Centralized Printing:  Where Are We Going

Now that we've responded viscerally, let's look realistically at Mensa newsletter bulk printing and mailing.

The common knowledge first: Scott Rainey (RVC 8) floated the idea of combining production and mailing of all monthly local group newsletters from a central location. The idea was to save time and money. Another benefit would be labor savings to groups, particularly those smaller ones whose newsletters aren't printed and finished (folded, collated, stapled) by a printer.

As a "computer person," Scott wanted to tie the advantages of recent "printing on demand" electronic advances to the concept of group-printing numerous computer files (newsletters). A mass mailing would also then be logical. Bulk printing and mailing, if it worked, would indeed save time and money.

His idea arrived smack in the middle of debate about the National Office producing a variety of new handbooks, ASIEs, and Minimum Standard Bylaws. The AMC's current interest in Risk Management and its fear of being sued added fuel to the perception that newsletter content management was under consideration. In context, Centralized Printing was viewed as another "Big Brother" project, especially since it emanated from a sitting RVC.

Scott's initial step was to (unofficially) poll how many groups favored centralized printing, without attaching a working hypothesis, financially justified. There were two immediate reactions — emotional (potential loss of editorial control by local groups, standardization, elimination of friendly fold, staple & mutilate parties) and practical (unanswered questions about stricter deadlines, production/mailing times, and overall cost effectiveness).

Addressing the `emotional' issue, Tyger Gilbert (AMC Communications Officer) had to declare: "NO ONE on the AMC has ever expressed the idea that a local group newsletter should be reviewed by anyone other than members of the local group itself" and "There is no desire whatsoever on the part of the AMC to control what local groups have in their newsletters."

The fear of overall `editorial control' was overblown from the get-go. Compulsory participation was never proposed. Most of the `big groups' wouldn't benefit from the plan and therefore wouldn't partake. Also, the concept of someone in Fort Worth studying newsletters monthly for subversive comment is ludicrous, but hey, we're Mensans and AMC-bashing isn't yet prohibited, so …

Practically, the proposal ran into a raft of problems. The only machine capable of executing the proposal is an automobile-size Xerox Docutech — a $250,000 high-speed laser printer, needing a highly skilled operator. A Docutech connected to a computer can print/copy straight from computer files. It can simultaneously imprint individual names and addresses from another file. After printing/copying, it can fold, collate and staple. It does "the whole enchilada." At present, the Docutech is unique.

To use a Docutech, Mensa would have to buy, house and maintain this machine, plus supplies. Staff would have to be trained. A forklift would be needed. A truck would have to take the newsletters for mailing…and so on. Alternatively, Mensa could contract with a copy/print business that has the infrastructure and is prepared to do all the work at an acceptable price.

Files from Mensa editors would have to be partially standardized to simplify production and hold production costs down. The same computer software program would have to be bought for many chapters and the users taught to operate that software. Unfortunately, permitting different paper colors or sheet sizes could materially increase production time and cost.

After production, everything is mailed, using the U.S. Postal Service (USPS). Mailing all the newsletters together does not appreciably reduce administrative problems. Much more important is the realization that bulk-mailing newsletters nationwide won't save money, a major setback for the plan. The reasons are complex. Essentially, our distribution is too widespread. Finally, — duh — compared to local mailings, most magazines mailed from a central location would take longer to arrive.

The proposed project is enormous in scope and economically unproven. Without participation from the large groups, it is unworkable.

Where does that leave us? Probably where the original plan should have gone — simply encouraging "electronic printing," teaching editors about computer files that can be e-mailed to local copy shops or put on a disk and mailed, saving time and car expenses. There would be some (voluntary) homogenization and cost savings. Diversity would remain.

And who knows where electronic printing is going? The USPS itself is not standing still. Maybe someday soon it will develop a mail piece to its own specifications that will encourage uniformity in return for substantial time and cost savings. Then we could start this whole debate again.

— Brian Bloch
     bloxmail@juno.com

[Ed. Note: Several of the Region 6 newsletters have gone to digital printing, using a single, Mensan-owned, copy shop in Texas. The plan is entirely voluntary, there is no intermediary between the individual editor and the print shop, and, because there are still a limited number of groups using the plan, there are no queues that could slow down production or create a need for earlier deadlines. We thank the Neemidges of Lonestar Mensa for bringing this print shop to our attention and RVC 6, Dan Wilterding, for publicizing this to his region. For more information, contact Dan Wilterding at rvc6@us.mensa.org or 817-573-4454.]