Andrea,

I have to agree with you. I don't think women execs need a separate magazine.

Lets concentrate on information relevant to the position.

Andrea - I think this is a bad idea all-round. It seems marginalizing at best, and patronizing in the least. Existing business and/women's publications can certainly deal with any gender-specific issues (glass ceiling, working mom, etc.).

Andrea,

As a former magazine editor, help this old boy understand? If I am writing business stories for executives and other managers (i.e., your Forbes example), how would the story be different for women? Business is business, isn't it?

I agree - This screams "junior varsity," and to me seems insulting. For one thing, as Lewis said, business is business. However, there are challenges that affect women in ways that men aren't challenged.

It would be better to tailor specific articles to women for Forbes, as both men and women could benefit from reading them, IMO.

I definitely tend toward the way you are all thinking. Business is business. Good writing, great content and richer/broader ways of looking at all the issues will appeal to both women and men. Consider those more "lifestyle-y" regular columns in both Fast Company and INC. A few years back, those didn't exist -but I believe both men and women respond, if the resulting letters to the editor about them are any indication. But, of course, there are so many other things that make a business magazine work for EVERYBODY. Interesting discussion...

Talked about this subject in class on Monday night and it seemed the men had little opinion on it, but every women in the room including the professor considered it demeaning and a slap in the face. They also felt it could possibly undo some of the progress women have made in business by basically saying that they had to have a special magazine because they could not disseminate the information in the regular publication.

Andrea,

As a businessperson with over 25 years of experience, the thought/need to have gender-specific business publications never crossed my mind. The fact it's being discussed and that Forbes is launching one brings PC to a whole new level!

I agree with the "business is business" comments. In many corporate settings, women are struggling to be treated with the same considerations as men - why would we want a separate magazine for our gender that only serves to obviate the differences between men and women - especially when, in some corporations, women are still fighting to mitigate those alleged "differences"?

I wouldn't subscribe. I've never liked the idea of separate female anything... outside of restrooms, maybe. That extends to "women in business" organizations or conferences, as well. But maybe I'm in the minority, so I'd ask the women here, as well: maybe you wouldn't read the magazine, but would you pay dues to an organization or attend a women's-only conference? Is there a difference?

Ann,

You are my favorite person today. The question you ask is one I have wanted to ask, but felt it a question inappropriate coming from a man. I think this is deserving of a separate post, and I hope you or Andrea or another woman contributor will do so.

In some situuations, there is a legitimate reason to have gender-specific magazines -- fashion and beauty for women: Vogue, Glamour, et al; men's fashion: GQ.

For a general publication about business, it should be gender-blind, unless its mission is specifically to address issues that only women face in business.

But for Forbes, this is all about getting more advertising. Now they can go to advertisers and agencies and say, look, we have a book that has 98% women execs as readers. They're trying to get companies that market to women -- the cosmetics, fashion, women's health categories that might not normally see a buy in Forbes as cost-efficient.

An insult to women? I'd say yes. Good business for Forbes? Maybe, but not if the women they think they're writing for see it as an insult and don't subscibe. We'll see.

You are quite right, David, about the motivations. But when you say, "For a general publication about business, it should be gender-blind, unless its mission is specifically to address issues that only women face in business."

...I wonder, like what?

Wow - looks like I re-entered the conversation a little late! I love that there is no gender-specificity in the comments and input here. And, Lewis - I will give it further thought, and pull a larger article together on the topic. One thing I have noticed in many non-biz magazines that are probably read by more women, but not necessarily women-specific (e.g. cooking light - which I'm assuming should appeal to anyone who likes to cook?) - is that they are ALL adding beauty, fitness, health, relationship columns. I know where to go if I want that, and it won't be a cooking magazine or a business magazine. Very odd.

Glad we got some good discussion going on this!

Like Women in Business, a bi-monthly with a 45,000 circ. that covers small businesses and published by American Business Women Assn., or Women's Enterprise USA, with a 30,000 circ. that covers women business owners and women professionals, or Womensbiz.US, with a circ. of 50,000, published by my friend Elaine Taylor-Gordon for women in business.

I'm sure there are some others.

Issues women face in business? Gender bias. Maternity leave. Sexual harrasment. Glass ceiling.
Networking.

In reality, these are issues that all in business should be concerned with, but these are faced more by women than men.

Noted with interest:

It was almost six years ago (Aug 01) that Carol Evans and MCG Capital formed Working Mother Media, acquiring (and salvaging) what been up to that point the 25-year old "Working Woman" and 21-year old "Working Mother" magazine titles. The entire staff and operations of the former would eventually be dismissed, some of the latter cut. Evans became the first woman to actually own the two titles geared to the then 60 million+ working American women of which 40% were working moms, saying at the time, [T]his company is there to serve their needs, tell their story, and connect them to each other so their lives can be as rich and powerful as possible.'' Working Mother Media also encompasses the National Association of Female Executives.

It was almost two years ago (June 05) that "Bee" (http://www.beemag.com) launched as, "a blend of SmartMoney, Newsweek and Marie Claire" for college-educated women 25-45 earning $55K+, (i.e. "the busy, curious, fun and savvy woman") because " [n]ewsstands are devoid of magazines addressing topics necessary for women in a modern world.”

It was almost a year ago (May 06) that we saw the launch of "Shattered" (http://www.shatteredmagazine.com), which sought to be the "first global business magazine for and about women." with the mantra to be the "Business Magazine that Breaks the Mold" by "[p]romoting women who are successful in business as the norm," through "substantive, hard-hitting content [we've] come to expect from magazines like BusinessWeek, Forbes and Fortune — only from a women's perspective."

It was barely a year ago (Aug. 22) that Forbes published editor Michael Noer's (in)famous warning of the evils marrying women with careers.

More interesting:

Both "Bee" and "Shattered" were started by young, ambitious women entrepreneurs who assembled solid talent under privately-held, small media publications backed with serious money.

Both publications were purposefully developed and positioned as female counterparts to *existing* high-end and/or niche male business lifestyle publications already on the market which don't receive the same level of scrutiny and attention.

Seriously, it's never about "need"... and I'm always suspicious about "want" (a/k/a demand). There's always room for a magazine (think of trees *sigh*...)

Better it be relevant, credible, and well-done than boring, clunky, and redundant...

So... when was "Forbes Life Executive Woman", with it's equally catchy title, launching again and why-- *really*.

Did it just discover the small segment business mag segment was hot and growing; the women's business/leadership mag segment was hot and growing (and they still had apologies to dole out), etc.?...

David: I know, I know... I hear you. But really -- who wants to read about that crap? ; )

Seriously, I understand there are issues that women face in the workplace that are unique to them... but honestly, I'd rather read a healthy discussion of that stuff in a general business pub., because, as you say (and Cam mentions, too), those are issues that affect all of us who are part of a corporate culture.

Ryan: Interesting romp thru the last few years of women in biz publishing. Thanks for that. As a general comment, it's interesting (read: baffling) to me why magazine publishers don't go after less-served, admittedly smaller niches... rather than relying on the same ol', same ol'.

Ann, I'm not saying I agree that those issues should only be covered in a women's business magazine. But there are several publications aimed mainly at women that are doing just that.

I agree with you -- if it's important, which I think it still is, then it should be covered in general business media.

But, again, Forbes is looking at creating something it can sell to new advertisers. Whether it's really needed as a separate publication is an issue Forbes has chosen to ignore.

Ann-

I couldn't agree with you more. Lets concentrate on issues that are relevant to general business. By singling women out we do nothing more than encourage the very thing we have been working so hard to overcome: the long-held belief that a woman in business should somehow be treated differently than a man.

But Nancy, what about those women who feel they have to deal with the various gender issues? It's nice to say let's concentrate on general business issues, but then you ignore or disenfranchise those who do feel the need for gender-specific information, advice or support.

Womenbsbiz.US, the online magazine a friend publishes, puts a focus on women in small business, to provide role models for other women in business. Forbes, Fortune, Inc, etc also present women in business, but perhaps not as often as they do men, and possibly without delving into those issues that some women feel the need to discuss.

In your perfect world, there would be no need, then, for other targeted magazines like Black Enterprise. Maybe we'll get there some day, but we're not there yet.

I was hoping it wouldn't go in that direction...

Whether there's need will always be debatable, but someone will always find an audience-- narrow or large-- worth their while to publish for. Or not...

Who an effort is meant for doesn't guarantee that's who'll read it initially, over time, or ultimately. Tastes change, editorial focus and leadership *might* change, and readership changes. Some publications are dogged in their focus, tin-eared in their pursuits, and tone-deaf in their responsiveness and succeed where others fail. Or not...

Publications like Black Enterprise, Latiin Business and Latina Style, Asian Enterprise, and Rez Biz magazine (among others) exist not because we lack a perfect world, but because even in a perfect world there would still be a desire to connect with stories of inspiration and success, entrepreneurial resources, and events that provide networking opportunities among those of shared background or cultural affinity.

The key commonality among these publications: their corporate-community ties, underscoring the need to raise the very issues that general-interest publications not only can't but *shouldn't* raise, due to to the short shrift they'd give. There's much to be said for the power of social marketing that builds and lever across relationships to different audiences you know within the context of your business, through the presence you create and not the other way around...

The reason I highlighted the "women's business" titles above is precisely because they stress "business as a lifestyle for women", not because they see women as a niche audience to exploit. This is so much further than merely tolerating or accommodating "women's issues" in a business world, and is the natural progression from having women firmly entrenched in all sectors as leaders.

I've never felt that business was *ever* coded (or coated) in gender-neutral or race-neutral language or themes (even with the most green-tinted of lenses). Existing general business magazines, at best, accommodate lifestyle issues that affect men and women in different ways. So accepting a wider-range of viable female perspectives on the newsstands as counterweight to what's present in the business world is cause for celebration in my book.

Not only are the titles likely to engage new audiences in following issues who might be turned off by the existing crop of titles, they're likely to attract advertisers who might not normally play in those waters as well. It all depends on the execution...

It will be especially interesting to see what happens with Conde Nast's Portfolio, and compare to any biz mag redesigns in say a year. Will there also be more or less space devoted to different sorts of issues?

My only hesitancy: not to see homogeneity in treatment/executio ( i.e. the "female" perspective on business, or "women in business-- what's up with that?")

With so much to hear, much to learn from, and much ground to cover, I'm looking forward to some provocative reading al the same.

We've got the topic covered by women who don't feel well-served by such mags, and we've got some great discussion from men and women about the truths of "another advertising vehicle" vs. a title that serves a real need. What are the positives of women-focused biz mags for the women who read them? If anyone can speak to that -do you also read other biz mags?

As someone who focuses on financial services marketing, I can see the need for financial information based content that addresses womens' isues, particularly those around baby boomer and aging women. There are some real and unique issues around money for women. Its important information but narrow yet might fit well into a magazine as described. However, with that said, I cant imagine a whole magazine dedicated to business women that won't become tired quickly.

When I first saw the blog topic and question, I thought, "hmm, I wonder if a man would have/could have asked that question."

Then, I saw Lewis say "I wondered that too, but didn't want to ask because I'm a man" to Ann's question about the women's conference attendance.

Interesting that both Lewis and I felt a different kind of gender bias related to the topic.

And...I concur with all of you -- it's an unnecessary distinction.

Drew

Although this is purely a "middle of the road" response, I would say some women will feel they are being "better served" and see a need for a women's specific business publication; others will not. Do I personally see the need for it? No, I don't.

I work in the cycling industry and we face a similar situation...there are a flood of women's specific products entering the cycling market. Women are being conditioned into thinking they need these products when at the end of the day, there really is no substitute for proper fit. Granted, some women NEED products such as these given a women's smaller body frame. However, wouldn't some of these products also help to serve teenage boys and men of a smaller frame? Of course they would, but they generally won't be purchased by consumers in this category because they are colored pink, purple, baby blue, or some other "feminine" color.

I hold the same opinion of a women's-specific business magazine in much of the same way as the need for women's-specific products in my own industry: there is no substitution for good, relevant information. Sure, women in the business world often face different issues than men, but the great women in business don't rise to the top merely because they do an exceptional job "for a woman", they rise to the top simply because they do an exceptional job. Period.

As these comments have rolled in and as I've discussed this with friends offline, I have definitely been reminded how women will have their very personal opinions about the topic, or might experience a time where gender-specific biz mags and conferences are what they need. I live in my own little world a bit, and tend to surround myself with like-minded women - so this was a good education. One thing I have wondered is if it is perhaps generational (the positive, negative or neutral response to women-specific biz mags/conferences)? I am in last of the boomer years myself, so I entered the biz realm after a lot of "women in biz" ground had been broken for me. Women in biz on relatively equal footing with men is my norm, but I realize that wasn't the case for a lot of women who are a little older than me.

Wow boys and girls...I just have to jump into the frey! Having published WomensBiz.US for almost 5 years (cultivating it in the ashes of the short-lived but terrific Womens Business NY which I also published but which had insufficient funding) perhaps I have some special perspective on this discussion. David is right...Ryan is right and so is Karen. There's nothing trivial about targeting women editorially in a publication focusing on issues unique to them. These could include balance, work/life problems, and corporate issues ranging from "the guys take a bathroom break and come out with a decision which they present when we reenter the meeting room. So much for equality!" to I'm making $12,000 less than the guy who had this position before me. When I discussed it with my boss he said, well, John has four mouths to feed!" And there's nothing trivial about profiling extraordinary and possibly otherwise unknown top businesswomen and women business owners and serving them up as inspirational role models. If the men want to read my publication...no one is stopping them...in fact, we have a His Turn column in every issue.

So there is definitely an editorial justification; what there isn't, is publishing justification, because Corporate America and Mad Ave just will not support a publication targeting businesswomen. To get even crumbs (with a few wonderful exceptions like IBM, AXA and Empire Blue Cross) you have to become a women certified corporation which means revealing one's age and personal financial information, something I object to doing on principal.

The only way I've been able to survive is by funding my pub myself with the proceeds of another ongoing business. And now that we've moved entirely online to an ezine format, it's easier and less expensive to produce. Of course, web ad rates are pathetic unless you're the Wall Street Journal online, but I'm not whining...it is what it is...and the 50,000 readers we moved over from our print edition don't seem to be complaining either. As long as they crave it, and I can pull it together with our far flung outsourced staff and my over-extended schedule, then it will continue.