FINEST HOUR 146, SPRING 2010
COMPILED BY BARBARA LANGWORTH
ABSTRACT
In which we finally get what’s coming to us.
===================
Our latest reader survey was available on the internet for the first time. Webmaster John Olsen created a form whereby members could enter their opinions online. Mailed-in entries were keyed in by Barbara Langworth who compiled the data using John’s database system. We received about 200, half by each method.
Not everyone filled in all the blanks so the totals vary. Respondents were from the USA, Canada, UK, Singapore, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and Australia. About 65 percent of those who responded to our question about age were over 60 years old, This statistic is not quite so grim as it may appear. The average age of members who state their age (based on our database) is 55 thus only 23 percent of those replying to the survey were in the average age bracket. The average age is 55 in the U.S., 59 in Canada.
Of 164 who responded to the “occupation” question, under half were retired or semi-retired. Common occupations were attorneys, lawyers, medical professionals and educators, business people, accountants, managers, administrators and consultants. They included a pastor, photographer, sportscaster, U.S. marshal and Blackjack dealer! Over half were longtime members.
Nearly all told us where they had heard of us. Among “Other” entries were “don’t remember,” personal contacts, magazines or books, Chartwell; and one or two via the English-Speaking Union, and Fulton Memorial. Despite our flyers twice being shipped with Levenger books, none mentioned Levenger
We asked what interests you most about Churchill (778 ticks, right) and what Churchill items do you collect (484 ticks, below). We asked for your interest in Finest Hour, the Chartwell Bulletin and website. Three-quarters of you said “high,” and the rest “moderate.” All but six wanted more or the same level of publications and web services.
In answer to the question about readership level, 42.3 percent said they read Finest Hour cover to cover, 38.1 percent said “thoroughly,” and 19.1 percent read “selections.” Only one person said they “flip through it.” Among “publications read,” 464 ticks were distributed between Finest Hour (39 percent), the Chartwell Bulletin (32 percent) and “Churchill Proceedings” within Finest Hour (29 percent).
WHAT IS YOUR FAVOURITE FEATURE OF FINEST HOUR?
Respondents listed (in order): articles by Churchill and book reviews (by far the highest votes), glossy cover, Books Arts & Curiosities, Action This Day, feature articles, cover story, Wit & Wisdom, Riddles, Mysteries, Enigmas, Churchill Proceedings, Editor’s Essay, World War II, Quiz. Several approved of recent in-depth articles such as the Ed Murrow story, “This…is London.”
IS FINEST HOUR JUST FINE AS IT IS?
Ninety-five percent (142) said yes, while five percent (seven) said no. A typical response was: “Great as it is, rich and robust with interesting and compelling topics. It will stand the test of time as a literary collectable.”
Mailed questionnaires (but not web participants) rated Finest Hour contents, distributing 925 ticks over favorite article subjects, 285 over favorite illustrations, and 1,369 over favorite standing departments in the magazine, distributed as follows:
GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
We asked how you would improve it and received sixty comments: “More book reviews….articles about collecting Winston Churchill’s books….more on Churchill’s relevance today….analysis of his voluminous writings…Victorian moral attitudes, with modern application….famous Churchillians now in the news….continue to publish opposing views and perspective, such as Diarmaid Ferriter’s take on de Valera….essays, speeches and talks by others about WSC…Churchill during the interwar years 1919-39….’then and now’ photos….the people around Churchill….relationships with friends, family, and enemies, personal and professional….shorter articles, more pictures.”
Occasionally, advice was contradictory: “More excerpts from scholarly writings” and “I like the newer, scholarly format” were countered by “more for the average reader, less from scholars and academics.” Some said “I have no interest in stamps and skip those articles,” while others said, “more stamps.”
SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
“The problem of objectively understanding and writing about wars and history….lighter articles such as Terry Reardon’s on St. Pierre et Miquelon in the autumn 2007 issues, to balance more scholarly articles by Martin Gilbert and other academics….an issue devoted to his writings, the Nobel Prize….the cars Churchill owned (an article has long been gestating on this)….more excerpts from Langworth’s Connoisseur’s Guide to the Books of Sir Winston Churchill ….how Churchill studied history and applied or ignored it in various situations.” One reader recommended “more on WSC’s early Parliamentary Bills between 1906 and 1914: No other statesmen thought of the conditions of the working man in the early 20th century.”
“THE RELEVANCE THING”
More readers prefer articles relating Churchill to today’s world than readers who don’t want them. A sampling: “More articles with relevant actuality, relations between nations, globalisation….more on WSC’s relevance to today’s challenges and crises….how would he react to today’s issues on war, healthcare?…how would he handle the dreadful happenings in the UK—the EC, crime, mass immigration, growing Muslim population?…more contemporary comment on WSC’s relevance in a vastly changed and changing world.” But one reader raised a caution: “I do have a concern at bringing Churchill into modern issues and allowing writers to take advantage of the publication to air their modern views.”
WE THINK WE’RE ALREADY DOING THAT…
Some of you asked for things we believe we are already doing: “A Churchill Calendar of activities during past and/or forthcoming quarter” (see the website and Chartwell Bulletin)…lists of Best Books by and about Churchill (see FH 140, but we’ll do more of this)….current news related to Churchill” (see Datelines and Around & About)….info on upcoming lecture series events at Cabinet War Rooms” (see Chartwell Bulletin)….where readers can find good Churchill photographs and sculpture to purchase (see winstonchurchll.org and click on “shop”)…Churchill’s influence on today’s Middle East/Muslim situation, for which he is often
blamed (see “Churchill and the Founding of Iraq,” FH 132)….more diary extracts or articles from people close to Churchill (see recent articles by Messrs. Bullock and Golding, FH 143-45; we publish such new material, but published diaries by colleagues are not within our right to reprint)….bring back stamps and Churchilliana.” (We heard you; see issues from FH 140 on.)
FINEST HOUR DESIGN AND LAYOUT
Few comments were offered, and some was contradictory. On the one hand: “Break up the print with cartoons or Churchill’s paintings, photographs of his early days where relevant,” and “I believe the magazine would benefit from a more contemporary feel and look. The articles and features, whilst very interesting are dated in presentation and layout.” On the other hand: “The publication continues to be well designed; don’t change a thing; you can’t improve on it,” and “It was very good when I joined five years ago and it is better now.”
However, the reader survey preceded one of our periodic redesigns. Commencing with FH 145, the magazine was altered by eliminating white-on-black caption blocks, adding more white space and leading between lines of type, cutting back on line rules, using more sans-serif type and photo “bleeds” (off the page edge). We typically redesign every five years. Readers concerned with layout and design should look at this issue, and FH 145, and tell us what you think of the changes.
Some things are unavoidable. Not being A-4 format, Finest Hour is going to appear “foreign” to Europeans the moment they take it from its envelope—despite our insistence on English spelling for English-originated material (see “FH is Bilingual,” page 7). We always aim to improve readability, because Finest Hour is more type-driven (like The Spectator) than art-driven (like Architectural Digest).
The editors are not graphic designers, and, while we deprecate the modern tendency toward acres of white space and enormous titles, an art director could surely improve the product—at a price. However, there are higher priorities, including a deputy editor, and, recognizing actuarial reality, a plan for succession.
Your praise was both humbling and encouraging: “Every time I learn something new (WSC decreed that a cat must always be at Chartwell—I had no idea!)…Finest Hour is one of the most professional-quality publications one can receive…I have each issue from #1….superb; no suggestions for improvement….an exceptional job together with the newly formatted website….the frequency of publication is just right for me…I read FH cover to cover and enjoy it greatly….I learn a lot about Churchill from many angles…I wouldn’t change a thing…I enjoy everything—have learned so much and think our editor is terrific….I like FH in its entire form—all subjects… I love Finest Hour, just make it larger….always look forward to my copy…. the book reviews are excellent.”
CHARTWELL BULLETIN AND CHURCHILL PROCEEDINGS
Most readers approved of our 2007 decision to expand the Chartwell Bulletin to cover all event and news items while devoting an expanded Finest Hour to “all Churchill, all the time.” One reader “missed coverage of events in FH, while realizing that the Chartwell Bulletin is now the vehicle for this.” A few readers thought that Churchill Proceedings (scholarly papers from conferences) should revert to its previous format as a separate publication. But most approved of running the Proceedings within issues of FH, which produces those papers up to three years earlier than they were being produced in the old separate format. And, of course, our new website feature, “Finest Hour Online,” offers more scholarly papers that don’t make FH for reasons of space.
Effective with issue 21, The Chartwell Bulletin was redesigned to match the appearance of the website— which is important, because many members now read it only on the web. Hard copies of the Chartwell Bulletin are mailed only to U.S. members. Both the UK and Canadian organizations have opted to read it via our website, where it is posted up to a month before the hard copy is mailed. Many Americans also read it online.
We were interested to know if American members also wanted an email-only Bulletin. While 60 percent said they would prefer it by email, only 20 percent said they would want it only by email, and over 40 percent said they would “disapprove” or “disapprove strongly” if this was the only way they could read it. (Three said they would drop their membership!)
We were anxious to know how often you use the website and were encouraged by the results. Nearly two-thirds of you use it monthly, and six percent use it daily. On the other hand, there are 36 percent who never use it at all. at all. As “Finest Hour Online” continues to expand, those who don’t use it at all will unfortunately miss the material not in our print publications.
Favorite website features garnered 400 ticks: One reader commented: “There’s not enough time in the day to digest all this information!” More specific criticisms were: “Finest Hour articles are slow to be available online and help in access is perfunctory….the website rarely works. I’ve been directed to go there to renew my membership but it never works….when I contact support, they tell it me it doesn’t work and to use snail mail—there are broken links though I think most of those have been repaired…The chronological web version of Action This Day is a little difficult to navigate.”
Webmaster John Olsen is sensitive to these concerns, but the new website still requires masses of old material to be converted and new .pdf files of back issues to be posted, so it’s a matter of time. Never hesitate to contact the webmaster if you have any trouble; he wants to help and acts promptly.
GENERAL CRITICISMS
We asked “what bugs you” and fifty-three replied. Some said, “I’m not bugged about anything.” Complaints included: “[One of our trustees] is welcome as a Churchillian but I don’t like reading him and will not attend events where he is a speaker…We need more outreach to the younger generations. Having been a member since I was 13, and now approaching 40, I find that people of my generation are not as familiar with the Churchill saga…Throughout the administration of George Bush, one of the worst Presidents ever, you compared him favorably to Churchill.” We take issue with the last. We avoid modern comparisons; quite often we have said they are non-sequitur. The Jablonsky article on the “Bush Doctrine” was more critical than complimentary. G.W. Bush did speak at one of our events; that’s something we’ll cover regardless of who is president.
On the other hand, many respondents had no complaints at all: “We get 20-30 magazines a month; Finest Hour is the one I read from cover to cover.”
CONFERENCE COMMENTS
The most common complaint about conferences was expense: “Pricey for an average guy like me….way too expensive….too far away….too expensive locations….should not always be the same time of year.” Suggestions included: “Could we try one on a campus in the summer to see if it could be offered for less and provide more educational time?…a gathering of Churchill Centre Associates (contributors to the endowment)….too expensive for retirees; some kind of senior citizen discount might be considered.” (Note: The average age at conferences is much higher than the overall average age. We’ve always thought this is because older members have more time to spare, but their support is crucial.)
LOCAL CHAPTERS
“The affiliates and chapters need a press kit designed by the Centre—one was promised in San Francisco, but it has not been delivered—the press kit would provide suggestions and materials on how to promote and advertise our local activities….why don’t Australia and NZ support WC as in the US and Canada, now that it’s clear he was the fall guy for Gallipoli?”
We asked if there was a local branch near you. Sixty-eight percent said yes the rest said no; most of the latter would like a branch near them. Members were split over whether they wished to attend local events, but if there were a local chapter or branch in their area, 84 percent said they’d attend. Lastly, we asked if you felt if your local chapter was effective. A hearty 77 percent said yes but 23 percent thought a chapter was not functioning. Several specific comments on chapters were passed on to their leaders.
BEST FEATURES
We asked what The Churchill Centre does best, and ninety-two members replied: “Keeps subjects varied, diverse, compelling and informative…the episodes in his life and leadership…classy events with very big headline speakers….publications, book reviews, Churchill Tours and activities…Churchill Museum at the Cabinet War Rooms….the Centre is responsive to members with friendly, courteous staff…stays true to Churchill…outstanding website and journal…fine symposia and seminars….conference topics, speakers and venues are all very attractive….adds real substance to what one already knows about Churchill…clearing house for ideas…a wonderful job keeping WSC’s memory alive…educates young people and their teachers…thought-provoking articles…inclusiveness: I feel I belong.”
Thanks to all who took the trouble to respond, and be assured we are listening to your thoughts.
Get the Churchill Bulletin delivered to your inbox once a month.