Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Inside the Collapse of the New Republic

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 64 posts

Inside the Collapse of the New Republic

#1

Post by GabrielF00 »

I think I'm exactly the audience that TNR wants. I'm well-educated, make a good living, largely agree with them politically, enjoy long-form journalism, and am familiar with the brand and its history. Yet I don't think I would ever subscribe to TNR. I just see a magazine as something that's going to pile up in my house. I can read more than enough great content online for free. If I was going to subscribe to a magazine, I think that The New Yorker is a lot more interesting than The New Republic. If I was going to subscribe to two magazines, I might pick the Atlantic or another competitor over TNR.

The media has largely portrayed this as Hughes carelessly destroying a renowned and vital institution. Hughes has certainly made some mistakes, but I wonder whether Foer and Wiesetlier were just letting the magazine gradually slide into irrelevance and inevitable death anyway. This is a magazine whose readership has dropped by half since 2000.

If Hughes doesn't want to subsidize a money-losing institution with a declining and aging readership, then isn't it his prerogative as an owner to shake things up? He may have gone about it the wrong way, but ultimately wouldn't the public be better off with a TNR that has an ability to support itself and thrive in the future?

Inside the Collapse of the New Republic
newyorker.com

Re: Inside the Collapse of the New Republic

#4

Post by GabrielF00 »

I think I'm exactly the audience that TNR wants. I'm well-educated, make a good living, largely agree with them politically, enjoy long-form journalism, and am familiar with the brand and its history. Yet I don't think I would ever subscribe to TNR. I just see a magazine as something that's going to pile up in my house. I can read more than enough great content online for free. If I was going to subscribe to a magazine, I think that The New Yorker is a lot more interesting than The New Republic. If I was going to subscribe to two magazines, I might pick the Atlantic or another competitor over TNR. The media has largely portrayed this as Hughes carelessly destroying a renowned and vital institution. Hughes has certainly made some mistakes, but I wonder whether Foer and Wiesetlier were just letting the magazine gradually slide into irrelevance and inevitable death anyway. This is a magazine whose readership has dropped by half since 2000.

If Hughes doesn't want to subsidize a money-losing institution with a declining and aging readership, then isn't it his prerogative as an owner to shake things up? He may have gone about it the wrong way, but ultimately wouldn't the public be better off with a TNR that has an ability to support itself and thrive in the future?

Re: Inside the Collapse of the New Republic

#5

Post by georgeoliver »

As someone not in the business of tech or journalism I'm left to wonder why Hughes didn't anticipate the editorial staff's reaction to Foer's firing.

Going out on a limb, is it possible that tech workers are more likely to go along with the whims of management, and journalists have more stake in their institutions? Or is it that due to the nature of their cultures tech workers have an intrinsic adaptability and journalists are stuck with inflexible traditions?

Re: Inside the Collapse of the New Republic

#6

Post by wonsler »

GabrielF00 wrote: post #4

I think I'm exactly the audience that TNR wants. I'm well-educated, make a good living, largely agree with them politically, enjoy long-form journalism, and am familiar with the brand and its history. Yet I don't think I would ever subscribe to TNR. I just see a magazine as something that's going to pile up in my house. I can read more than enough great content online for free. If I was going to subscribe to a magazi…

His job was to go about it the right way. It doesn't help anyone to write buggy code.

Re: Inside the Collapse of the New Republic

#7

Post by rwallace »

georgeoliver wrote: post #5

As someone not in the business of tech or journalism I'm left to wonder why Hughes didn't anticipate the editorial staff's reaction to Foer's firing. Going out on a limb, is it possible that tech workers are more likely to go along with the whims of management, and journalists have more stake in their institutions? Or is it that due to the nature of their cultures tech workers have an intrinsic adaptability and journ…

At a guess, Hughes is a businessman; he's used to dealing with people with economic motives. From the description, that magazine seems to be a primarily political institution; its staff were in it for the politics, not the money, which probably took Hughes by surprise.

Re: Inside the Collapse of the New Republic

#8

Post by smacktoward »

rwallace wrote: post #7
georgeoliver wrote: post #5

As someone not in the business of tech or journalism I'm left to wonder why Hughes didn't anticipate the editorial staff's reaction to Foer's firing. Going out on a limb, is it possible that tech workers are more likely to go along with the whims of management, and journalists have more stake in their institutions? Or is it that due to the nature of their cultures tech workers have an intrinsic adaptability and journ…

At a guess, Hughes is a businessman; he's used to dealing with people with economic motives. From the description, that magazine seems to be a primarily political institution; its staff were in it for the politics, not the money, which probably took Hughes by surprise.

Nobody with even a nodding acquaintance with The New Republic should have been surprised that its people weren't primarily in it for the money. TNR has been a money-losing proposition for most of its 100-year history. People write for it because of its reputation and audience, not because it pays the most per word.

Re: Inside the Collapse of the New Republic

#9

Post by wmeredith »

This is a fascinating look at someone royally fucking something up. Great read. Although, I'm not sure it was an unavoidable tragedy. The magazine has always lost money and to survive it must have rich patrons. It ran out of them and the only one left wanted to make it something it wasn't. If this hadn't happened it would have a slow death of starved cash flow. I'm not sure if that's better or worse.
Post reply on HN