Contents Analysis - Q magazine

This is the contents from the February 2008 issue of Q, which doesn't seem to highlight very main features without looking at the cover, but it's generally about a 2008 preview. I don't think I really like this contents, it seems very cluttered and too busy.

First of all it does what Clash doesn't and calls it's contents Q contents, which i don't think has a negative effect, but I don't believe it's necessary as the house style comes across very effectively and the reader will know what magazine their in.

Again it is separated into Features, Every Month and QReview, which are like the Clash categories, but these don't fit together as well the Clash ones, but this may be intentional to appeal to their target reader. Like for instance, maybe Clash's target audience are wanting clearly delivered music info, no frills, and straightforward organisation of the magazine, whereas Q readers are looking for a more thrown together feel and a bit of everything, as I think the mismatching titles connote this feel.

The feature names and descriptions are also nearly opposite to that of Clash, as they have a much clearer, motivated meaning, however the preferred reading that I'm picking up on for them could just be because I'm more a part of Q's target audience than Clash's, and maybe Clash's language is very clear to their readers. For instance "Where are they now? - Toploader traced. Nation breathes easy" has a clear denotation of they've found out what Toploader are up to these days, combined with a bit of humour. But I do feel it's less effective in a strange way, because as it is obvious to me what these features are, I'll know whether I'll like them or dislike them, therefore I may not read some of them, but in Clash because I don't have a clue what some of them are but the language sounds intriguing I'll flick to the page to see what they're about. But the straightforward language also has the side that the readers may be appreciative of just being straightforward told what things are about. I may try and mix these styles when creating my own as I think they both have valued effects, but Clash's contemporary ambiguity may not be suitable for my target readers, so maybe only a small element of this could be incorporated.

Like Clash have their fashion and CD to separate them, Q have their review section to appeal to their maybe older, more conservative target readers than Clash's young, alternative style audience. Because I have recognised having an individual area as a convention, when thinking of my own to separate mine from the crowd, I'll need to think of something which hasn't been done before and will appeal to my target readers. But at the minute, I'm stumped for ideas.

Again, the features themselves seem to be for surveillance and diversion, with numerous interviews and obviously the review section for surveillance info, and things like the crossword for diversion or escapism.

I find the images quite odd, as I cannot seem to decode them very well and they appear a bit random and irrelevant. I don't think either are of the cover stars (upon further research I've found that the cover stars were a mix of Chris Martin, Bono and Liam Gallagher), but are just parts of small features. I think they have been used because they are big acts (Madonna and Led Zepplin) and just to show that Q is big scale, even though it's slightly misleading. I still don't really understand the relevancy of the Madonna photo because it's just "50 Madonna facts to go" yet she's in a top hat with an umbrella on a real photo shoot, so it may just be a library picture to intrigue the audience. But the Led Zepplin has more music relevancy, as the signifier is they're performing a gig, then the signified idea of the lifestyle associated with this goes on to appeal more to the target readers.

3 fonts are used all over, which seems to be an emerging but obvious convention. There is the smaller serif font used for descriptions and articles, similar to Clash, however in the review section the font is different and sans serif, which could be Q trying to subtly separate those features and emphasise the feature which they're known for. The larger font used for the feature titles is simple, yet different, and is the equivalent to Clash's square serif font, as it is rounded with no serifs to differentiate it from the other fonts.

The colours are basically that of Q's house style, the red, black and white, just like the Madonna cover I analysed, which adds to the conservative feels to match the easily denoted language. The grey is also used to highlight the reviews section, in the same subtle way the change of font does.

I think it is the layout and boxes which ruin this contents for me, as everything seems so segregated. I will have to take this into account, as I like the boxes on articles, but prefer free writing on contents.