Notes · Media StudiesUK · A-Levels

Magazines: Mainstream and Alternative Media

Magazines are an in-depth form of Paper 2, studied comparatively across all four framework areas through a contrasting mainstream and alternative (or independent) title. This topic covers the mainstream/alternative distinction, the media language of magazine covers and content, representation and identity, the contrasting industry and audience of mainstream and alternative titles, and a model comparative analysis.

6 sections~21 min reading time2 competenciesLevel Foundation 1 · Standard 3 · Advanced 2

T·111111 / 15

Exam profile

AO1 · Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the set magazine products, the relevant theories and their contextsAO2 · Analyse and compare mainstream and alternative magazines across the framework, evaluate theories and make connections

Operators:analysecompareevaluateapplyto what extenthow far

basic level

AS-Level expects framework analysis of the set magazines and knowledge of the relevant theories.

higher level

The full A-Level requires sustained comparison of a mainstream and an alternative magazine across all four areas, with theory, context and judgement.

Depth

Text

Contents · 6 sections

Magazines: Mainstream and Alternative Media

Mainstream and alternative media#

FoundationAQA 7572/2 MagazinesDfE GCE Media Studies subject content

Mainstream and alternative media

Fig. 1Mainstream and alternative media differ in scale, funding and relationship to power - the contrast that structures the magazines study.

The magazines in-depth study is built on a comparison between mainstream and alternative (or independent) media, and understanding this distinction is the key to the whole topic. Mainstream media are the large-scale, commercial, profit-driven products of established companies, aimed at mass or large niche audiences and operating within dominant industrial and ideological norms; alternative media are smaller-scale, often independent, non-commercial or not-for-profit products that stand outside or against the mainstream, often serving niche, subcultural or oppositional audiences and offering representations and viewpoints the mainstream neglects.

The distinction is not only about size but about relationship to power. Mainstream magazines tend to reproduce dominant values and to serve commercial and advertising interests, while alternative magazines often set out to challenge dominant representations, give voice to marginalised groups, or resist commercial logic - offering a counter-position within the media landscape. Pairing a mainstream and an alternative title therefore stages a comparison not just of two products but of two ways of doing media, which is precisely what makes the study analytically rich.

The comparison illuminates every framework area. In media language, mainstream and alternative titles use the conventions of the magazine form differently (the alternative title may subvert cover conventions); in representation, they construct different identities and values; in industry, they are funded, produced and distributed on entirely different models; and in audience, they target and address contrasting audiences. Running the framework across the contrast is the structure of the whole study.

The alternative title also foregrounds questions of ideology and power that the mainstream can naturalise. Because alternative media consciously position themselves against the mainstream, studying them makes visible the assumptions and interests the mainstream takes for granted - the commercial imperatives, the dominant representations, the ideological norms. This connects the magazines study directly to the representation theories (Hall on power) and the industry theories (Curran and Seaton on concentration and diversity).

For analysis, the mainstream/alternative distinction should organise the whole comparison, with each framework area used to draw out how the two titles differ and why. The strongest answers treat the contrast as meaningful - showing that the alternative title's choices are a deliberate departure from mainstream norms - and relate it to the contexts and the theories, rather than simply noting that one magazine is bigger or glossier than the other.

Worked example

Framing the comparison

Set up a mainstream/alternative comparison of two magazine titles.

Mainstream title
Identify a large, commercial, advertising-funded title serving a mass or large niche audience within dominant norms.
Alternative title
Identify a smaller, independent title serving a niche or oppositional audience and challenging dominant representations or commercial logic.
The stakes
Note that the contrast is about relationship to power, not just size - the alternative defines itself against the mainstream.
The plan
Signal that the comparison will run the framework across the two to reveal how and why they differ.

Result: The comparison is framed as a meaningful contrast of two ways of doing media, ready to be run across the framework - the foundation of the magazines study.

Typical mistakes

Treating the mainstream/alternative distinction as merely about size or production values rather than about relationship to power and dominant norms.
Comparing the two titles superficially without running the framework across the contrast.

Active revision

Explain the difference between mainstream and alternative media and why the magazines study pairs a title of each.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: GCE AS and A level subject content for media studies (Department for Education)

Media language of magazines#

StandardAQA 7572/2 MagazinesDfE GCE Media Studies subject content

Magazine cover conventions

Fig. 2The cover conventions - masthead, image, coverlines, layout, mode of address - work as a system to construct the magazine's identity.

The media language of magazines is concentrated, above all, in the cover, whose conventions do enormous work: the masthead (the title, in a consistent house style), the central cover image (typically a model or celebrity in a mainstream title), the coverlines (the teasers arranged around the image), the main coverline, and the overall layout, colour palette and typography. These conventions are read as a system - together they construct the magazine's identity, its mode of address and a promise of what the reader will find inside - and the cover is a magazine's single most important act of media language.

Semiotics is the primary tool. The cover is dense with signs whose connotations construct the magazine's meaning: the model's expression, styling and gaze; the colour palette; the typography; the register of the coverlines. Barthes's denotation, connotation and myth decode these - a glossy mainstream cover may naturalise the myth that a certain look or lifestyle is aspirational and attainable - while anchorage (the coverlines fixing the meaning of the image) organises the reading. Decoding the cover semiotically is the core media-language skill for magazines.

Mode of address is especially important in magazines because they build an intimate, ongoing relationship with a reader. The direct address of a cover model's gaze, the inclusive or aspirational 'you' of the coverlines, and the register (confiding, authoritative, playful, radical) hail a specific reader and construct a sense of shared identity. Mainstream and alternative titles use mode of address very differently - the mainstream often flattering and aspirational, the alternative often challenging, ironic or solidaristic - so mode of address is a key comparative point.

The mainstream/alternative contrast is sharp in media language. A mainstream glossy typically deploys the cover conventions in polished, expected ways to construct aspiration and desirability; an alternative or independent title may deliberately subvert those conventions - an unconventional cover image, a rejection of the polished house style, coverlines that challenge rather than flatter - to signal its oppositional stance. Analysing how each title uses or subverts the conventions is a central comparative task, and Neale's repetition and difference can frame it.

For analysis, magazine media language should be decoded through the cover conventions, semiotics and mode of address, with the mainstream/alternative contrast foregrounded and the theories applied to specific features. Because magazines are an in-depth form, the language analysis must connect to representation (the cover constructs representations), industry (the polished mainstream cover reflects a commercial, advertising-funded model) and audience (the mode of address hails a target reader) - the synoptic reach the extended responses require.

Worked example

Decoding a mainstream cover

Decode the media language of a mainstream glossy magazine cover.

Image and gaze
A polished cover model with a direct gaze connotes aspiration and hails the reader intimately.
Coverlines and anchorage
Aspirational coverlines ('your best...') anchor the image to a promise of self-improvement (Barthes).
House style and myth
The consistent, glossy house style naturalises the myth that a certain lifestyle is desirable and attainable.
Connect
The polished conventions reflect a commercial, advertising-funded model and target an aspirational reader - language linked to industry and audience.

Result: The cover is decoded through its conventions, semiotics and mode of address and connected to industry and audience - the model magazine media-language analysis.

Typical mistakes

Listing cover elements without decoding their connotations and how they construct the magazine's identity and address.
Missing how an alternative title deliberately subverts the conventions rather than simply doing them 'badly'.

Active revision

Analyse how the cover of a magazine uses (or subverts) the conventions of the form to construct meaning and address a reader.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: AQA AS and A-level Media Studies (7572) specification (AQA)

Representation and identity in magazines#

StandardAQA 7572/2 MagazinesDfE GCE Media Studies subject content

Magazines and identity

Fig. 3Magazines construct representations that offer identity 'tools' (Gauntlett); mainstream titles tend to reproduce dominant norms, alternative titles to challenge them.

Magazines are powerful constructors of identity: they do not just represent groups but offer readers models of who to be, making them a prime site for both the representation and the identity theories. A mainstream lifestyle title constructs and sells an aspirational identity - a way of looking, consuming and living - that the reader is invited to adopt; an alternative title may construct a subcultural, political or oppositional identity that resists mainstream norms. Analysing the identities on offer, and whose values they encode, is central to the magazines study.

Hall's theory of representation and stereotyping is the base tool: magazines construct representations of gender, age, class, ethnicity and lifestyle that reduce, essentialise and naturalise, often reproducing dominant, commercially convenient images (Hall's link between stereotyping and power). Gauntlett's identity theory complements this: readers use the magazine's representations as 'tools' and resources for constructing their own identity, picking and mixing from the models on offer - a more active account that fits the way readers engage with magazines.

Gender representation is a particular focus, and the feminist theories apply richly. van Zoonen's analysis of the display of women's bodies as spectacle and the construction of gender through discourse, hooks's insistence on intersecting oppression and the politics of representation, and Butler's account of gender performativity all illuminate how magazines construct femininity and masculinity - and how an alternative or feminist title might challenge the mainstream's gendered display. Gilroy's post-colonial theory applies where race and ethnicity are represented.

The mainstream/alternative contrast is at its most pointed in representation. Mainstream titles tend to construct aspirational, commercially convenient, often narrow representations and identities that reproduce dominant norms; alternative titles frequently set out to challenge these - offering diverse, marginalised or oppositional representations, refusing the aspirational-consumerist model, and giving voice to groups the mainstream neglects. Comparing the representations and identities the two titles construct is a central and evaluative comparative task.

For analysis, magazine representation should be read as the construction of identities as well as images, with Hall, Gauntlett and the gender and ethnicity theorists applied to specific covers and content, and the mainstream/alternative contrast foregrounded and evaluated. Because magazines are an in-depth form, the representation analysis should connect to media language (the representations are built from the cover conventions), industry (commercial pressure shapes mainstream representation) and audience (readers use the representations for identity) - the synoptic connections the study rewards.

Worked example

Comparing constructed identities

Compare the identities constructed by a mainstream and an alternative magazine.

Mainstream identity
The mainstream title constructs an aspirational, consumerist identity through polished, conventional representations (Hall on dominant norms; van Zoonen on display).
Alternative identity
The alternative title constructs a subcultural or political identity, offering diverse or oppositional representations that resist the mainstream.
Apply identity theory
Gauntlett: readers use each title's representations as identity resources, but the resources on offer differ sharply.
Evaluate and judge
Weigh how far each reinforces or challenges dominant norms, and connect the difference to their contrasting industries and audiences.

Result: The comparison analyses the identities each title constructs with Hall, van Zoonen and Gauntlett and judges reinforcement versus challenge - the evaluative representation task the study sets.

Typical mistakes

Analysing magazine representations as images only, missing that magazines construct identities readers are invited to adopt.
Assuming the alternative title is straightforwardly 'better' rather than analysing how its representations differ and why.

Active revision

Compare how a mainstream and an alternative magazine represent gender or lifestyle, applying and evaluating a representation theory.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: GCE AS and A level subject content for media studies (Department for Education)

The magazine industry#

AdvancedAQA 7572/2 MagazinesDfE GCE Media Studies subject content

Mainstream and alternative magazine industries

Fig. 4Funding is the crux: advertising funding pulls the mainstream towards mass, advertiser-friendly content; independent funding frees the alternative for oppositional content.

The industrial contrast between mainstream and alternative magazines is stark and explains much about the products. Mainstream magazines are typically produced by large publishing companies, funded chiefly by advertising (and cover price), aimed at large audiences, and subject to the commercial imperative to attract advertisers and readers - which shapes their content towards advertiser-friendly, aspirational, mass-appeal material. This is a clear case for Hesmondhalgh (managing risk through established formats and large audiences) and Curran and Seaton (concentration and commercial pressure).

Alternative and independent magazines operate on entirely different industrial models. They are often produced by small, independent or not-for-profit organisations, funded by subscription, cover price, donation or grants rather than mass advertising, and aimed at niche audiences - which frees them from some commercial pressures and allows content the mainstream could not carry, but also constrains their scale, resources and reach. The industrial model directly enables the alternative title's oppositional or diverse content, connecting industry to representation.

The funding model is the crux of the contrast. Advertising funding pulls the mainstream title towards content and representations that suit advertisers and attract a mass, advertiser-desirable audience; reader-funding or not-for-profit models free the alternative title to prioritise its mission or its niche audience over advertiser appeal. Understanding how each title is funded therefore explains a great deal about its content, representations and address - the industrial roots of the products' differences.

The wider industrial context is the decline of print and the rise of digital. Both mainstream and alternative magazines face the collapse of print advertising and circulation and the migration of readers and revenue online, and their responses (digital editions, paywalls, membership, social media) are part of the contemporary study. Curran and Seaton's scepticism about digital democratisation and Hesmondhalgh's account of risk apply to how magazines are adapting to this disrupted, digital environment.

For analysis, the magazine industry should be read for how funding, ownership and scale shape each title, with the industry theories applied and the mainstream/alternative contrast foregrounded. Because magazines are an in-depth form, the industry analysis should explain the products' language, representations and audience address - showing, for instance, how advertising funding shapes the mainstream title's aspirational content, and how independent funding enables the alternative title's oppositional stance - the synoptic connection the study rewards.

Worked example

Funding shaping content

Explain how the funding models of a mainstream and an alternative magazine shape their content.

Mainstream funding
Advertising funding requires a large, advertiser-desirable audience, pulling content towards aspirational, mass-appeal, advertiser-friendly material (Hesmondhalgh, Curran and Seaton).
Alternative funding
Reader, subscription or grant funding frees the title from advertiser pressure, allowing niche, oppositional or diverse content the mainstream could not carry.
Connect to representation
The mainstream's funding explains its conventional representations; the alternative's funding enables its challenging ones - industry shaping representation.
Contextualise
Both adapt to the decline of print and the shift online, testing their models.

Result: The analysis explains each title's content and representations through its funding model with the industry theories - the synoptic industry reading the study requires.

Typical mistakes

Ignoring the funding model, which is the crux of the mainstream/alternative industrial contrast.
Describing the industry without connecting it to the products' content, representations and audience.

Active revision

Analyse how the contrasting industrial models of a mainstream and an alternative magazine shape their content and representations.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: GCE AS and A level subject content for media studies (Department for Education)

Magazine audiences#

StandardAQA 7572/2 MagazinesDfE GCE Media Studies subject content

Magazine audiences: mainstream and alternative

Fig. 5Mainstream titles target a mass, aspirational audience; alternative titles a niche, committed one - shaping and shaped by their industry and content.

Magazine audiences are defined by the mainstream/alternative contrast as much as everything else. Mainstream titles target a large or large-niche audience defined by demographics and, especially, psychographics (a lifestyle, an aspiration), and address them in a flattering, inclusive or aspirational mode; alternative titles target a smaller, defined niche - a subculture, a political community, a marginalised group - and address them as insiders or fellow-travellers. Identifying each title's target audience with evidence, and how its mode of address hails them, is the base audience task.

The uses and gratifications model explains magazine appeal well. Readers use magazines for information (advice, news of a field), personal identity (models and reinforcement for the self - strong in lifestyle titles), social interaction (shared talking points, a sense of community) and diversion (pleasurable browsing). Mainstream and alternative titles offer these gratifications differently - the mainstream often foregrounding identity and diversion, the alternative foregrounding information, community and a sense of belonging to an oppositional group.

Reception theory applies with force, because magazine representations and values are decoded variously by readers. Hall's dominant, negotiated and oppositional readings capture how a reader may embrace, partly accept or reject a magazine's aspirational or political messages from their own social position; and the alternative title deliberately courts an audience likely to give an oppositional reading to mainstream norms. Gauntlett's identity theory again complements reception, since readers actively use the magazine's representations as identity resources.

The audience contrast connects to industry and representation. The mainstream title's mass, advertiser-desirable audience is the reason for its advertising-funded model and its aspirational content; the alternative title's niche, committed audience is the basis of its reader-funded model and its oppositional content. So the audience each title serves both shapes and is shaped by its industry and its representations - a tight synoptic loop that the in-depth study is designed to reveal.

For analysis, magazine audiences should be read for how each title targets and addresses them, how they receive and use it (uses and gratifications, Hall, Gauntlett), and how the mainstream and alternative audiences contrast, with the connections to industry and representation drawn out. Because magazines are an in-depth form, the audience analysis should be developed and connected across the framework, completing the synoptic reading the extended responses require.

Worked example

Contrasting magazine audiences

Compare how a mainstream and an alternative magazine target and address their audiences.

Mainstream audience
A large, psychographically defined, aspirational audience, hailed by a flattering, inclusive mode of address; gratifications of identity and diversion.
Alternative audience
A niche, committed audience (a subculture or political community), hailed as insiders; gratifications of information, community and belonging.
Reception
The mainstream courts a dominant reading of its aspirational content; the alternative courts an oppositional reading of mainstream norms (Hall).
Connect
Each audience underpins the title's funding model and content - a synoptic loop of audience, industry and representation.

Result: The comparison contrasts the two audiences, applies gratifications and reception, and connects to industry and representation - the model in-depth audience analysis.

Typical mistakes

Identifying a target audience vaguely without evidence from the title's mode of address and content.
Analysing targeting only and neglecting how audiences receive and use the magazine (reception, gratifications).

Active revision

Compare the target audiences and mode of address of a mainstream and an alternative magazine, applying an audience theory.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: GCE AS and A level subject content for media studies (Department for Education)

Worked comparative magazine analysis#

AdvancedAQA 7572/2 MagazinesDfE GCE Media Studies subject content

Comparative magazine analysis by framework area

Fig. 6A comparative magazine analysis runs both titles through each framework area with theory and context, into a judged, synoptic reading.

The magazines in-depth study culminates in comparative, synoptic extended responses running the framework across a mainstream and an alternative title, and the worked example below models the method on a representative pairing. Because the set titles change with each specification cycle, the method is what matters: organise the comparison by framework area, foreground the mainstream/alternative contrast, apply and evaluate the theories, integrate context, and reach a judgement.

The comparison must be structured by framework area and genuinely comparative. Take each area - media language, representation, industry, audience - and compare the two titles within it, drawing out how and why they differ and relating the difference to the mainstream/alternative distinction. This avoids the common weakness of describing one title in full and then the other, and it lets the two titles illuminate each other, which is the whole point of the pairing.

Theory and evaluation run throughout: Barthes and Neale for the cover language, Hall, Gauntlett, van Zoonen, hooks and Butler for representation and identity, Hesmondhalgh and Curran and Seaton for the industry, and uses and gratifications, Hall and Gauntlett for audience. Each theory is applied to specific evidence in each title and evaluated, and the mainstream/alternative contrast often sharpens the evaluation by testing a theory against two very different cases.

Context and connection give the comparison its synoptic depth. The titles' contexts (social, cultural, historical, industrial) explain their differences; and the framework areas connect (the alternative title's independent funding enabling its oppositional representations, courting a niche oppositional audience) so that the analysis reveals the products as coherent wholes shaped by their relationship to the mainstream. The judgement should weigh what the comparison reveals about mainstream and alternative media.

The worked example below models a comparative magazine analysis structured by framework area, with theory, evaluation, context and a judgement. It is the template for the in-depth magazines extended responses, and it demonstrates the point of the study: a mainstream and an alternative title, known across the framework with their theories and contexts, can be compared to reveal how the magazine form makes meaning, constructs identity, operates as an industry and serves its audience - and how alternative media offer a counter-position to the mainstream.

Worked example

Comparative magazine essay plan

Plan a synoptic comparison of a mainstream and an alternative magazine. (Apply to your own current CSPs.)

Media language
Compare how each uses or subverts cover conventions (Barthes, Neale), the alternative deliberately departing from mainstream polish.
Representation
Compare the identities and representations each constructs (Hall, Gauntlett, van Zoonen), evaluating reinforcement versus challenge.
Industry
Compare their funding and scale (advertising-funded mass vs independent niche; Hesmondhalgh, Curran and Seaton).
Audience and judgement
Compare targeting and reception (gratifications, Hall), integrate context, and judge what the pairing reveals about mainstream and alternative media.

Result: A framework-structured comparative plan foregrounding the mainstream/alternative contrast with theory, evaluation, context and judgement - the model magazines extended response, to apply to any current pair.

Typical mistakes

Describing one magazine fully and then the other, with no genuine area-by-area comparison.
Covering only one or two framework areas in an in-depth answer that requires synoptic breadth.

Active revision

Plan a comparative, synoptic essay on a mainstream and an alternative magazine across the framework, with theory, context and a judgement.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: GCE AS and A level subject content for media studies (Department for Education)

References & sources

Sources

Department for Education

GCE AS and A level subject content for media studies

AQA

AQA AS and A-level Media Studies (7572) specification

Magazines: Mainstream and Alternative Media

6 sections~21 min reading time2 competenciesLevel Foundation 1 · Standard 3 · Advanced 2

Magazines: Mainstream and Alternative Media

Key points

Framing the comparison

Key points

Decoding a mainstream cover

Key points

Comparing constructed identities

Key points

Funding shaping content

Key points

Contrasting magazine audiences

Key points

Comparative magazine essay plan

Sources

Magazines: Mainstream and Alternative Media

Key points

Framing the comparison

Key points

Decoding a mainstream cover

Key points

Comparing constructed identities

Key points

Funding shaping content

Key points

Contrasting magazine audiences

Key points

Comparative magazine essay plan

Sources