Your next magazine subscription may well be purchased at the post office—the Postal Service could begin selling magazines directly to consumers as soon as next month.
The news comes from the Mailers Technical Advisory Committee. MTAC is a committee made up of representatives from the US Postal Service and various industries related to it—from magazine publishers to envelope manufacturers. Most of their discussions are concerned with arcane mailing regulations, but one proposal is relevant to journalists and media companies.
As first reported by the blog Dead Tree Edition, run by an anonymous magazine publisher, MTAC’s periodicals working group has been considering a proposal for the Postal Service to sell magazine subscriptions directly to consumers in post offices and online. The proposal was first formulated at an MTAC meeting in May and could go into effect as early as next month, according to Edward Mayhew, a member of MTAC.
The plan is for the Postal Service to install posters with QR codes in post offices around the country. Customers could then scan the code with their phones and subscribe to different magazines. Alternatively, they could just subscribe to magazines online, through USPS.com. USPS did not respond to requests for comment.
Obviously, the proposal is just that—a proposal—and Mayhew cautioned that the details are subject to change. But he added that many publishers—including both magazines and newspapers—have shown interest in participating in the program. With both publishers and the Postal Service rapidly shrinking, they want to act to stanch the bleeding as quickly as possible. A trial program featuring 25-50 post offices could start as early as January, he explained.
Such a prediction may be optimistic. The Postal Service has not yet made any public announcements regarding the program, though Mayhew did not find this surprising. “You won’t hear it from them until they have a program in place,” he insisted.
He recalled that, twice during his 37-year tenure as a USPS employee, the Postal Service attempted to directly sell magazine subscriptions. In the 1980s, it began installing magazine racks in post offices, so that customers could pick up magazines, fill out the subscription cards inside, and mail them. But the experiment was soon scrapped, Mayhew explained, after some in the government began to worry that selling magazines was distracting from the Postal Service’s main mission of delivering the mail.
A few years later, the Postal Service began allowing employees to sign up for magazine subscriptions on their organizational intranet. Mayhew described it “as a perk for employees—you could go on the website and sign up for 300 different periodicals.” This service is no longer offered, he added, but it shows “that the mechanism is in place” for the Postal Service to sell magazine subscriptions online.
But why would the Postal Service want to get into the magazine subscription-selling business? The most obvious answer is that every magazine subscription is another piece of mail for the Postal Service to deliver. But according to Mayhew, periodicals actually make up “a shade under 4 percent of the total volume that goes through the postal service.” The bulk of mail delivered is…well, “bulk mail,” also known as standard mail, direct marketing, or (less kindly) spam.
What periodicals lack in volume, though, they make up for in influence. People want to receive periodicals, so they check their mail and read the spam. If magazines die, then people may not even bother to check their mailboxes. Internally, the Postal Service refers to periodicals as “the anchor in the mailbox.” Clearly, the Postal Service has an interest in making sure that periodicals stay in business and continue to sell print subscriptions.
Does this mean that the Postal Service will only let customers subscribe to the print versions of magazines? Mayhew was not sure. “It’s an open option right now,” he said, adding that the Postal Service is trying to embrace the digital future. In October, he noted, the Postal Service began allowing periodicals to count both print and digital subscribers when reporting their circulation numbers. It seems likely, but not certain, that the Postal Service will offer both print and digital magazine subscriptions.

Paragraph 5: " With both publishers and the Postal Service rapidly shrinking, they want to act to staunch the bleeding as quickly as possible."
I think the proper word is 'stanch.'
Unacceptable error from the vaunted Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism
#1 Posted by James Wilkinson, CJR on Thu 27 Dec 2012 at 09:43 AM
Amazon sells magazine subscriptions so I don't get it unless the USPS has a better price to offer to consumers. If it was me I would try to partner with the Newspaper companies. Have the mail service deliver them to each household. Lets work to keep USPS running for the common good.
#2 Posted by Herschel Everett, CJR on Thu 27 Dec 2012 at 12:49 PM
James, good catch. On a similar one, I hate people using "gauntlet" instead of "gantlet." I caught National Geographic on that one once.
#3 Posted by SocraticGadfly, CJR on Thu 27 Dec 2012 at 02:04 PM
Word History: The spelling gauntlet is acceptable for both gauntlet meaning "glove" or "challenge" and gauntlet meaning "a form of punishment in which lines of men beat a person forced to run between them"; but this has not always been the case. The story of the gauntlet used in to throw down the gauntlet is linguistically unexciting: it comes from the Old French word gantelet, a diminutive of gant, "glove." From the time of its appearance in Middle English (in a work composed in 1449), the word has been spelled with an au as well as an a, still a possible spelling. But the gauntlet used in to run the gauntlet is an alteration of the earlier English form gantlope, which came from the Swedish word gatlopp, a compound of gata, "lane," and lopp, "course." The earliest recorded form of the English word, found in 1646, is gantelope, showing that alteration of the Swedish word had already occurred. The English word was then influenced by the spelling of the word gauntlet, "glove," and in 1676 we find the first recorded instance of the spelling gauntlet for this word, although gantelope is found as late as 1836. From then on spellings with au and a are both found, but the au seems to have won out.
#4 Posted by Wordsmith, CJR on Fri 28 Dec 2012 at 10:26 AM
Thanks to those who pointed out the usage error; it's been fixed.
#5 Posted by Kira Goldenberg, CJR on Tue 1 Jan 2013 at 07:20 PM