The appropriate headline here would be "Time Inc. Sells Itself to Meredith Corp., Backed by Koch Brothers". That is the actual headline of this article, and as far as I can tell, there is no inaccuracy in it nor any good reason to have changed it for Hacker News.
Time Inc. Sells Itself to Meredith Corp., Backed by Koch Brothers
111–120 of 151 posts
Re: Time Inc. Sells Itself to Meredith Corp., Backed by Koch Brothers
#112Much like the "world" winners of things like the Superbowl and WWE Wrestling - Time I think is very much seen as an American brand and not much notice is take of things like "Man of the Year" outside of it.
It's a shame it's being bought by this lot though - of course they can make their man of the year whoever the like now, including Trump and other controversial people.
Re: Time Inc. Sells Itself to Meredith Corp., Backed by Koch Brothers
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
If conservative billionaires are alike, the way WSJ has tanked since being bought by Murdoch portends that Time will be a disaster. (For example, it started peddling "Mueller needs to resign" nonsense after the indictments under easily falsifiable excuses.) [See https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/30/murdoch-fox-muelle... ]
What have the WSJ's subscriber numbers done since Murdoch purchased it?
Needs to be viewed also in context to the market.
Re: Time Inc. Sells Itself to Meredith Corp., Backed by Koch Brothers
#114I grew up in a home that subscribed to Time Magazine, and am young to remember how often that brand was touted in advertisements on TV. But it's been a long time since I've associated prestige with that media brand, especially after it was spun off from the actually profitable parts of Time Warner. With the exception of their "Person of the Year" tradition, which draws attention but seems to have as little actual inf…
> Despite that, The New Yorker doesn't seem to have lessened at all in the rate of influential and newsworthy pieces it produces (Rowan Farrow's expose of Harvey Weinstein being one of the more recent notables [1]).
OT - they hinted at this in 2002: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2002/12/16/beauty-and-the...
Re: Time Inc. Sells Itself to Meredith Corp., Backed by Koch Brothers
#115I grew up in a home that subscribed to Time Magazine, and am young to remember how often that brand was touted in advertisements on TV. But it's been a long time since I've associated prestige with that media brand, especially after it was spun off from the actually profitable parts of Time Warner. With the exception of their "Person of the Year" tradition, which draws attention but seems to have as little actual inf…
It doesn't surprise me that the person who led the UK to exit the EU and the person who led a military coup in Turkey would be on the Time shortlist. Indeed, I'd have been shocked if either of them hadn't been on the list.
I'd say that both of them are likely to have a larger impact on the world than Trump, really...
Re: Time Inc. Sells Itself to Meredith Corp., Backed by Koch Brothers
#116Short on content, long on medication ads is how I view Time. Time has suffered from the lack of a differentiated digital content strategy that is compelling. I default to WaPo, NYT, Economist, FinTimes, Atlantic and the BBC.
NYT, Economist and Atlantic are all good. But good God, WaPo has let itself go with HuffPo-tier headlines and hysteria.
NYT, Economist and Atlantic are the ones I'm subscribed to as well. I've tried other publications but they turn me off for one reason or another.
Re: Time Inc. Sells Itself to Meredith Corp., Backed by Koch Brothers
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like the British media, because they don't pretend to be impartial. Impartiality is impossible, so it's better to be honest about that fact than to pretend to be impartial as the American media does.
On the other hand the state sponsored one forces you to pay an involuntary fee and it is not all that balanced a source.
I'll pay a fee all day to have some fraction of the population getting less of their news from the Daily Mail etc.
Let's triple the fee and get some state newspapers and advertising.
Re: Time Inc. Sells Itself to Meredith Corp., Backed by Koch Brothers
#118Last time I read Time magazine I was shocked at the almost childlike simplicity of the content. It reminded me of a magazine we have here for elderly people of minimal education called Ireland’s Own...it does interviews with sweater wearing singers from country towns and articles on the potential historical reality of Fairies...now that I think about it it is a cut above Time.
Re: Time Inc. Sells Itself to Meredith Corp., Backed by Koch Brothers
#119I grew up in a home that subscribed to Time Magazine, and am young to remember how often that brand was touted in advertisements on TV. But it's been a long time since I've associated prestige with that media brand, especially after it was spun off from the actually profitable parts of Time Warner. With the exception of their "Person of the Year" tradition, which draws attention but seems to have as little actual inf…
I think that Time is still a brand that is thought of as being credible which could be troubling if it is turned into propaganda.
However, I think the value is the web site not the actual paper publication. A couple years ago Time ran a story I was interested in and wanted a paper copy. I went to the local grocery store and they didn't have it and then I went to the local chain bookstore and they didn't have it either. A similar thing happened when Sports Illustrated had an article I wanted a paper copy of. What the magazines sections of these stores did have were plenty of crafting and gun magazines (I live in a rural area) and tons of "special issues" about Princess Diana or the Beatles or something. The magazine rack ain't what it used to be.
Re: Time Inc. Sells Itself to Meredith Corp., Backed by Koch Brothers
#120Allegedly, the Koch Brothers don't plan to take an active role in the company. "Steve Lombardo, a spokesman for Koch Industries, also said that the Kochs had no plans to take an active role in the expanded company. “This is a passive financial investment made through our equity development arm,” Mr. Lombardo said. The company’s role in the transaction, he said, was similar to that of a bank." Regardless of what you t…
If conservative billionaires are alike, the way WSJ has tanked since being bought by Murdoch portends that Time will be a disaster. (For example, it started peddling "Mueller needs to resign" nonsense after the indictments under easily falsifiable excuses.) [See https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/30/murdoch-fox-muelle... ]
WSJ has always pedalled some dubious editorials like that, even before acquisition. I’d be curious to know what other differences there are though since they were acquired.