Stephen King, I think, is an excellent writer. His subjects are hard to read, in fact I had to quit reading him with the one where the woman held the writer hostage, just got too much but his earlier books are pretty much...tho scary....I think outstanding. He also wrote On Writing or something like that, which is really one of the best books I have read, about the art of writing.
But I got our copy of Newsweek today and am stunned to see it's up for sale! And another one bites the dust. The editor is somewhat defensive, (he sounds something like me, actually: we're doing a quality job here, we're doing the right thing)..... (he actually says they're holding up democracy, or something like that ) etc., and we still have the magazine in our hands, (apparently something of a miracle) and the history of the magazine, but I myself was considering canceling the subscription.
Why?
Time is doing it better. I do notice a subtle switch in this latest Newsweek back to actually covering the news. Time used to be a sensationalist biased type rag thing, no longer.
Newsweek has become Op Ed Extreme, everything, the entire MAGAZINE except for the token short news items in the front, this or that in China or Laos or something, about 1/3 column each, everything else in the ENTIRE magazine, or 89 percent of it, was, until this last issue, a piece on something, an editorial opinion, extremely well written, sometimes provocative, sometimes insider views of this or that aspect. The problem IS I may not care to read that particular topic today. I may want to learn more in depth about the news events of the day. THAT they did THIS time with the "Broadway Bomber," or maybe "Incompetent" would be a better word, but it may be too late. In the past it's just been whatever topic this or that pundit or expert would care to write on.
One page each. Pundits and Talking Heads. Beautifully written op ed. That's not why I buy a news magazine, and apparently it's not why a lot of people did. They should rename it Literate Op Ed Week.
Even in their CW area (conventional wisdom, arrows up or down for this or that person in the public eye) they say we'll carry on here unless you're a billionaire who wants to buy us.
Amazing. If I were a billionaire, the talking heads would talk online with one featured in the magazine and a link to the others and the news and the background of the news would be in the magazine. They must think we get all our news from the 50 second sound bytes on CNN or something, or Katie Couric or the ever shorter articles in the paper.
They missed this one, they changed the format as we've noted here, and it did not work: there's no need to be defensive, now they are up for sale or gone.
Is this a good or bad sign, I wonder idly?