Newsweek: The New Republic in sheep's clothing

Michael Kinsley has a brutal, but not inaccurate review/analysis of Newsweek's revamped magazine. It's harsh, but honest.

I have to admit, it is somewhat sad to see a major news magazine plummeting, but as Kinsley discusses, their attempts to rearrange the deck chairs on their Titanic can only make one chuckle -- Newsweek is drowning, with the opportunities of the blogging milieu floating lifeboats all around it.

Indeed, editor Jon Meacham's Newsweek recently reinvented mag tries to save itself by cutting the baby in half.

Backs turned to the writing on the wall (and floor and ceiling and tv..etc), refusing to morph into an opinion periodical (a la The Nation or The New Republic) and be up front about publishing material geared for the Left, Newsweek is cluelessly trying to retain its house of cards by misting it with some designer fonts and colors.

Mr. Meacham, your (dozen or so) liberal readers don't need a flashier layout or rearranged article structure. They will continue reading Newsweek so long as you retain your MSM Tried-and-True "Liberal-elitist-editorializing-passing-for-objective-news" shtick.

If you want to be a news magazine, either venture an attempt in the direction of objectivity, or openly and explicilty change into a product competing with The New Republic and The Nation.

Carrboro, NC bankrolling expansion of its local newspaper

Hat tip to Rob at Say Anything Blog.

Carrboro, NC yesterday voted to withdraw $50,000 from the town's economic development fund to finance an expansion of the North Carolina town's weekly newspaper, The Carrboro Citizen.

Among other things,the money will be used to hire more employees in the editorial department. Publisher Robert Dickson sees no problem with local government bankrolling the paper's department responsible for government oversight and accountability:

[Dickson]bristles at any suggestion he would sacrifice integrity by accepting public money. Dickson likens it to The News & Observer and other media accepting advertising from politicians and sports teams that they cover.

"Newspapers do business with people they have to report on," he said. "It's a fact of life."

Carrboro's mayor also had no problem with $50,000 in Carrboro's economic development fund going to bailout the local newspaper:

Mayor Mark Chilton said, "There's no opportunity for the town to use the relationship to get an outcome they might want in the media."

That's not really the point. The absence of a clear quid pro quot doesn't justify direct government support for the press.

How likely are these editorial board writers to bite the hand that gave them their job when time comes to expose or report a story embarrassing or damaging to local government? And that's to say nothing of the fundamental conflict of interest.

It's understandable for the local mayor and Publisher to justify the loan as boosting the local economy, and it very well might. But once you start down that road of government entaglement in the press, where does it stop?

Jean Folkerts, dean of the UNC-Chapel Hill School of Journalism and Mass Communication, said the relationship could raise questions.

"I am always concerned about the news business being tied to government support," she said. "While it often may seem benign, and indeed seem magnanimous, it is indeed a step down a slippery slope."

Full article here.

New York Times falls further into junk territory

The S & P gave another kick to the old grey lady on her way down, cutting her rating from a B down to a B-plus. From Reuters:

Standard & Poor's on Thursday cut its rating on the New York Times Co (NYT.N) deeper into junk status, citing rising leverage in the midst of a newspaper industry slump.

A drop in ad revenue aggravated by the long U.S. recession will likely lead to a spike in leverage at the Times by 2010, S&P said in a statement. The rating agency said it expects the economy to begin to recover late this year, but there is significant uncertainty about when the newspaper ad slump will begin to heal.

Full article here.

Boston Globe shutting down?

Paul Tharp of the New York reports that the Boston Globe may be a thing of the past...as of today:

Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger faces the uncomfortable task of having to shut down the Boston Globe today if holdout employees refuse to fork over $20 million in savings to his family.

If the Sulzberger family carries out its threatened shutdown by today's deadline, it would be an admission that they wasted $1.1 billion in buying the paper in the first place.

But if they back down, it would show a weakness of will that Wall Street investors who hold big stakes -- particularly hard-nosed billionaire Carlos Slim -- might turn against the family to wrest away its control of the enterprise.

And buyers aren't exactly lining up to save this sinking ship:

Another widely discussed option -- selling the 137-year-old Boston paper -- seemed less likely as potential buyers waved off any thoughts of owning the admired money-pit.

"It's like trying to catch a falling knife," said Jack Connors, the former head of Boston ad agency Hill Holliday, who was part of an attempt to buy the paper several years ago.

"I'm not a buyer" because of the Globe's uncertain future, he added. "I don't know whether there's an economic reason to own it."

The Globe was on track to lose $85 million this year unless changes are made, The Times said. That follows losses of $50 million last year.