In defense of Astronomy Magazine

A very respectable SAA member wrote:
"I picked up a copy of Astronomy at a magazine rack and was greeted by
a
cover which featured the bold word, "IMPACT," with a supporting
subheadline
which continued something to the effect of what we can do and what we
can't
do about an inevitable devastating asteroid collision with Earth.
Naturally, there was a picture of the killer hurling its way down to
us.
Also featured on the cover was a story dealing with the TRUTH about
astrology. Has the National Enquirer obtained the magazine?"

To which I would like to reply:
Okay, I am a Sky & Telescope fan to be sure but Astronomy magazine has
been growing on me. In defense of the mag I just wanted to say a
couple of things....

1. Sensationalism sells and it is their job to sell magazines. It was
obviously a way to attract the eye of new readers who would not
normally pick up the magazine. Okay, as those more experienced in the
area of astronomy we may not like it but for a magazine to survive it
must always bring in new readers just to stave off turn-around. It's a
business and sometimes sacrifices have to be made to stay alive.
(Sucks but true.)

2. Actually, I was initially turned off by the reference to astrology
as well but then I READ the piece. As one of the head contacts for new
and potential members (and not to mention my role as Outreach
Diredctor and Webweaver!!!) in my astronomy organization I hear about
astrology ALL THE TIME! I never felt like I had good ammo to
dis-associate astronomy from astrology until this article helped me to
put it into perspective. It gave me a good weapon to quickly, cleanly,
and scientifically debunk the goofiness trying to connect the two.

(Although the new topic ideas posted by the aforementioned SAA member
were pretty good in my book too! :-)

Dawn Baird-Chleborad
http://www.astronerds.com

John Savard wrote:

On 15 Nov 2004 07:50:11 -0800, (Dawn
Baird-Chleborad) wrote, in part:

A very respectable SAA member wrote:
Also featured on the cover was a story dealing with the TRUTH about
astrology. Has the National Enquirer obtained the magazine?"

That certainly is an exaggeration; since the TRUTH about astrology is
that it's a bunch of nonsense, and Astronomy magazine doubtless
reaffirmed that...

for that matter, the latest issue of National Geographic magazine has,
on its cover, "Was Darwin Wrong?"... but they answer with a resounding
"No" on the inside.

But then, National Geographic *did* publish a swimsuit issue last
year...

I missed that. Was it swimsuits on Eskimows? Pretty funny. Personally
I think this commercialistic crap has gone far enough. What's next. Swim
suits on dogs? It would sell@ Im beginning to believe Osama is right~!






Sober respectability just isn't what it used to be, I guess.

Still, though, while the National Enquirer doesn't own Astronomy
magazine, it _is_ owned by the same company that publishes _Model
Railroader_ - Kalmbach.

John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/index.html