ADVERTISEMENT



Is it Time for Time to Scale Back its Frequency?

A case for going—gasp!—quarterly.


John Brady By John Brady
07/07/2008 -13:13 PM






Does anyone here remember that wonderful year 1996, when Time magazine did a redesign that caused a reader revolt? Well, I remember it well. One element in the failed repositioning of the newsweekly was a recent staffer, Joel Stein, who was the magazine's novelty item just before the collapse. Stein specialized in news lite—hot dog eating contests, stuff like that.

When the magazine regrouped, Stein was missing in action.

Now, under the editorship of Richard Stengel (who signs his Editor's welcome column "Rick"), Joel Stein is not only back; he is riding higher than ever as the magazine sinks to new lows. In a recent issue (July 7), he writes The Awesome Column on the ordeals of getting an album by Guns n' Roses lead singer Axl Rose by downloading nine tracks from a blog. "I play it all the time, everywhere," writes Stein. "This is despite the fact that I don't like Guns n' Roses or heavy metal. Which is far outweighed by the fact that I really like having things that everyone else wants." (Time directs readers to Stein's "track-by-track review" at time.com/gnr). "Even if piracy seems unfair, megafans aren't going to stop themselves," Stein concludes. "Record companies will have to learn that giving music previews away—just as Google gives away its searches—in exchange for ads, sponsorship and merchandise is the new business model."

Elsewhere, in the Life department of the same issue, Stein reports on another big news event: McDonald's new Southern Style chicken biscuit on the breakfast menu. I mean, we aren't trivializing the news are we? I mean, like, what's more controversial in journalism today than chicken for breakfast. "But it is good," Stein says. "The biscuit is soft and buttery, and while I don't love chicken, this is at least clearly decent, non-McNugget chicken, boldly presented without sauce."

Look, Stein is Stein. I'm not picking on him so much as I am wondering why Time turns over so much of its space and its reputation to someone so frivolous and unfunny (though they are probably rolling in the aisles at the magazine). Joel Stein isn't the problem here. The real problem is Time's judgment from on high.

Elsewhere in the Stengelized Time we find two "new" features—"The Skimmer," which reviews books briefly, then recommends either “Read, Skim or Toss”; and "Pop Chart," a seismograph-like charting that labels people and events as Shocking, Predictable, or Shockingly Predictable. Both of these departments resemble longstanding features in New York magazine—mini-reviews that advise readers to Buy the Book, or Wait for Paperback; and the fabulous Approval Matrix, a "deliberately oversimplified guide to who falls where on our taste hierarchies": Highbrow or Lowbrow, Brilliant or Despicable.

Meanwhile, while the world winces, Time's lead story on the oil crisis is "10 Things You Can Like About $4 Gas." "Pricey gas is mostly just economic pain," is the subhead. "But beyond the agony at the pump, life is getting a little better in ways we may not notice." Those little unnoticed things include (duh) less traffic, less pollution, fewer traffic deaths, and less obesity. "People walk more, bike more and eat out less when gas is pricey," observes astute Time journalist Amand Ripley (with additional reporting by Maya Curry).

OK, so what do we have here? "Business, more than any other occupation is a continual dealing with the future," observed Henry Luce, Time Inc.’s legendary founder. "It is a continual calculation, and instinctive exercise in foresight." Ah, yes ... if only Henry were around today, he would die.

U.S. News & World Report is cutting its schedule to biweekly. And now Time, the greatest newsmagazine ever, is in freefall. Readers are bailing, advertising is down (some 30 percent or more when last checked), and one senses that staff resumes are being updated as this is writ. Clearly, the redesign, relaunch and restaffing has been a disaster. The editorial marketing from on high reminds me of the launch of the "new Coke." (If you remember 1996, you will remember that debacle, too.)

Accordingly, here are my predictions for the coming six months:

1. Time magazine to go quarterly. Editorial director John Huey announces "Rick" Stengel to edit new publication, Time for Kids!
2. Joel Stein leaves "to pursue other interests," including a Hollywood development deal with Adam Sandler.
3. Fox Entertainment and Rupert Murdoch Productions announce purchase of screenplay "Time Out—Way Way Out" by Joel Stein. Steve Carrell stars as the befuddled editor who plots to destroy a magazine—and get kicked upstairs, finally able to get that second home in Switzerland—by dumbing it down with frivolous writing and no reporting whatsoever. Jim Carrey co-stars as the slacker columnist who can't believe he is paid ("plus T&E expenses!") for writing such crap. "My parents still don't know what I do for a living!" he admits in a tender moment with mentor (Dom DeLuise in a cameo role). When the magazine fails, Carrey sits by the phone awaiting job offers. "I'm thinking maybe The New Yorker," he tells the bartender.

Director Mel Brooks says he is considering a soundtrack by Guns ‘N’ Roses for the movie. "Even though I don't like heavy metal, it works nicely with the 'way out' theme."

RELATED LINKS


John Brady By John Brady -- John is an editorial columnist for FOLIO: magazine. He is former editor-in-chief at Boston Magazine, Writer's Digest, and founding editor of The Artist's Magazine. Currently he is visiting professional at Scripps School of Journalism, Ohio University. You can reach him at his web site – http://www.johnbrady.info.

COMMENTS/DISCUSS: 17

Post Comment / Discuss This Blog - Info/Rules

You just dated yourself.
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 08:40.

Your column was snarkier than a Joel Stein Special...don't be such a hater. Focus on things that matter.
Time Magazine
Submitted by Jim Kelly on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 09:53.

Who cares. The magazine, and unfunny writer J.S., is irrelevant. Work for Sandler? J.S. is so weak he couldn't get a 1/2 hour cartoon show on the air. He has as much depth as Time Warner's other great marketing experiment, Anderson Cooper. Goodbye, Time Magazine. RIP. Guess it's time for Ann Moore, John Huey and the rest of those fools to rest on their multi-million retirement accounts while the real journalists in that company get kicked to the curb. And memo to "Rick": lay off the botox, it makes your forehead look too smooth. . . . .
The Truth shall make us free
Submitted by Dave In Texas on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 10:11.

No. Mr. Brady didn't date himself. He simply expressed the entwined tautologies that a.)Time has lost its way and b.) that Joel Stein's observations are spectacularly unfunny. Time Magazine has become the Ladies Home Companion for would-be hipsters, while Stein is the Andy Rooney of his generation.
10 Things You Can Like About John Brady's Screed
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 10:17.

John Brady.....really? Time Magazine's ad rates and circulation are down because of Joel Stein, really?? Look, I think Stein is often amusing and rarely remarkable, but you sir have unintentionally made him far more important than he actually is. But then, I can't imagine anyone riding herd over Writer's Digest or The Artist's Magazine would necessarily "get" someone like Stein. Again, I don't love Stein, but I at least understand what he brings to the table. That you cast Stein as the poster boy of What's Wrong With Time Magazine demonstrates a stunning lack of awareness of the evolving media landscape.
An end of an era
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 10:28.

Time was a wonderful publication, and it still could be. The problem is there aren't any readers for it. American media consumers just keep getting dumber and dumber. Of the intellectuals, the younger population that Stein writes to is increasingly online, and the rest is choosing other means of their news and analysis. So whatever Time does at this point editorially to increase its sales and subscriptions is out of sheer desperation. It's a shame really. Some non-profit oughtta buy the staffs of all the newsmagazines and keep some combined form of them going just as a public service. ;-)
Unfair
Submitted by The Editorialiste on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 11:35.

I think this column is written unfairly, because it rounds up several unrelated points to make one argument. The current design of Time? I think it's fantastically eye-catching. Joel Stein? Hate him if you'd like, but I think he's essential. If unique elements like him weren't in Time, no one would read it anyway -- people get their wartime news from the newspaper and other up-to-date outlets. Time's strength is not coverage, it's analysis. You make a valid point that perhaps Time's lightweight coverage has gone too far. But as long as they can keep wrapping excellent long form journalism in the saccharine fun of lighter fare (after all, the "time" that Time is supposed to cover is equal parts Britney as Baghdad, whether you like it or not), they're going to sell a lot of magazines and keep people's attention. Just because Stein's byline is all over the magazine doesn't mean it's only for his "regular guy" column. Just so long as Time doesn't have long form analysis of Shiloh Jolie-Pitt, we'll be OK. Oh -- and if drawing inspiration from New York magazine is wrong, I don't want to be right. All the best, The Editorialiste http://editorialiste.blogspot.com/
Spot On
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 12:20.

Mr. Brady nails it. Rick Stengel has utterly ruined Time. Of course, all newsmagazines are in tough straits at the moment, but Stengel killed Time when he took over and decided -- brilliantly -- that he'd cut the reporting budget and spend the money on high-priced columnists and cultural observers. Very smart: add more of the fact-free bloviating that's available everywhere online, and ditch the fact-generating reporting that few publications are doing these days. He's essentially turned Time into a silly, frivolous blog.
Paying for Partisanship
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 12:21.

I think the problem with Time and certain other publications is that sometime in the 90s they decided to go blatantly left wing, pretending that their opinions were actual news. They, and others, seem to have forgotten that Americans can think for themselves. Whether you are liberal or conservative is your business, but when publications shove their politics down your throat pretending to deliver hard news, those mags should expect be thrown up on...or thrown out. I write for a pub that is thriving...THRIVING in this economy, but the publisher insists on nonpartisanship. That's class!
Important Correction
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 12:23.

New Coke was introduced in 1985, not 1996.
Stein's awesome, broseph
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 12:48.

If you look at his work from Time, Entertainment Weekly and the LA Times as a whole, Joel Stein has a great track record. Even he probably wouldn't say that everything he's ever written is gold. (I hope he wouldn't.) In reference to puns, Edgar Allen Poe once said something along the lines of "those who most dislike them are those who are least able to utter them." I think something similar could be said about unfunny pundit types who dislike, or can't understand, humor and the folks who write it. P.S. Loved your work on the Brady Bunch.
This doesn't sound like late 90's Time
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 15:09.

Wait, when did the '96 redesign fail? Because I was at Time through the early naughts and Stein was riding high: He was popular with readers and well-liked by management. With that and the New Coke flub--plus the fact that "Time for Kids" can't be a joke prediction because it exists--John Brady just doesn't sound like he knows what he's talking about or like he did any research. Which is sort funny, if you think about it.
Shouldn't you check your facts?
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 15:18.

Re your snarky last line, in fact Stein has already written for The New Yorker. (see http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/08/22/050822sh_shouts). Stein helps leaven a mostly serious newsmagazine in a very serious news climate, a lot of readers love his work, and Stengel is smart to make such good use of him.
John's right. TIME Magazine
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 16:59.

John's right. TIME Magazine would be so much better, better read and more profitable if it were exactly the way it was in 1958, when he read it. Nothing should change. TIME should be imperious and important and drone on, exactly like the old days. The old ways were the the best ways, which is why Time and Newsweek and USN&WR are kicking ass, right John?
To be fair ...
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 17:36.

Brady seems to be suggesting that if you remember 1996, you probably remember when New Coke appeared. He's not saying they came out the same year.
Spot on
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 07/08/2008 - 21:08.

Spot on is right on. The decision to get rid of the people doing great, unusual, and worthy things and pay fortunes to people to say the same boring, run-of-the-mill stuff as everyone else was as bone-headed a bit of management as is possible.
Brady is right
Submitted by Anonymous on Fri, 07/11/2008 - 23:32.

Time has gone down in quality, and the latest issue, with those Stein examples mentioned by Brady, truly back up what he is saying. They were God-awful and not funny at all, not even culturally relevant. Stein was such a disaster at Entertainment Weekly he was there for like, what, a week? He bounces from magazine to magazine leaving a boring trail of columns. Then he goes on crappy TV shows to talk about the 80s or some other pop-related stuff. Give it a rest dude. And Time, seems like you're running out of it.
SPOT ON, My Good Man!
Submitted by Lord Fakingston I Presume on Sat, 07/12/2008 - 00:24.

"Spot On"?! While you're getting your kicks in on someone's writing style, can I just ask when you adopted the affectation of using "spot on"? Unless you spent your formative years in London, the use of "spot on" is laughable.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.



RECENTLY in Editorial dots icon

MOST READ on FOLIOdots icon

FOLIO: Alerts & Newslettersdots icon

Sign up for our news alerts, special offers & feature updates:



FOLIO: Alerts
Breaking news & industry updates

FOLIO: Publishing Technology
The Latest on Trends, Issues & Products (2x Monthly)

FOLIO: Special Promos
Special offers & announcements from Partners, Sponsors & Red 7 Media

FOLIO: Update
Webinar, content & service feature updates


CAREER CENTER dots icon

Latest Featured Jobs