A need for something in between…
Runner’s World and Running Times, that is.
If you follow me on Facebook, you may have noticed my annoyance with a certain Runner’s World article last week.
This blurb is from an article about running myths. The myth? That vegans can’t be runners. Sigh. I was annoyed that that was a “myth” at all, but then. Oh, THEN! They have a quote in there, from their nutritionist, saying vegans will be fine, you know, if they consume enough WHEY (among other things). Whey is not even vegan – its a milk byproduct. And while I appreciate that the nutritionist saying protein is not a concern (it really isn’t, for most Americans) and pointing out that some will do better as vegans than others (they will!) I was SHOCKED they said vegans consume whey. And then put the focus on soy, too. Sigh.
I felt similarly appalled when Runner’s World suggested spitting out sports drink to save calories.
Ugh, Runner’s World. I dislike it more and more each issue. I do tend to like the featured human interest stories and the articles on runner psychology, but mostly, I find myself not getting much out of it. Shoe/bra/running short reviews don’t interest me. I don’t enjoy the columns. I feel like there isn’t much useful information, for me, in there.
And, SIDE NOTE! Yeah, I am complaining about a running magazine, a luxury to be able to buy and read it. And you know what? I probably will keep my subscription up, because it’s cheap, and usually there is one or two articles I like a month. I know I am being ridiculous. I am not going to lose sleep over this. That whey thing just threw me over the edge.
So anyway.
For awhile, I have been reading Running Times. I think the information is more useful, I really like their features on competitive runners of all ages (high school, college, elite), and that they focus on track events as well.
I always knew I was not the Running Times demographic – the articles seemed geared toward people way more competitive than me. However! I still felt like it was okay for me to read it, until I saw the September issue Editor’s Note (just the beginning, below):
The “who are these people?!” attitude surprised me. Like… there is no reason why anyone should run 25 or fewer miles a week. Ha ha. And then all the “excuses” for why one might. But then they said it, right there – they are a magazine for the “highly competitive.”
I should explain, the Editor’s Note is promoting their article later in the issue, “Maximize the Minimum” – how to still run competitively when you can “only” run 30ish miles a week. I read the plans in that article and thought, “holy crap, this is still really intense for ‘not running that much'” Speedwork, hill repeats, cross, strength. You know, all the stuff we should be doing if we want to be competitive, it just pointed out to me that I am mostly someone who runs for fun. And that is probably NOT what Running Times is focused on. So maybe I am more Runner’s World demographic, but they just annoy me.
Ha ha ha. Where do I fit in?! I am so lost (not really).
I just find this all very interesting, as I think any amount of exercise, whatever it is, is commendable. And I really dislike running snobbery – about pace, times, amount run, blah de blah. I think we should all support each other. And I feel someone running (gasp!) less than 25 miles a week might stumble across something like that and feel discouraged, even though the article mentions it’s for the “highly competitive.” It might make someone think they have to be that way to be worthy of being called a runner.
At the same time, there is a need for a competitive magazine, and a more “fun” one. Hee hee. Just don’t tell anyone I am reading the competitive one. Shhh!
Themocracy
“I just find this all very interesting, as I think any amount of exercise, whatever it is, is commendable. And I really dislike running snobbery – about pace, times, amount run, blah de blah. I think we should all support each other.”
AMEN!
And I’m one of those people that probably can’t call myself a runner, because I don’t average more than 25 miles a week (because I don’t want to hurt myself, and I cross and strength-train a LOT), but then maybe I’m also not a runner in some circles because I don’t run 8-minute miles. Who knows. I find that kind of attitude to be really obnoxious, and something that could probably discourage a lot of potential “casual runners,” like myself (but on the other hand, obviously I wouldn’t be reading a magazine geared toward competitive runners!). I’ll probably never achieve that kind of distance or pace, but I’m still a runner because, you know, I RUN.
Exactly! You’re my kinda runner!
Exactly, if you are running… you are a runner. If you are injured, but ran and the past and want to get back at it… you’re a runner! If you take walk breaks… you’re a runner. Sigh.
If you run to the bathroom when you really have to go… Are you a runner?
Definitely! Especially if you accidentally go a bit on your leg 😉
That second to last paragraph is probably THE BEST thing I have read in a long time! I am going to print it out and put it on my fridge. Thank you!
Aww, thank you! <3
I stopped finding Runner’s World interesting once I became pregnant. I think one of the issues (Jan or Feb) was a weight-loss issue and that totally turned me off. If I wanted to read about trendy weight loss, I’d subscribe to Shape or Women’s Health magazine. Ugh. Some of their human interest stories are interesting but then others kind of fall flat. I find myself finished with the article thinking… “And then?”
When I was reading Hal Higdon’s marathon book, he had a big section in there on how some of these elites that run over 100 miles aren’t necessarily doing their bodies good by logging miles for the sake of logging miles. I vaguely remember reading about Meb’s training plan and his taper compared to some of his fellow Olympian colleagues. Meb’s miles were less and he ended up doing SO WELL because his body was rested and he found a good formula that works for him. I love all the lame excuses they give for why someone would only be running 25 miles per week. Maybe that someone is not super competitive but likes to read something other than Runners World???
I agree that I really dislike running snobbery. There will always be someone that can run faster, longer, better… Why focus so much on the numbers, the pace, the brags of every single workout. I like to run for fun, but I also have a competitive spirit to always try and improve. I guess it is all about finding that balance that works for you!
Whenever a new issue comes in and I see weight loss highlighted on the cover I have a major internal “ugh.” The tips are always so asinine… or at least, crap I already know. It kind of perpetuates the idea of running to lose weight, rather than for enjoyment. It just annoys me.
Meb is so amazing! He is running NYC again, right?!
I have always felt that Runner’s World was more of a fitness magazine whereas Running Times is more for hard core runners. And by hard core, I mean runners that take running seriously and don’t just use it as a method of keeping fit.
Hmm, that is interesting, because I don’t run to stay fit (I am overweight and have been as a runner for years) and am not competitive… I wonder how many people do it for social/enjoyment/stress release reasons above all else? Making me think…
I won’t renew my RW subscription for a few reasons.
1. It’s not too far off from the trashy fitness magazines like shape or … I don’t like the weightloss articles because most of the time they reek of “fad” and lose the weight quick schemes. (I would prefer to see more articles about nutrition and maintaining weight when you’re running 40+ miles a week)
2. The quality of the articles is starting to run me the wrong way. Take the article from November last year highlighting “the running twitterati” of basically the “popular bloggers/twitter users”. Complete garbage. (Especially since many of them complain about running on a regular basis)
3. When the main story on RW.com is about Lilo (possibly like maybe thinking of running a marathon) there is a problem.
I wish there was a middle ground too. I like running times for the more serious articles and profiles of badass runners because I’m more Inspired by them and their stories (especially someone who started out slower and is now fast) than reading about avg joe who ran a marathon in 6 hours. (Which could still be a good story…) I’m not a running snob- I’m also inspired by people working hard for their goals. RW (to me) seems more geared towards newer/less serious runners. I’m no badass but I’m getting less an less out of RW especially when so many of the articles are like “run a marathon with a 3 day a week plan” or run your first half on low mileage. Snooze.
Oh gosh! Ha! That twitter article was dumb. I think there was another twitter article in one of those magazines this month or past. Like, “highlights from twitter”! If I wanted to read that crap, I’d be on twitter.
That Twitter article KILLED me, maybe 2 were “magazine worthy” the rest, not so much. Altho now I’m falling into that judgy mcjudge stereotype… 🙂
I gave up my RW subscription in 2012 and haven’t missed it. I felt like all the articles were the same and I could find most of what I wanted to read online anyway. Sorry, RW. You just weren’t doing it for me anymore.
But I guess my question for you is, what would you want or hope to get out of a running-themed magazine? I mean, other than correct reporting and fact-checking 🙂
And I think the RT editors should re-do their survey and actually ask WHY people run the amounts they do and WHY they are reading RT! That might open their eyes to their actual readership demographics.
They do all go online, later! Which is nice, if you are looking for links! Something seems more real to me in print, which is weird. I am more likely to read it in a magazine. If you presented this month’s issue all online to me, I bet I wouldn’t read it.
Actually, Running Times pretty much has what I want. It just sounds like they don’t want me as a reader! Ha ha.
Oh gosh. Yeah. That would be awesome if they did that follow up!
I feel like runners world is useful for people in their first year or two of running – when you’re excited, easily inspired, and really interested in all things running. After that, it all seems so canned. (Not to mention their downright criminal business practices, but that’s separate from their product or target audience.)
I always had a hard time getting into Runnibg Times because I don’t have a track or xc background. It felt like I was a poser reading their stories, ha!
I am now a much more educated poser for reading those articles! 🙂
I just recently subscribed (and have yet to get an issue) of Running Times, and I’m very curious to see how I like it. Like many other commenters, I have RW to be far too gimmicky in its effort to attract newer runners and improve single copy sales. I think that many people do run to lose weight, maintain weight, etc. but the reason we continue to buy and subscribe RW is not for those tips. I like the general interest stories (hello, one about the college athlete who nearly got deported!) and the “I’m a Runner” feature. I am vaguely intrigued by the recipes but I am not sure I like their plans. Not for me, at least.
I do find this concept that you have to run 30+ miles to qualify as a runner a bit asinine. What am I? A jogger?
NO! I hate the word jogger! Eww! LOL
I kinda like Runners World, but only for the stories about real people, and I most of the time like the last page when they have some sort of famous person.
I’ve never read Running Times, and I’m curious now about it!! That’s hilarious about them giving reasons why someone didn’t run 30+ every week! A runner is a runner, even if it’s one mile, you still ran.
Maybe we should come up with our own running magazine!
Oreos + Running? 😉
Wait – so it was a nutritionist saying that vegans can eat whey? Not just some dumb Runners World writer? Oy!
I gave up my subscription about 2 or 3 years ago. As others have mentioned, it all seemed geared to new runners and it was all recylced material I feel like could have been in any other previous issue. Blah. No thanks.
Yeah, it was a nutritionist quoted in the rest of the article! Derp!
Runner’s World is all about selling people stuff they don’t need — it doesn’t surprise me that they would suggest spitting out sports drinks vs. not drinking them — their advertisers don’t care whether you swallow their drinks as long as you buy them.
BTW, Skratch Labs makes a great sports drink that is lower in sugar and easier on my belly. And low enough in calories that you can swallow it.
I don’t read running magazines because they are boooooring. My husband is a track and field freak so I hear all the blah blah blah about running I can stand. I like to run (maybe 10-15 miles a week) to unwind my brain. I’d rather read blogs.
Jesse writes for two blogs if you want to read about professional runners: http://tracksuperfan.com and http://dailyrelay.com
Like Erin, I let my RW subscription go. It was nice to read the first year or 2 I was running, but after a while, I just felt it was the same tired thing month after month. More sales and marketing, less stories and inspiration, and really zero useful information.
That said, I had the same gut reaction to the runing times article when I first read it. It came off as elitist and snobby, even if that wasn’t their intention. Like, “hmmm, how can we talk down to the lowly pedestrian runners?” (btw, I hate “pedestrian” when it’s used to describe runners just as much as I hate “jogger”)
I’m with you – let’s lift each other up instead of making comparisons. Even so, I still prefer running times.
Interesting, as I say pedestrian sometimes! But when you think about the term, you generally think of people walking. Hmm. I may have to think about this more. Should I do a post, “what running terms do you hate?!”
I too really dislike running snobbery. My personal favorite on running snobbery is this article entitled “How Oprah Ruined the Marathon” http://www.salon.com/2007/11/03/marathon/.
Personally, like you said, anyone who runs no matter how far or how fast is a runner. And, the fact that you are getting off your butt and running definitely is commendable.
As for me, Running Times is too hardcore – though I like reading the articles about the up and coming professional athletes like Evan Jager and Jordan Hasay. I don’t even so much as give any training program a second thought since I know I can’t physically do it and nor do I want to.
I don’t dislike Runners World as much the others. Again, I read it with a grain of salt and sometimes I’ll try their tips and if they work, I’ll stick with it and if not, I’ll try something else.
A new running magazine is needed for those in the middle for sure!
Gosh, that article really has me thinking. I don’t think the Oprah comparison is fair. Especially since I think she has did the marathon faster than me, and if you trained and do your pace, so what? At the same time, I do hear about people who have it as a life goal but don’t always train and end up walking so much of it and being in pain. Those people aren’t harming others running, I just worry about their enjoyment of it, if they don’t train and it takes them most of a day. Not saying they shouldn’t, just that I hope that is what they wanted. I walked a HM once and it was so freaking hard. I walked the last 8 miles of the last marathon I did and it sucked (except it didn’t because I was with a friend). Basically, it sounds like I need to get a better grasp of walking these events.
Oh gosh. I could never use a RT training plan either! Unless I was looking to get injured 🙂
I too agree that the Oprah comparison isn’t fair either. If anything, she should get credit for helping start the running boom. So many people have beating her time as their goal. And, it’s not really fair because she had all the time and money in the world to get ready for it. She had a trainer, a personal chef, etc.
People who don’t train enough for the marathon are only hurting themselves in the long run. But, there’s a fine line between being undertrained and being overtrained.
I don’t really read either magazine (and have never read running times… but I’m not competitive and clearly not their target audience, apparently…). Seeing these articles makes me kind of glad to not read them (and I read that link you posted about the swish and spit – not cool).
I do really like when you post with articles though. It keeps me in the loop!
I hate the idea that “real” runners hit a certain weekly mileage. That’s great for them. But I like doing workouts OTHER than running. I have no idea how I could possible fit in 30+ miles/week of running along with strength training and a little bit of cross training. Plus you know, having a life and getting enough sleep every night. It’s just not going ot happen and I’m OK with that.
Vera got me a subscription to Marathon & Beyond magazine last year and I really liked it. Actually, I’m still behind on issues because they are so jam-packed with useful information and interesting personal stories. It focuses on looong distances, hence the name, but it’s a good resource for anyone who takes running seriously, but without all the flair/fluff of RW.
I should totally get a subscription to that! I would love to hear more about the magazine from you. Gosh, we could have talked about it at lunch if I ever stopped canceling 🙁
I guess their real runners ONLY run? I am with you though. I love to run but want to have a life too!
I get “Trail Runner” magazine (electronically) and they just had an article “Paleo vs. Vegan”. I think that it must be the trend to discuss perhaps the whys and the benefits of each? It does NOT, however, say that vegans can’t run. After all, in the ultra-running world, Scott Jurek is pretty much a bad-ass who is vegan. Have you read his book? I love looking at his blog – totally inspiring!
I did read his book! It was what finally made me sign up for the ultra last summer. As Jurek runs so much more, I was like, I just gotta sign up for this 50K!
Oh gosh, yes, totally discuss those dietary plans, but don’t perpetuate a myth that vegans can’t run. Why didn’t RW mention Jurek? Good point. That article was just grasping at straws.
That’s really embarrassing that Runner’s World made such a big mistake printing the whey comment. That’s very clearly a huge error. There are always things in Runner’s World that I think, “hm?” But I, like you mentioned, like at least a story or two each month. I’ve never tried reading Running Times, but that editor’s note doesn’t make it seem very approachable. That’s funny to think they consider 30 to be a low number. I definitely never got above 40 in my first marathon training plan. Hm.
I was saying that when I was talking to a friend about this article – some people don’t even get that high marathon training!