Better days ahead? MAD going from Quarterly to Bi-Monthly publication
Well — THIS is noteworthy: apparently MAD may be increasing the frequency of publication from 4 times a year to 6! If true, this marks the first halfway positive news after a couple years of unremittingly negative news for the magazine. To put it in objective astronomical terms, this is the first “expansion” of the MAD Universe after a period of non-stop “contraction” (You know: the elimination of MAD Kids & MAD Classic; and the slashing of: issues-per-year; staff size; office space; per-issue budget; page-rate paid to Writers & Artists…)
Obviously, this stay of execution has something to do with the departure of the old Paul Levitz & Co. executives from DC COMICS, and the announcement last month of the new executive team, touted as more “MAD-friendly” than the last. So…were the Levitz Gang just a bunch of bean-counters too quick to “pull the trigger” on MAD? Or are these new guys really willing to go the extra mile to give it every chance to survive? Probably both. (Which I say, not only because it sounds reasonable, but because that’s how they always answer on the Sunday TV News talk shows when presented with an either/or question.)
While this increase in publication frequency isn’t going to solve all of MAD’s problems (like…oh, losing 95% of their peak paid circulation of a generation ago)…it’ll definitely give them the opportunity to pull the rabbit out of the hat! But, one thing you can say for sure: even if it’s only a temporary reprieve, this is indisputably better for MAD than the alternative, under the old DC guard - a continuation of the Big Shrinkage into Nothingness.
But, forget all that! I know what you’re all thinking: how does this affect Mike Snider, personally? Well, I hate to have to say it, but I may actually lose my penny-ante bet with a friend over when the Last Issue of MAD will be…and wind up having to pay for my own spaghetti dinner! (Sniff, sniff). Oh, okayyyy…I guess I can live with that. [Although I could raise a stink about the conditions of the bet having changed drastically -- i.e., new DC execs who MAY give a shit about MAD vs. old ones who probably didn't! -- but...ah, c'est la vie! It's a good Italian restaurant; a good friend; and I can always put it on my credit card!]
Afterthought: Actually, this move (going to Bi-Monthly, or just announcing that) makes perfect business sense regardless of whether DC COMICS is actually committed to trying to revive MAD — OR bent on killing it off. Just suppose the latter, for a second: announcing that you’re increasing from 4 to 6 issues a year is bound to convince some reluctant subscribers-to-be to finally part with their cash, hmmm? (This was the Entire Business Model of Membership-Gyms in L.A. during the 1980s: A) Get $300 annual membership fees upfront; B) Go out of business & pocket cash). Additionally, it has to be easier to sell ad space in a magazine that’s nominally a “Bi-Monthly” than a “Quarterly”, right? (Need evidence: look at the almost total lack of outside ads in the latest Quarterly MAD issue, #503.).

The other day while perusing TMZ.com (slogan: “First with all the Michael Jackson crap you can stand!“), I couldn’t stop myself from flipping through what they say are the never-before-published
No doubt about it: Michael Jackson will be sorely missed — ESPECIALLY by those of us in the Comedy & Humor Business, including MAD Magazine. I can’t think of another public figure who provided such a strong & steady stream of “comic fodder” over such a long time — more than a quarter of a century! I’ll bet that if you did a text search of the entire contents of MAD since 1980, his name would be the most frequently mentioned, in articles about him but also liberally sprinkled all over other articles & satires as a comic reference. (”…as [blank] as Michael Jackson!” or “…makes Michael Jackson look like [blank]!”)
Why did 20% of presumably satisfied Tropicana customers suddenly stop buying the exact same orange juice in a different package (at right in photo)? No one’s exactly sure, but the theories run from absence of the familiar Tropicana “straw-in-the-orange” on the label…to the new package looking like a generic or house-brand orange juice. Whatever the reasons, it’s clear that this well-intentioned move to modernize and “refresh” the branding backfired on Tropicana, big time. (If you’re interested, read about it in 
