I would conclude purely based upon initial inspection that the Gadget Show magazine is primarily focused on advertisement, consumer information and generally technology related subject matter (ergo the name “Gadget Show”). Advertisements included will appeal to both children and adults alike, I’m basing this assumption upon the demand for these “gadgets” and the encompassing age range that is inherent with them. A clear example is a T.V; it is safe to assume in this first world country that we reside in that the general population are inclined to believe that a TV is a necessity, a bare essential if you will. Look now at the population of the UK in its entirety, considering the mass quantity of the public buying devices (in this case a TV), it is pretty safe to say that anyone can pick up this magazine and instantaneously find a so-called “gadget” and have an undying urge to purchase it, despite the fact that it will appear antiquated when compared to the inevitable launch of a ‘superior’ product. The process cycles until they die poor, but with a great selection of skip worthy so-called gadgets that in this countries ever developing technological advances would be considered “a good door stop” in about a year’s time.
Let us consider the first of this target audience; a rich and lonely upper class adolescent with no more friends than an isolated turnip in a box, in space. His/her parent(s) will do anything to appease him/ her, and axiomatically when he/ she sees something, the kid gets it as a form of over compensation from an abject paucity of parenting skills, and the kids constant state of abeyance from not having any friends. Then again; I could also deduce that said child could be so over-encumbered with technology that he is regarded as ‘cool’ for the best part of his childhood, but upon reaching puberty he will establish that his gadgets are as worthwhile and pointless as the aforementioned turnip in terms of him having any sexual contact for the foreseeable future. I would deduce that this child would most likely be male, with no other competing siblings/ demonic spawn, most likely has an imaginary friend to compensate for his lack of human contact, is upper or upper-middle class and is generally spoilt. A child that owns a tablet, “smart” phone or any other handheld portable electronic devices will inevitably break it, which implies that unless they are stealing cables from industrial estates and selling it to scrap dealers; the kids parents obviously have disposable income.
To support this theory, I would like to point out that the cover states “50 must have gadgets”, the price of these items range from 200 to 1300 pounds. The language used inside portrays a certain sense of naivety in terms of what it must be like not to have a money tree growing out of their behind, it uses terminology such as “only” and “as little as” before stating some ridiculous price tag.
Another target audience is of course the “mid-life crisis” group. They have disposable income, they are generally middle or upper-middle class, drive a middle of the range sports car, have a hairline that recedes as quickly as they draw money out of their account to buy elaborate new technology to be “down with the kids” and are most likely single. I would also safely assume that they were of a white British ethnicity.
I would say that this magazine (in general) is aimed at the UK population, given the fact that its made in Britain; for White Males either aged 8-15 or 40-50 and generally for the middle, upper middle or upper class. I would say the terminology and language used appeals more towards the technologically adept population, or indeed the older age range of this target audience. The vocabulary used is somewhat extensive, or at least I would consider it a modicum at best when compared to more prestigious magazines.