The postcard inside the plastic-wrapped package advised “…we will be sending you Bon Appetit for the duration of your remaining Gourmet subscription term.”

And there it was, my non-Gourmet. First I got sad about Gourmet’s passing all over again. I like the way Elissa Altman summed up its demise: “Gourmet folded because it had a direct competitor under the same roof in the same genre geared to more practical and commercial endeavors, it made more money, and one of them had to go…End of discussion.”

Once I got over the fact that it was not Gourmet, I was curious to see how Bon Appetit was different. Content, for one thing. Bon Appetit is all about entertaining. Tone, for another. It’s all about ease: world-class dining made simple.

Yet most of the recipes didn’t look that easy. In fact, I got the biggest laugh from a cover blurb promising “5 Easy Ways to Eat More Veggies.” The number one way? Cook cardoons.  

(If you’re wondering what they are, it’s probably because your grocery store has never sold them and you’ve never seen them before. Here’s a technique piece in Saveur, which described cardoons as “high maintenance.”)

On behalf of freelance food writers everywhere, I examined the March issue’s contributors, and found a mix of mostly veteran food writers, with one or two youngsters:

• Cookbook author Molly Stevens wrote the cover story on 1-pot wonders
• Coi chef Daniel Patterson penned a recipe story based on restaurant dishes
• Brat Pack actor Andrew McCarthy (the wild card) wrote a piece on Irish soda bread 
• Filmmaker  and new cookbook author Tamra Davis supplied recipes for vegetarian kids
• Diane Chang wrote a lovely essay about her grandmother’s cooking, with a portrait of the two of them as a full-page photo
• Carolynn Careno, a freelance food writer and cookbook co-author, recreated an Idaho cabin dinner
• Molly Wizenberg of Orangette wrote her monthly column, a pleasure to read.

And you know what’s really strange? If you want to read any of these pieces, click on the website’s magazine section to access close to the entire issue’s content.

I couldn’t find any pieces about food policy or farming, or essays as brilliant as “Consider the Lobster.” Bon Appetit is much less lofty and aspirational. But then, Ruth Reichl is not in charge. On the other hand, it publishes younger writers, even a blogger. I don’t think Gourmet was ever going to acknowledge food bloggers. It was run by snobby old-school journalists. Let’s be honest. 

I’m sure I’ll come around. Right now, I need reasons to fall in love with Bon Appetit. If you have some, let me know.

For more reading on differences between Bon Appetit and Gourmet:

• BookSlut’s smackdown: Gourmet vs. Bon Appetit cookbooks
• The Wall St. Journal’s side-by-side comparison of the two magazines, by the numbers

First there was print, where all we needed was the written word. Then blogs, where writers learned to become publishers, photographers and marketers. Now there’s the new iPad from Apple, where publishers are salivating over a new way to imbed video into their products.

Think about it. Will assignments from magazines soon include video? If so, it’s exciting for readers to see as part of an article or recipe, for example, exactly what stiff peaks mean when whipping egg whites, or how to sear a steak. Yes, we’ve got those videos on the Internet now, but so far they haven’t been part of our freelance writing assignments or book deals.

While it’s clear that the iPad is a cool new development, it doesn’t necessarily bode well for publishers or authors compared to print. According to the New York Times, royalties will initially be less. And “Publishers acknowledge that digital content should be priced lower than the print content,” said Carolyn Reidy, chief executive of Simon & Schuster.

Oh joy. Yet another digital medium where we can be paid less to do more.

My three questions for you are: Do you think publishers will pay us to produce video, or will it be a separate discipline, like photography? Are we writers willing to learn this skill? (For those of you already producing video, you’re ahead of the curve.) And, am I just being a crab about this cool new medium? 

Just read 5 Second Rule’s excellent post about whether recipes are boring, and it generated some thoughts about recipe length. (Isn’t it fantastic when an blog post idea arrives on a platter? Thank you, Cheryl.)

Now, some writers like to go long. They like to hold the reader’s hand and explain. Sometimes I’m surprised about how much handholding, though.

I edited a recipe recently that said: “If necessary, rearrange the oven racks to accommodate the large pot.” Otherwise people might not know how to fit the pot in the oven? Really?

At the other end is the trend of short-attention span recipe writing. Sunset just received an edict from parent Time Inc. that recipes must be shortened to 75 words. Can’t wait to see what that looks like. What does it mean for readers? That they already know how to cook? Or that they don’t cook anyway so it doesn’t matter? 

I had my own epiphany Friday night about short recipes, while cooking  Poulet Aux Olives from Claudia Roden’s The Book of Jewish Food. The instruction said, “Fry the onion in the oil til soft.” Looking for further guidance, I found none and panicked, momentarily. On what heat, in what size pan, for how long, I wondered? After all, when I edit recipes, I look for those clues.

Then I realized I have been sauteing onions for years. I know how to cook them until they’re soft. And I relaxed. It was the right amount of information for me.

What do you think about the length of recipes? What is the right balance of length versus explaining, and how long is too long? What should be the deciding factor about length?

Maybe the magazine editor was just talking off the top of her head, but when I read it, steam came out of my ears. 

In a story in the International Association of Culinary Professionals’ newsletter, by Stephanie Stiavetti, the editorial director of a national food magazine spoke of writing opportunities on her magazine’s website:

 “There’s a lot of fear and concern…the move to user-generated content will impact those who made their living writing for print, but it has also opened up new opportunities for bloggers.”

Oh yes, we know all about that, how links are the new currency, and dwindling opportunities for freelancers. The article continues:

“How much quality can you expect from an uncompensated writer who may not be willing to put a lot of effort into an unpaid gig? ‘A lot,’ says the editor, who plans to use guest bloggers in the future: ‘We’ll be selecting the people we feel have the same level of accuracy and integrity that we would expect from our own writers.’

“The editor believes that (her magazine) has a lot to offer bloggers beyond money. “It’s exposure. Our Web site is one of the top twenty food sites in the world.”

(I’m making her anonymous because I don’t want hate mail directed at her. She’s not the first to say this.)

So the editor wants professional bloggers for the website, but they should work for free because her site gets a lot of hits. Hey, maybe she can apply that logic to the print magazine and stop paying professional writers there too, because her magazine has lots of of subscribers. 

When I emailed the editor about her comments, she said the piece was misleading, that so far the magazine’s website columns are written by staffers. But when I pressed her about pay for freelancers online, she did not respond. Meanwhile, another magazine editor quoted in the story said she paid bloggers less than print writers for original content.

Should bloggers should be paid the same as print writers to create original content? (If so, Steph wrote that Sunset pays the same rate.) 

As Gourmet went down, Saveur went up. According to Eater, Saveur ended 2009 as the second highest magazine for ad page growth among all monthly mags. Its December issue was up 32 percent in ad pages, according to publisher Merri Lee Kingsly.

Impressive. Too bad she hasn’t raised the editorial budget in response. Instead, the editors have been working their tails off.

For the December issue, Executive Editor Dana Bowen wrote the 20-page cover story, including recipes and all but one sidebar, a feat that must have taken several months in addition to her full-time job.

In the same issue, Executive Food Editor Todd Coleman went to India to pen a feature on India’s Gujarati cuisine, weighing in at a roaring 16 pages. James Oseland, the Editor-In-Chief, accompanied him as the photographer! 

So how much of the book did these stories take up? In the magazine layout world, the “well” is the area between the columns and departments in the front and back of the book. It’s where the big juicy feature articles live, and where all freelance writers aspire to be published. The number of ads determine its size.

Before I give you the answer, I’ve got to hand it to the editors for their ingenuity and hard work. They made the best of what must be a puny editorial budget. It’s satisfying to write big features for your own magazine. And to be a decent photographer when you’re the editor-in-chief is a huge accomplishment. 

On the other hand, I did a little math. Combined, in-house editors produced 36 pages of the magazine’s 46-page feature well. That means they paid nothing but expenses for around 78 percent of the feature content, leaving just a few pages for contributors. So much for all that growth.

* * *

Please note: Even if you are still getting the current feed through Feedblitz, it will stop fairly soon. If you do not re-subscribe, you will stop receiving it. To subscribe to the new RSS feed, please click here. If you receive email notifications, please re-subscribe here.  Thanks.