food for thought. They have to maximize every inch of advertising space, which means that their content, more and more, must be part of a merchandising strategy. The only North American exception to that is Journal of Asian Martial Arts; but that covers so many aspects and so many styles that, once again, you could look over an awful lot of text before coming across something relevant to your interests—though it is a beautifully produced and authoritative journal, and quite a bargain at the price...
Laurentkd
Master Black Belt
I still remember the day I discovered JAMA. I was actually doing research for an unrelated paper at my university and I came across rows and rows of a peer-reviewed martial art journal-- it was amazing!!! It was also great because I could read them all without paying a cent, and could really go through them and find the information relevant to me. Ahhh the good old days. Another bonus of JAMA is that the back of each issue has the topics of the old issues listed, so if you really wanted to you could go through the list of topics and then order the specific journal you want (I think I spent more time tracking down specific issues than researching that paper!)
And those articles really do compress a huge amount of information into a very compact space. I'm particularly fond of the articles on TKD history by Dakin Burdick in the 1997 volume and Stan Henning in the 2000 volume... my only gripe is that they don't publish more issues!
I'm still trying to figure out how they do it. Their subscription is a measly $35.00 a year, I think, but the production values are incredible and the overall quality of the journal is outstanding... I feel I should subscribe to them, even though my university library has a subscription, just to support their endeavor.
Scott, was that also in JAMA? Do you happen to have the reference? Would love to read it!
