The MAD Paid-Circulation Graph
The chart below shows MAD’s paid circulation over the past 5 decades (as reported by the magazine itself, and collected by MAD’s unofficial, but trusted, Keeper-of-the-Stats, Mike Slaubaugh). There are several interesting things on this chart, which I’ve labelled A through D, in red:
Letter A. There’s a theory in the MAD Community that the magazine was mainly a phenomenon of the Baby Boom Generation (those born between 1946 and 1964). Thus, the reasoning goes, the main “cause” of the declining readership of MAD was NOT (as I’ve argued) its failure to “change with the times” but merely the aging of the Boomers into adulthood, and right out of the core MAD-reading demographic. I don’t like this theory; it seems defeatist to me (and like an excuse for not having changed) — but, looking at this chart, it’s hard to dispute it. See, the year 1974 (”A”), when MAD reached its peak circulation of 2.1 million, also happens to be the 20th anniversary of the Median & Most-Populous Year of Baby Boomers, 1954 (which I happen to know because it includes ME, and I did indeed turn 20 years old, so the math works out fine!). The upshot of this “Median year”-business is, before 1974, the number of Baby Boomers Under Age 20 (available as MAD readers) INCREASED every year; after 1974, that number only DECREASED. The dramatic up-&-down plot of the MAD-circulation graph mirrors the entire Boomer Generation’s own movement through the pre-teen and teenage years. (And, don’t forget: despite the perennial hype about the size of the Baby Boom generation, it has long since been numerically eclipsed by both Gen-X and Gen-Y. Where are all of THEM on this graph?)
Letter B. Just look at that trend-line from, say 1979 to 1984! Wow! The then-editors must’ve been shitting their pants on a regular basis — losing fully HALF of their readers in 5 years! The most obvious cause, in addition to very last of the Boomers leaving their Teen years, is VIDEO GAMES. Specifically, Arcade Video Games - which ate up many a quarter otherwise destined to buy a copy of MAD. (But I would add another possible cause: the shifting of American Humor during this time toward the more raunchy, more ironic & conceptual, and more “biting” and rough — leaving relatively-mild & straightforward “MAD-style” Humor in the dust.)
Letter C. What’s this? A little uptick in circulation, maybe signaling a reversal of the general downward trend? Oop — false alarm. Resume the shitting of pants!
(Notice also, to the right of “C”: the years 1993/1994 - the birth of the Internet-as-we-know-it (not its “Arpa-Net“-ish precursors). What was MAD’s circulation then? Under 500,000, down from its 2.1 million peak. Hmm. So much for the argument that it’s the Internet that killed MAD. It had already lost 75% of its readers before the Net was even a twinkle in the eye of its father, Al Gore!)
Letter D. Now here’s the real mystery: the circulation plateau of about 200,000 from 2000 to 2007. Who are these people? (Whoever they are, 30,000 of ‘em just disappeared in the last year!) I’m sure that some of the 200,000 were “never-left” adult MAD readers (whom I personally know to exist: one was my family doctor in Nevada; another is a helicopter reporter for a major-market NBC-affiliate; yet another is a big political consultant in his 50s). And then there are the children (or grandchildren? Gulp!) of former MAD readers, enticed (badgered?) by their elders into reading it. But surely there MUST be at least some Gen-Y or “Millenial”-readers with no existing “family connection” to MAD who were somehow LURED IN by the magazine itself. Ah, THESE are the readers that must be captured, and studied, and replicated in a laboratory — quickly! — for MAD to have any chance of surviving past next year.
Since nobody asked me…here’s what I can tell you about our homestate governor, Janet Napolitano, who was just nominated by Barack Obama to be our nation’s next Homeland Security Director: