NG May 1991 Issue Misprint

[Mike Jackson]

I've been receiving National Geo magazines for decades as an annual Christmas gift from my folks. In May of 1991, I received my issue and started reading it, only to become very confused when I got to page six (6) of the first article, "Elephants - Out of time, out of space". In place of page seven (7), I found myself on page seventeen (17.) Reading to page twenty-four (24) led back to page seventeen (17), then the magazine appeared normal until the end of the publication.

I assume that somehow a section from another copy of the issue was inadvertently substituted for the correct pages in my issue. When I contacted National Geographic Magazine about the error, they sent me a letter (see pictures) requesting that I return the issue for a properly assembled one.

The auction includes the magazine, the mailer, the letter and all of the enclosures in the letter's envelope. The mailer and magazine have been stored in a manila envelope in my office since 1991 and are in mint condition. I have not read the magazine since 1991, and was very careful to not crease the pages when I took the pictures of the issue for an eBay auction. The letter is in mint condition, though the original envelope is torn from my opening it in 1991, and the envelope has browned a bit since then. I have blanked out the address portion of the address label in the picture of the mailer, but I have not altered or removed the original mailing label from the mailer.

I would imagine that the issue might be worth a few hundred dollars to an avid collector, and I realize that the BIN price is set ridiculously high for that auction. I set it at that amount in the event that National Geographic decides that they do not want a misprint floating around out in the world where it can be seen. One can always hope... :O)

Has anyone else run across an issue with this error in it? I would imagine that there might be at least one other May 1991 issue with my issue's pages in it in place of the correct ones.

[Mike Jackson]

Added one picture.

- Mike

[Melvin L. De Vilbiss]

A very interesting anomaly I had not come across (and I’m certain there are many more)!

I immediately searched through all my extra May ’91 issues and low and behold…

NADA!

Every page in every issue was as it should be!

Reading through some of the NGS publications one comes away with the belief the organization attempts to achieve the highest of standards for quality control of its print material (hence their desire to get it back from you, perhaps?).

Would that their online and many subscription services attempt to meet the same standard? I know; I’m dreaming!

Not being a collector of misprints, however, I have only a passing interest in these rarities but believe there are a few out there that collect them.

Unfortunately, the only person I was aware that did so is no longer with us.

Thank you for sharing this with us!

Mel

[Claude Belisle]

Mike,
I just can't understand why anyone would care for a 1991 NG magazine misprint, specially at 4,999.99$!
But as you say, "One can always hope".
Good luck!
Claude

[Mike Jackson]

Like I implied in my post and on the auction, it was a joke. Personally, I think that NG could care less about the misprint issue. I was just intrigued that they had tried to get it back in 1991.

[Mike Jackson]

And I reduced the BIN to $499.99. The joke wore off, at least for me.

[Scott T. Shier]

I do not think that the N.G.S. is as concerned nowadays with misprints, errors, printing glitches and typos, misspellings, etc. as they once were. The Magazine used to go to great expense and effort to ensure perfect accuracy and quality control.

I would be shocked if they cared about misprints (printing press errors) now. In April I bought a newsstand copy of April 2010 "Special Water" issue, and found that 6 or so pages towards the front (features departments, ads) were inserted into the issue twice.....not only twice, but UPSIDE DOWN!

In the "old" days that might command some premium in the collecting world, but now it is more common, if not usual. There is the infamous story about NGM Editor-In-Chief Ted Vosburgh in the early 70's stopping an entire press run of a month of National Geographic because he found a semi-colon or some other punctuation mark to be incorrectly placed - it cost the Society some hundreds of thousands of dollars (much more $$ now!) and much lost printing press time and destroyed copies to do this. It was perfectly alright then, but I can't imagine that current NGM Editor Chris Johns would get away with his life if he did the same thing today.

The other thing now -- most markedly since they went to mailing the Magazine in the clear plastic wrap instead of brown paper sleeve/envelope -- is that the issues never come to your homw in "mint" condition anymore. This also has to do with the fact that the issues are not physically as sturdy anymore (thinner paper used). I never receive an issue anymore that is not dented, curled, chipped, or exhibiting a minor crease down the center from being rolled by the postal carriers. I never saw issues get like this prior to circa. year 2000. When they revised their brown paper wrap from being a tight sleeve to an envelope that was sealed (glued) shut at the seam, the issues typically came out with glue residue which then created blemishes, as well as the sticky spots then would tear (abrasions), so that you again did not have a pristine copy. The glue spots would also attract dirt, thusly making your front cover show dark spots and streaks.

These aspects are all quite annoying to longtime collector's and members who actually keep all their issues. When you take pleasure and pride in your NGM collection, you are not happy with incidental damage/imperfections caused by sloppier mailing protocols.


- Scott T. Shier, Michigan

[Melvin L. De Vilbiss]

Spoken more kindly than I was going to - and decided not to even mention for fear of being too abrasive!

So much has changed in recent years that I have considered ending my participation in collecting – even with all the time and energy I’ve invested in my collection.

I'm sick of being forced fed advocacy babble and slanted/biased reporting. I’ve watched as the NGS has fallen head over heals into this trap since the '70's and have simply gotten tired of it.

Somehow, this “attitude” plays part and parcel into its lower standards…kind of like – globalization means “lower standard of living” as we have known it…don’t you think?

[Scott T. Shier]

Hey Mel,

Your comments made me sort of chuckle, in a wry way of course. I'd hate for you to end your collecting!

Meanwhile, when you refer to biased/slanted reporting, are you referring to the NGS's support of global warming (more accurately, 'climate change') ? Some people don't like that. Or, are you referencing the fact that NGM editorial policy seems to place more importance on access, over comprehensive presentations? I am talking about how they decline to publish anything about the Middle East, China, the Polygamists sects in America that might interfere with advertising revenue and/or business partnerships from those same sources, or lead to a closed door in terms of say, China giving access to NGS writers, photographers?

- Scott

[Melvin L. De Vilbiss]

Short answer - YES!

Long answer - YES, and more!