Newsweek Considered as a Helix of Semi-Precious Stones

Tuesday, June 15 2010

Newsweek Considered as a Helix of Semi-Precious Stones

Of all the characterizations that have been thrown my way since I started writing as the Voice of Newsweek, by far my favorite has been that one, from a Marion Maneker piece on The Big Money, in which he argues that Newsweek should curb this “rogue tumblr.” Because Newsweek last year implemented a new editorial strategy, says Maneker, it should stand silent when some say the plan has not been a success: “you cannot blame your critics for evaluating you on your own self-imposed terms.” Of course, Maneker’s argument conveniently neglects to mention that Newsweek’s editorial shift was accompanied by a shift in business strategy (cut the rate base and reduce costs while trying to get more out of each subscriber, which I still maintain has yet to be proven a failure), but I think it is his assertion that it is somehow inappropriate to respond to criticism that is the most problematic.

Which is to say: I don’t think it is at all touchy, thin-skinned or defensive to want to set the record straight. In fact, given the circumstances, it’s crucial.

For instance: If I were to say “Howard Kurtz has long been a flop, both as a reporter and as a TV personality”, a casual reader might see this and form a poor impression of Mr. Kurtz’s work. Which would be unfair. Unless, of course that claim, which is presented as a fact, is backed up by some actual, empirical, facts. You see how that works, Howard?

The thing that kills you isn’t always the obvious thing. Sometimes what brings you down are the weight of perceptions, fair or not, around you. And that’s why it is vital that Newsweek, not just me, defends itself. People are busy; they don’t have time to read everything carefully, and once they form an opinion about you it’s very hard to change it. So every time someone says without any evidence that “If the Washington Post Company couldn’t make that thing work, no one can”; every time someone tosses off the fictional notion that “Newsweek’s Website has long been a flop” like it’s a mathematical fact; every time someone spouts off some half-assed editorial solution to what is ultimately a business problem; all these these things add up to an unfair picture of the state of Newsweek.

These things damage us, and while I agree that we’ve done a great job of damaging ourselves, all I ask is that the criticism be smart and fair (and much of it has been, by the way; Paid Content has been spot-on in its reporting of our difficult financial state; James Fallows has been thoughtful about the future of magazines like Newsweek; Lee Siegel made some good points in the Observer). I have no problem with people who want to discuss the real problems Newsweek faces. I do object to pieces that in the end amount to little more than name-calling.

Though many would like to portray it this way, Newsweek is more than Jon Meacham (and I stand by my contention that he is being unfairly tarred for all our failings). It is the product every day of the efforts of nearly 400 talented and flawed human beings, each with a personal version of what Newsweek is, and how it should be. And these people are my brothers and sisters, every one, and though I often disagree with them; though I have found certain things Newsweek has done in the past year to be poorly-reasoned, dull, or embarrassingly though unintentionally offensive; though I feel that many of the criticisms aimed at Newsweek’s editorial product in print and on the Web have not been without merit; though all these things are true, I’ll be damned if I don’t stand with my people and let baseless attacks go by unchallenged.

Which brings me back to Maneker, and his kicker: