Capital New York

I read Newsweek for a decade plus. My parents had a subscription up until a year ago.

When they canceled it was a useless bunch of ads and pretty pictures. I cannot understate how much Newsweek came to suck near the end. I remember hearing, perhaps incorrectly, that on the doomed Titanic they somehow made things worse by steering away from the iceberg.

In the last few years Newsweek lost all identity. Maybe it's whole concept was suffering, but Newsweek killed everything that I enjoyed in it, mainly actual articles. Thoughtful multi-page articles were replaced by 6-pages of pictures with 10-word captions. They heard "print is unpopular" and thought "maybe if we just stop this news thing people will buy". It's a news magazine and it looks like Nickelodeon for kids. Someone should have lost their job over this instead of bringing the whole magazine down with this poorly thought out strategy of ditching meaningful content.

I find the idea that this is part of a rapid transition away from print is absurd. Newsweek was grossly incompetent; They practically encouraged people to stop reading,

I will miss Newsweek, but the magazine I loved died long ago, and its current shambling zombie existence needs to end.

-Newspaper reading 26 year old.

Newsweek stopped being a hard news and became a pop culture with an agenda magazine decades ago.

Which is coincidentally when we cancelled our decades old subscription.

Go figure.

Newsweek just lost its relevence.

I believe in justice. Newsweek went out of business because of it's true values. One of which was not focusing on the news in an unbiased manor.

Loon

Zeitgeist? How about Newsweek's far leftism? Likewise with Time which will soon follow Newsweek into the dustbin!

zeitgeist, schmeitgeist. What doomed Newsweek was half the country is conservative and didn't buy her liberal slant. The internet has diluted the liberal media's ability to control the narrative.

Like most progressive rags Newsweek has been found dead face down in it's own propaganda puke in the alley of irreverence.

Capitalism wins again! Maybe if it wasn't such a leftist propaganda outlet...

GOODBYE! Next time try conservatism. It sells well all the time.

NEWSWEEK lost relevance when they became a mouthpiece of ultra-left politics. No one views them as pure, unbiased journalism.

They are simply a magazine that hires Leftist politicos who are ideologically skewed enough to believe (and proclaim) that silly bumper sticker that "facts have a Liberal bias."

In articles and editorials, NEWSWEEK journalists presented a view that anyone who didn't accept the slant as presented by NEWSWEEK and the DNC was "extreme."

Personally, I will not miss this magazine and I won't visit their website.

In high school in the early 70's, Newsweek and Time were the "go-to" sources for those of us in debate classes and extracurricular debate teams. Teachers felt that the reporting was good, accurate and a logical and inexpensive source.

By the late 70's to the mid-80's print 'news' magazines were woefully behind the curve as cable just cleaned up the floor with them. No longer timely, the need for 'opinion' and 'slant' drove my perception of them as a slightly out-of-touch Uncle, muttering about the Truman administration or something.

By the 90's, the constant haranguing, proselytizing, and ridiculous posturing became simply unbearable. I wouldn't even pick one up in a waiting room.

Their time came and went, and even the bastard offspring like The Beast wallow and moan, unable to capture the loyalty and, more importantly, the revenue stream of past periodicals. Incapable or unwilling to understand that those models are gone forever, and frantically becoming more outrageous and pointless to the reading public.

A reasonably educated adult needs facts. Not opinion.

I cannot help but wonder if Newsweek might have survived with that as a guiding principle.

I guess nobody can ever know if it would have made a difference in the end but as a long time subscriber I stopped reading Newsweek around 2006 when they went from a general news magazine with a slightly leftist bent to a full on wing-nut rag. It's a pity that they dragged it through the mud so long before finally putting it out of our misery.

Keep printing Left-wing liberal lies and the part of the country that actually reads will stop buying your rag. Newspapers all over the country have learned this. At least Newsweek didn't let circulation get in the way of their ideology. Good for them.

Newsweek became an increasingly terrible publication. These days it's simply a tragic waste of paper and energy. Had it retained any trace of quality, people might want to buy it off the newstands. As it is, you already know what Newsweek's tendentious take on current events is going to be. So there's no point buying it.

Competing media and the consequent diminution of revenue are hurting print media across the board, but readership is still the life blood of a magazine. Unfortunately, magazines are much like restaurants: one or two bad experiences and we never go back. This one lost me the first few times I saw it, decades before Brown took it over. It was “Time” lite – and I didn’t even like “Time”. I wanted a news magazine that was in-depth news, not opinionated fluff. From the content of this piece it sounds like it has remained opinionated fluff to the end.

Unless your are a true connoisseur willing and anxious to strain at gnats and swollow camels, one commie rag is not much different than another. The ones that survive are probably not much different than those that don't-they just have a better marketing strategy.

Unless your are a true connoisseur willing and anxious to strain at gnats and swollow camels, one commie rag is not much different than another. The ones that survive are probably not much different than those that don't-they just have a better marketing strategy.

Unless your are a true connoisseur willing and anxious to strain at gnats and swollow camels, one commie rag is not much different than another. The ones that survive are probably not much different than those that don't-they just have a better marketing strategy.

Digging a $10 million-plus hole in the ground at Vanity Fair, the New Yorker, and now Newsweek. What does it tell us? That Tina Brown's inch-deep, self-satisfied view of the good life—an incompatible blend of hugely expensive parties and doctrinaire socialism—not only doesn't make sense, but doesn't sell magazines.

No one knows what attracts corporate boards to this woman like moths to a flame. Her career seems to have been entirely subsidized by acres of money made in profitable industries and diverted to Tina Brown.

IT WASN'T CHANGING READING HABITS - IT WAS THE ABYSMAL QUALITY OF CONTENT.

ELEANOR CLIFT WAS NOT AN ASSET.

No Zeitgeist involved, Tina. You were competing for that oversaturated market segment that wants to read left-biased stories exclusively. Simple as that, but you still can't figure it out. RIP, Newsweek.

You still don't get it.
The liberal media isn't rejected due to all that, it's the lack of reliable content.

Propaganda, in any form just doesn't cut it.

"News"week died because its publisher was seemingly unable to restrain his impulse to make every other cover story about Jesus, Mary, and his holy menagerie of religious nitwittery.

Whoo-hoo! Hooray! Yippeeee! ObamaWeek is Dead! ObamaWeek is Dead! ObamaWeek is Dead!

How about being a victim of crappy reporting, ideological slant, and general mediocrity? Zeitgeist has very little to do with that. This from someone who had a continuous subscription for 20+ years, and canned them a decade or so ago.

Newsweek died under decades of blind, unthinking liberalism that alienated millions of readers and subscribers. It became a voice of the far left wing, no longer of intelligent discourse and reporting. People just judged to it be irrelevent to the real world, even though the magazine and its website were still quite trendy in the collectivist media capitals of New York and Washington.

Unfortunately most readers there don't buy subsciptions. They just comp each other. Tina Brown may have improved the publication a little right at the very end, but it was already choking to death beyond recovery--kind of like Obama's economy.

Americans who voted for Obama generally are not subscribers to any weekly news publication and people who read weekly news publications generally didnot vote for Obama. So now you know why Newsweek failed.

Oh thats it? The times? Frankly it was bad reading and the usual agenda pushing to the wrong crowd---the average American magazine reader is more Conservative than all out Liberal--they arent going to part with dollars for something that isnt even close to their own belief of what Zeitgeist is for then. No, Newsweek wrote and reported on the wrong stories for the wrong people---simple. They voted with their dollars. Buh-bye.

When you insult 1/2 of the publicwith your liberal bias how can you stay in business? Next to go is Time.

No, a crappy liberal rag was the reason you are finally folding

Its not about the paper you publish on, its about the people that create the print.

When you insult the intelligence of half the country with biased stories and political attacks, you end up discouraging the majority of the people that were actually paying to support the publication. It doesn't matter what format they continue to publish under if it's not going to appeal to the type of person that actually pays for subscription magazines.

When you sell out a publication to one political view you tell many consumers there's no need to buy your product. I can get news weeks left wing view from number of sources, it's the White House talking points in a magazine. News week placed politicl purity over real journalism, now it doesn't exist ny more....are you listening ABC, NBC, CBS, NY TIMES?

Seek truth, print reality, be impartial and the people will buy your product.

I don't think the zeitgeist, spirit of the times or any sort of nebulous reason is to blame for Newsweek's decline. They chose to side with a party in the government instead of holding government accountable. War can't be vile under one President and then be ignored under another simply because they are of different political colors. Raising the debt ceiling can't be unpatriotic while one party is in power and then become the salvation of the economy when the other party is holding the reigns. It just doesn't work like that.

The public wants those with the power to ask the tough questions of government to do it, and do it without partisan bias. The Press, renamed the Media is supposed to be a watchdog, not a lapdog. That is why Newsweek and other companies are suffering a lack of reader/viewership. These companies have left impartiality, integrity, and any sense of humbleness behind. They believe they know what is best and that they are more intelligent than their potential audience. So they push an agenda rather than report facts, uncover untruths, and expose what the government would keep hidden from us and letting us decide for ourselves what is right and what is wrong.

They believe that the zeitgeist is some ever changing entity, and while that may be the case in some instances the spirit of an age has elements it shares with those of ages past, and remains unchanging in some regards. Truth, bravery, sacrifice, honor and even handedness never go out of style. Newsweek would have done well to remember that.

Newsweeks problem was Zeit-Left-Wing-Idiocy. These publications would rather crusade for American Marxism & in doing so, turn off half of a huge total available market of readers. It wasn't the environment they were publishing in, it was their content.

Newsweek was not a victim of "reader habits" beyond readers demanding news, not left-wing propaganda.

Newsweek has degraded itself to a propaganda rag, only found agreeable by the 10% of the population who call themselves progressive liberals.

Same thing happened to Air America. same thing happened to CurrentTV. Same thing is happening to MSNBC and CNN - sitting lasdt in the ratings just to cater to their radical left audience.

Real news magazines that cater to our center-right country are plugging along just fine...

Couldn't happen to a better liberal-spin-rag.

The real zeitgeist is that print or television media that target themselves solely to the NYC left alienate the vast majority of their potential readers or watchers. I read Newsweek for literally decades but gradually came to tune it out and stopped buying it when it became so narrowly leftist that it ceased to be a source of news and analysis and became instead just another left wing screed.

Zeitgiest, smeitgiest- the reason Newsweek took a tumble is simple: Under MS. Brown, and her predecessors, the "magazine" went from a well-respected and objective news weekly, to a biased tabloid rag that lurched further to the extreme left with each passing year. Much like Air America and countless other hard-left pablum, the market is small, overcrowded, and losing money or funded by the likes of Soros and friends. Only so much money can be poured into losing enterprises, and thus, rags like Time come out on top.

Sadly, if this had happened many years ago when it was a reputable news source, most folks would be concerned. Now, only the journos and their ilk in the beltway and the salons of NY will shed a solitary, paltry tear for this sorry excuse of a supposed victim of an imagined"Zeitgeist."

Don't let the pixels pummel you in the posterior on the way out, Newsweek. You will not be missed.

Newsweek's "LAST PRINT ISSUE", only wish that statement was referring to the FED instead.

People will no longer pay to read leftist propaganda.

Naah.. they just put out a crappy product and are 'pining for the fjords'. Keep and eye out, and you'll get to watch the rest of the MSM follow them circle the bowl.. NYT, WaPo are next.

I canceled my subscription several years ago, before digital pubs were the norm. I canceled because it was obvious Newsweek had become little more than propaganda for Socialism.

Mr. Haber: The Darwinian Newsstand is the result of a non-independent press/media in America for the past 40+ years. Welcome to your own creation. Blame the internet all you want, but if the rag was strongly independent, it would be hitting a grand slam in revenue and popularity.

I canceled my subscription several years ago, before digital pubs were the norm. I canceled because it was obvious Newsweek had become little more than propaganda for Socialism.

Well, you have to give Newsweek editor in chief and magazine legend Tina Brown credit. She failed to 'get it' to the very end.

WE STOPPED GETTING NEWSWEEK BECAUSE YOU BECAME JUST ANOTHER LIBERAL RAG, STOPPED HAVING IN DEPTH & OBJECTIVE NEWS STORIES, AND WOULD INSULT THE VALUES AND MORALS OF MOST OF AMERICA.

NO ONE IS GOING TO READ YOU ON-LINE EITHER - SO DIE NEWSWEEK, DIE!

This author exhausted himself with a verbose, whiny rant that missed the obvious: Newsweek became a LEFTIST RAG that ended up preaching only to that haughty slice of the population...who cheered it while not buying it.

Many years ago, I had a subscription to NEWSWEEK, But as I witnessed news on the ground, versus how it was spun, or how it was not covered at all, I realized that I was paying for a glossy version of PRAVDA, just with an American face.

After one issue that had too hard a list to port too many, I canceled my subscription and never looked back.

The so-called 'Mainstream Media.' has proven itself to be little more than the propaganda arm for an increasingly radical and anti-American Left.

Good riddance, Newsweek, may many others of the dinosaur media share your fate.

Buh-bye.

This author exhausted himself with a verbose, whiny rant that missed the obvious: Newsweek became a LEFTIST RAG that ended up preaching only to that haughty slice of the population...who cheered it while not buying it.

I hate to tell this dear lady that, like TIME, you decided to abandon half of the readers that would purchase this magazine. You only can take soooo much liberal and Democrat hate speech, found weekly every week, on the cover and inside the magazine. I am tempted to call it a rag, which it really was.

Newsweek was a liberal rag that you could not trust to tell the truth and that's why it is now in the crapper. Good riddance.

So dishonest and just bad journalism is now called Zeitgeist. Who would have thought.

Good riddance to bad journalism. Time magazine isn't far behind. Contrary to belief, people of color are NOT liberals and almost never buy these rags......so its the MINORITY 39% of white people who vote democrat that have to keep these leftist publications afloat. I suppose they could get Obamacare to make it mandatory for every hospital waiting room to have a copy.....

I'm looking at my 1947 copy of Newsweek. Not a hint anywhere of left wing or right wing ideology or editorial. Newsweek did itself in by alienating over half its readership with far left tripe. Glad I quit reading it twenty years ago.

Good. I'm glad this ragazine is not going to be printed anymore. Now, if Time would do the same.

hmmm.. how about a trashy liberal magazine with no integrity?? Yeah, that sounds about right.. going out of business!

Irrelevance and lack of objectivity doomed Newsweek .

It wasn't Zeigheist. No, not at all. It was the left-wing, liberal agenda, the same reason why TIME is next and The New York Times. That's why I canceled my subscription in 2008 and for TIME as well.

It wasn't Zeigheist. No, not at all. It was the left-wing, liberal agenda, the same reason why TIME is next and The New York Times. That's why I canceled my subscription in 2008 and for TIME as well.

May the entire liberal propaganda machine which shovels hypocrisy and even outrageous lies collapse in ruins, just as the US descends into third world status. The idiot trust fund babies of the 60s like Ted Kennedy and others of his ilk have successfully destroyed what was the most successful middle class in history, in favor of millions of third world drones, illegals, low iq dummies, and misfits. How's that working out?

May the entire liberal propaganda machine which shovels hypocrisy and even outrageous lies collapse in ruins, just as the US descends into third world status. The idiot trust fund babies of the 60s like Ted Kennedy and others of his ilk have successfully destroyed what was the most successful middle class in history, in favor of millions of third world drones, illegals, low iq dummies, and misfits. How's that working out?

Ah, now I know what Zeitgeist means. "Moronically stupid writers and editors who bring their own enterprise to dust and blame outside influences".

One less piece of liberal crap.

Liberal rag. RIP.

Good riddance. I hope Time is next.

Another Leftist propagand organ bites the dust. Yawn! Soon one hopes it will be joined by The New York Times print version. Eventually the Democrat party will run out of mainstream press publications to carry their message. Oh horrors, they'll have to pay for ads instead of having their Lefty allies in print media publish the Democrat talking points disguised as editorials and slanted (so called) "news" stories. You know the type of story, "World to end tomorrow, all will perish simultaneously. Women, children and minorities hardest hit." Zeitgeist? No, more likely the large number of Conservative people still in America (all those not in some way on the public dole and thus capable of reading above the third grade level and therefore with a reason to buy a magazine without many pictures) decided not to BUY Newsweek (Pravda). This includes dentists who are small businesses, soon to be hammered with more taxes by the idol of Newsweek and his Communist minions.

Good riddance!!!

Hey, "You're All Unemployed Now"......

Blah, blah, blah. One down.

If newsweek wrote this story then I can see why their going under. Huh?

Good riddance

Yeah the world is a better place today without that rag.

Yeah the world is a better place today without that rag.

No, they tried to make their own "Zeitgeist," they didn't dutifully cover the actual news. That's the problem. Just another propagandist liberal rag with an agenda of propping up ruling-class leftists. They want to play "social engineer" and they want to play "brainwash the plebs" and intelligent people -- the type of people who are wont to read news magazines -- do not go for that.

I subscribed to Newsweek for many years beginning when I went to college in 1963 and enjoyed reading the news and columnists. However, as the years moved on, new hot shot editors came in and re-invented the wheel every four or five years, usually for the worse. More recently, these makeovers always included shrinking the typeface to to the point that I resorted to using a magnifying glass to read the copy. And so, reluctantly, my subscription was not renewed 4 years ago, and I started one with TIME and went through the same rigmarole with them and non-renewed. I see the same thing happening with other popular publications and I guess the publishers think they can shrink their way to breakeven.

Avery Sloan
Baton Rouge

The only "bungling" within Newsweek and especially that by Niall Ferguson's critique of Obama is that Newsweek fell prey to was that it lost its way with its readership. No longer perceived as a balanced version of either national review/newsmax or nation magazine, Newsweek became one of the too many not so quiet cheerleaders of the Left while pretending to keep its patina of a serious news magazine. Adding Niall Ferguson on staff was not enough (myself included) to counter the number of "hrummphs" I would shout to myself as Newsweek swayed further toward its suicidal dual-personality arc of People magazine and a print version of Salon.com. The problem became is that we no longer NEED Newsweek to make sense of the world; not as your review states because there's no place for macro-interpretations of news. On the contrary, it is precisely because Newsweek WAS no longer a voice for deliberate and considered analysis of the news and more like intellectual lipstick on a grunting pig of an already crowded field of the mainstreet liberal media machine. I am sorry to see Newsweek go not for what it could be but, sadly, rather what it became. Like John Wilkes Booth after he was shot in the neck by Boston Corbett and was unable to raise his gesticulating arms in either protection or thespian blows he cried "useless". Yep. Goodbye Newsweek.

Good riddance to liberal trash.

I subscribed to Newsweek for many years beginning when I went to college in 1963 and enjoyed reading the news and columnists. However, as the years moved on, new hot shot editors came in and re-invented the wheel every four or five years, usually for the worse. More recently, these makeovers always included shrinking the typeface to to the point that I resorted to using a magnifying glass to read the copy. And so, reluctantly, my subscription was not renewed 4 years ago, and I started one with TIME and went through the same rigmarole with them and non-renewed. I see the same thing happening with other popular publications and I guess the publishers think they can shrink their way to breakeven.

Avery Sloan
Baton Rouge

maybe if the news started telling the truth people would start reading again

How about the real reason is their biased reporting, people are sick of it.

Goodbye Newsweek, we won't miss you.

Why don't you blame yourself as editor-in-chief, Tina Brown? In the "olden days", I subscribed to Newsweek for years. I found the reporting to be well balanced. Ms. Brown took over and the reporting and article subjects became increasingly slanted. Time was bad and became worse. Alternate sources such as Rolling Stone became laughable. As Pogo said, "We have met the enemy and he is us." The media is its own worst enemy.

The Zeitgeist Ms Brown might have wanted to think about for just a moment is that one in the microcosm of the news editing department. The line from Network captures a facet of it, but I go a little further: the people who muscle their way into editorial positions at places like Newsweek and Time are morally vacuous and petty tyrants. A friend of mine worked the Newsweek International department briefly 50 years ago, and got fired along with the rest of the staff when the editor decided it was time to show how big his britches were. My friend also worked in the NYT for a stint, and has pointed me to the books "The Kingdom and the Power" and "The Powers that Be" to describe the personalities of these organizations. These media operations are cheap soap operas, and it is only by the laziness of the readers that these monstrosities have survived as long as they have. Their absolute blind conformance to the current political narrative and their refusal to report any conflicting information makes them morally and informationally equal to the propaganda ministries of Stalin, Hitler and Mao Tse Tung, and sooner or later they are all going to fall.

Ya, well:

A. Things change, print media is last century now.

B. You shouldve tried to offer some sort of balanced reporting by actually hiring some conservative writers since, you know, more than half the country identifies itself a conservative.

Just no surprise here. Goodbye.

Your communist propaganda RAGazine was done in by it's own anti-capitalist, anti-american, normal-phobic ravings.

Always good to see a liberal rag bite the dust!

Maybe if the media would go back to trying to be impartial, they would create the type of discourse that fueled people to read their magazine. No one trusts mainstream media anymore. Their fault. No sympathy here.

Well one government Propaganda mouth piece down & dozens to go!

Good! worthless propaganda rag!

There's no need to make Newsweek's demise any more complicated than what it was really caused by - a loss of credibility after years of relentless left wing diatribes from inside an insular east-coast bubble that had no relationship with what people actually observed going on around them for themselves.

There's no need to make Newsweek's demise any more complicated than what it was really caused by - a loss of credibility after years of relentless left wing diatribes from inside an insular east-coast bubble that had no relationship with what people actually observed going on around them for themselves.

I have a bottle of Champagne witing for when it is the NYT's turn....

Way too complex an explanation. Newsweek turned from news to liberal opinion as news.

Vanity Fair magazines changed me; I went from an innocent young naive girl to understand there is a dark side to human being. And the world was not Disneyland, it is really a forest full of animals.

Incomprehensible nonsense. Colons do not make for elegant punctuation. I've counted 9 uses of colons (one inside a parenthesis!) Also, in the last 15 years Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, Talk, The Daily Beast and Newsweek where never part of the Zeitgeist, but merely tag alongs.

They still don't get it. When the magazine took a sharp turn to the left and stopped attempting to be fair and balanced they lost their audience. But these people would rather go out of business instead of following journalism standards.

Poor Tina. If only she had held on a couple more years, the liberalization of the country would have been complete. As it is, the literate in this country are still slightly conservative, and her magazine's drift to the left alienated a large part of her circulation.
In a couple of years, someone will launch "Nuzweek" - a picture weekly with short photo captions with one or two syllable words, and it will be a big hit with the 50 percenters, as we old school conservatives will call the unemployed leeches living off "Obama money."

A newsweekly, if it is to succeed, must appeal to the broadest spectrum of readers.

But Newsweek has been driving away subscribers for at least two decades. (Time Magazine, too)

The main reason for a newsweekly is news, with more analysis than one gets in a daily newspaper in its print or online editions. But Newsweek tried to turn itself into a journal of opinion, left-leaning opinion, so right there about two-thirds of former and potential readers lost interest.

Poor Tina. If only she had held on a couple more years, the liberalization of the country would have been complete. As it is, the literate in this country are still slightly conservative, and her magazine's drift to the left alienated a large part of her circulation.
In a couple of years, someone will launch "Nuzweek" - a picture weekly with short photo captions with one or two syllable words, and it will be a big hit with the 50 percenters, as we old school conservatives will call the unemployed leeches living off "Obama money."

Lol...good riddance to another liberal democrat propaganda rag.

The Internet has stripped the MSM of its pretensions, and the MSM still does not get it. That's what happened to Newsweek, IMHO.

When you know longer print worthy news
When you cannot keep up with online sources
When there's too much of what you're NOT doing well
This will happen...

Newsweek epitomized putting the "analysis of the age above" the facts when it published guilt-implying mug shots of the falsely-accused lacrosse players on its cover (two weeks after DNA testing
had cleared them).

Evan Thomas later explained that "the narrative [of its story] was right, but the facts were wrong".

Classic.

AMF.

Libweak went the way of all left leaning publications. The NYT is next.

Excuse me while I dance in the streets. Good riddence to the liberal propaganda machine.

What a bunch of "long-hair" crap! I would like (whatever the tabloid) just report the stupid events without so much intellectual bias, they turn it into an editorial.

Still don't understand that Newsweek failed because it was a liberal rag. Cheep liberals do not pay for things!

Liberal tendencies are what killed Newsweek. Time is next.

One of the problems with Newsweek was: It made these "profound" observations for THE MASSES.

Think -- would the editors of Newsweek read that stuff? No, they were too intelligent. So it was ultimately condescending. And the readers eventually picked that up.

Many (most) of the long time print power houses are finding it increasingly difficult to stay in business. And although they are quick to blame the Internet, and in truth it is part of the problem, the main problem is that they have become so liberal that at least half of their former subscriber base just went away. They probably could have withstood a 5%, or maybe even a 10% reduction, in their subscriber base, but to lose half put them out of business. Now, they get to spend some time re-creating themselves in such a way that they can live in the tough business of Internet land with only half of the subscribers they used to have. And all the time they blame the Internet and the high cost of printing.

Thank God! We don't have to try and read drivel masquerading as journalism any more!

My parrot is going to need therapy she has only used Newsweek and the change in the routine will be upsetting.

I assume here "Zeitgeist" means "facts." Newsweek became the print version of MSNBC, and its leftist lean produced the same results as that sinking network.

Packaging propaganda as news only works on those too stupid to know the difference, and unfortunately for Newsweek, there's evidently not enough of them to provide a profit (thank God for the rest of us).

Goodbye print Newsweek, nobody with an IQ higher than a retarded Cocker Spaniel will miss you.

Next: "New York Times circles the drain, blames Zeitgeist."

If Newsweek told the truth in their rag they might have been able to leg it out a bit longer. Bye bye Newsweek. On to NYT, LAT, Huffington Post, USA Today, et al.

Personally, I'd attribute the demise of this publication to the fact people can hear the same transparently partisan tripe on NPR or MSNBC for it's actual value - $0.00 ....

Tina, did you ever notice that the world does not revolve around NYC? Guess what? There are lots of people in between the West Coast and East Coast of the US. I'm sure that it never crossed your mind. Just sayin' that you left out a huge population if readers since you assumed that we all live in Manhattan. You might enjoy San Francisco, Seattle, Bolder, Aspen, Salt Lake City, the Twin Cities, Houston, Austin...I think you get my point.

Newsweek's "LAST PRINT ISSUE", only wish that statement was referring to the FED instead.

If you like to pay for every other page of ads for a left leaning rag, then you will miss any of these troubled so called journalism outlets. I myself see many good print expanding in this era. Maybe those rags can appeal to their masters they report about and have them subsidize like the arts. I for one am glad to see another progressive rag go away. One down hundreds more to go.

Newsweek sealed its own fate by indulging Democrat hacks like Jonathan Alter instead of installing a team of high-energy, unbiased journalists.

Why pay for leftist claptrap when you can get tons of it free at HuffPo, the Daily Koz, etc?

there are only so many liberal paying readers. Once you reach saturation, there is no more market share, and the far left rags have no more paying customers.

What magazine is this?

Like many other Ultra-Liberal magazines, they are suffering from the "Pravda Syndrome"- people have little interest in a publication that only prints one side of the story and spends it's time bowing to the Democrat party and it's own Kim Il Jung, otherwise known as Obama the " Dear Leader". Perhaps if you had told the truth once in awhile........

Newsweek goes under because no one wants to read it's liberal propaganda.

No Tina, demand for better crap than you have cranked out for years was against Newsweek.

Glad newsweek is dead. Got sucked into a subscription this year. They are really bad! Not the mag I knew when growing up. I for one am glad they're dead.

Good riddance to another anti-American socialist rag. Hopefully it will wither away in cyber insignificance.
This is a great day. God Bless America!

It died because no one reads it because it's full of bullsh*t .pretty darn simple.

HMMMM...seems there is a reason that Fox News is so successful...the general public is sick and tired of the extreme liberal slant of the news...in ALL of the mainstream media. Only the Wall Street Journal and Fox News present another side...and they seem to be doing just fine, thank you......lesson anyone??? Newsweek has been a left wing rag for years...

Oh nooooo! What am I going to read in the dentist's office before my next cleaning? Thank God there's always Highlights for Children and Readers Digest. Seriously, who cares about another liberal rag ceasing its ungreen policy of killing trees in favor of using dirty electricity to power tablets? Not I, said the fly; it's not I that reads the Newsweek mag.

This writer must get paid by the word because this was a lot of convoluted prose to say that a magazine
can't sustain itself after losing a profitable portion of it's circulation because it openly and avidly campaigned for the most polarizing president of modern times in 2008. Good riddance. If Carlos Slim ever stops bailing out the New York Times hopefully they'll be joining Tina and who knows what silly excuse they'll use.

Newsweek had a problem with the truth. Long ago it became a propaganda outlet, home of Journ-0-listers.

Watch that door on the way out

Looks like Harmon's $1 he spent on the leftist pravda rag was $1 too much.

Sums it up quite well, and nicely written.

I, for one, shall raise a cup of good riddance to that pos NewsWEAK going away.

Surely, I'm not the only one that will be glad not to have to see yet another cover of Obama with a halo or a picture of his fat, ridiculously dressed wife with knee slapping description: "Fit, international style icon"....

One more liberal propaganda rag down the drain. Time is next.

For the last 37 years, I read Newsweek only in the Dr.s office to fill time if I hadn't brought something to read. I usually read Reader's Digest first for the humor. There are economic and science magazines that offer a lot more meat for the time spent reading. TRY ONE.

In my opinion, the demise of Newsweek, along with other media, like Time, and the falling ratings of TV news outlets, like MSNBC, and CNN, are due to the fact that they are left wing, slanted, propagandists for leftists, like Obama, and the progressive movement. They omit truth, slant it, or spin it. So, most of the Middle Class who despise this leftist movement designed to change this country into a secular, third world, country destroying most, or all, of American values and traditions are turning to Talk Radio, Fox News, or Internet providers to get The Truth and a different perspective on what is really going on besides propaganda for, and by, the far left.

In summary, the consumer decides which news outlets are going to survive, thus, when the media turns far left, the consumer turns to a different product. Of course, those outlets getting taxpayer money survive because they are subsidized by the government ( that is, with taxpayer money).

Let's not ignore the fact that Newsweek, and other news media of today have been attacking Christianity, appeasing our enemies, and ridiculing God, family values, and traditions. So, "We The People", have had enough of this socialist propaganda and turn Newsweek and other liberal outlets off.

Obama and his ilk, in my opinion, were re-elected by a dumbed down, populace and low informed voters, who have been brainwashed by the so called main news media, The common sense, working Middle Clsss, that is supporting all of this welfare spending, and liberal malarkey, have had it, and are fit to be tied. We are mad as hell and we are getting rapidly to the point where we are not going to take it anymore.

Newsweek, and the other liberal, so called, journalism can be dumped into the trash heap and burned for all we care. I say, good riddance to Newsweek and any other left wing, propaganda machine. I will shed no tears for their demise.

Newsweek and Time's audience are the 51% Takers. The 49% Makers don't pay to read a magazine that demonizes them. Doomed to fail.

Hollywood will soon see the 49% Makers stop seeing their movies for same reason.

Oh we'll, most people check the news on their smartphones while sitting in a waiting room. No big loss.

It's about time...... it's not "Zeitgeist", but left bias, and a lack of trustworthy content.... The 'Cloud' has had an influence, but I don't think we will ever see National Geographic out of print form

Philosophizing, and intellecutalizing will not hide the the fact that this magazine failed because it was a biased liberal magazine. I didn't read it because it was so liberal, and millions of others like me have done the same.

Don't let the proverbial door hit ya on the way out Tina. Your propaganda sheet aka garbage, needs to be laid to rest...NYT is next...

Great - another liberal rag bites the dust. No one buys these liberal rags - the editors and reporters just show up on TV and tell us how liberalism is the answer to our problems. Even the NY Times is slowly going broke.

did this writer write for newsweek? If so It is a good example why people are moving away from such dribble as newsweek.

Zeitgeist? Does that mean behind the times? In a world of the home not so small screen and the smaller screen being carried around by todays generation, the printed word is failing fast. Banal doesn't fill the description of what's being placed the public today, there must be MORE, there must be NOW, there must be CONSTANT contact with "friends" and "likes" and users of such tools who go into withdrawal when their attachments are cut off, as described by those who were instantly isolated by the terrible storm that nailed New York. Newsweek is GONE because it SHOULD be gone, plain and simple.

A bit long winded. Let me see if I can shorten it a bit. It wasn't the zeitgeist, it wasn't the platform - it was the content.

Time magazine explicitly declared that the whole magazine was dominated by a point of view--similar to Fox News and MSNBC. Some may have thought that Newsweek intended to be and succeeded in being objective--similar to CNN. A comparative study some years ago concluded that Time was much more objective and Newsweek was much more slanted.

Not all agree that being slanted is bad. Some years ago, Atlantic Monthly did a front cover story showing that at one time newspapers were all slated. Then some of the powerhouses took over newspaper coverage by driving out other newspapers; the powerhouses used the argument that they were objective; often they were not. The author called for a return to admitted slanted or ideological newspapers. Maybe the blogs and social networks have attained the same purpose. Certainly MSNBC and Fox News carried out that proposal. And CNN hasn't quite figured out what to do.

To Matt Haber: VERY excellent article, particularly the 3rd to last paragraph........and coming from me, a fiscal conservative who can't stand the Leftist media, non-news reporters like Newsweek and NYTimes, etc, that's saying something.
Another way of describing the demise of Newsweek, is this:
(wait for next posting, see if I have to 'register' or something! )

Ridiculous. The media, especially the liberal media, still has a huge effect on our culture, but it has never been magazines--it has always been TV. The liberal media was far more important to the normalization of gay marriage than one viral video. The liberal journalist sees a viral video and just imagines it was more important that biased media without any study.

Yes, yes, yes.
Plus Brown wrecked the New Yorker and everybody knows it!

Zeitgeist? No wonder the magazine went belly up.

Way too complex an explanation. Newsweek turned from news to liberal opinion as news.

How fantastic, DOWN with the liberal media!!!!!

ohhhh! So what you're saying is Newsweek was out of touch with American readers.

Another way (perhaps a corollary but with heavy dose of personal opinion) to describe the demise, is this: There's only so much Leftist print-media drivel the public will buy. And as far as "news"......."Newsweak" and NYTimes are devoid of concrete news filled with facts to truly inform readers of what's happening in our country, states and cities. That's why NYT is really more of a 'magazine' that its devout readers imagine. Another "magazine" like Newsweak is superflous ! Look at A-1 of the NYT any day, and see that roughly 5 of 7 front page stories could have been written weeks before.....rather than news of the previous day. It's REAL sad that the NYT 'investigative' journalists can't think their way out of a paper bag, even for stories about their own freaking city......and Tina Brown at Newsweak was just as pathetic. Did they EVER try for 15 minutes to calculate the net worth of a NYCity policeman at age 42 when the "20&out" full pension and lifetime healthcare was earned? With final pay 'spiking' ? With COLA on pension and health-care"? Cuz if they had, they'd have learned that $3M or $4M is the answer......complete screw-job, con-job on the taxpayers of NYCity. Not to rant, but THIS type of govt malfeasance/con-job on the private sector public, is the REAL type of news that's causing cities to go broke, and will the taxpayers EVER understand it? No. So, goodbye Newsweak and hopefully soon, the NYTimes. Absolutely NO scrutiny of the very real current catastrophes hoisted upon us by our governmental entities. None, zilch.

I loved reading Newsweek, until it began drifting farther and farther to the left. Its unabashed anti-Republican reporting and commentary turned off many respectable American readers. When will the media ever be fair and balanced?

Actually, newsweek was against newsweek. Americans, in some cases, are awakening and finding the deception of the left to be of no value.

By the way, Matt, I'll describe a simple way to roughly estimate the net worth of a NYC policeman at age 42....... and www.nypdrecruit.com
brags about the fabulous pay & benefits to make it easy, WITH a simple assumption of COLA & interest discounting being equal, all you have to do is ignore COLA and interest discounting and assume lifespan to age 82. You'd learn that lifetime pay & bfts from 22 to 82 total about $5 to $6M, divide by 20 years working and that's $250k - $300k PER YEAR of working. Good god, husband & wife policemen make over $500k per year of working! Top "1%" !!! If only the news media had 1/2 a brain to figure it out ! What's worse........is that the bfts have tax-deferred and tax-free components that are astounding in their power compared to regular $500k earned every year for 20 years working! It's the greatest fleece-job on taxpayers ever designed (by unions.....and with enough complexity that no one bothers to figure it out !). It SHOULD make private sector investigative journalists VERY intellectually-curious.....but for some reason(s), has NOT !

It's simpler than you think Tina. People are not going to voluntarily pay good money to be assaulted by Liberal agitprop.

"Time" is next and good riddance.

'Time' is next and good riddance.

Yes the trends in online reading and the inadequacy of a weekly news summary in a 24hr news cyle world contributed. But the fact that Newsweek sucked and sacrificed impartiality over a political bias that went against ~ 50% of the populace was a far bigger contributor.

When I was young Newsweek was on my reading list. Than as I matured I realized the magazine was just another well packaged propaganda outlet. When Drudge broke the Lewinsky story it was discovered that Newsweek had been setting on the story for almost a year. The revised radio industry offered an alternative to the established broadcast opinions and the internet offered the same alternative to the print industry. This article is well written yet still avoids the truth. Don’t piss on my boots and tell me it’s raining.

The 'zeitgeist' was against Newsweek?
I can simplify this for everyone without the use of any Philosophy 101 terminology.
It was a LOUSY magazine that was painfully biased, that nobody wanted to buy.

Perhaps not as preening and blame-avoiding as the zeitgeist explanation: but a tad more accurate.

Don't think so Tim. I would not pay good money to read that liberal crap. Lots of others think the same way. Die a painful death Newsweek, Time, et al.

Maybe if Newsweek printed real news, instead of just mainstream propaganda, it might have stayed alive. Unfortunately much of the American public, due to the "success" of our public school systems, can no longer read anything of length or substance, so the point is moot.

Newsweak wasn't the first to go, and it will not be the last. There are simply too many liberal 'news' sources spewing the exact same propaganda. With the internet as well as radio and television, much of it is now free (and worth every penny) and if we know anything, it's that liberals LOVE them some free stuff. So don't expect to see your favorite liberal magazines around much longer, unless 1) they have hundreds of millions of dollars to lose, or 2) you can find a way to take other people's money to pay for it.

Good riddance.

Good bye and good riddance. Nothing more then a liberal fish wrapper.

I stopped ordering Newsweek when it became nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Democratic Party

i was a newsweek reader up to the 1st gulf war. i read now every military system did not work. M1 tank used too much fuel to be used in combat due to it's turbine engine. the desert sand would clog its filters. the anti-tank missles would not penetrate russian armor,the all volunteer army could not stand up to the battle hardened hussein troups. the helicopters would not work in the desert due to the fine sand clogging their filters.
the war started and everything that i had read in newsweek was the opposite of the truth. all the military systems worked very well and the troops of sadam hussein were refered to as battle weary after the war started. i cancelled my subscription. mark twain " do not believe anything you read in the newspaper" amen!!

Good riddance! What was once a decent news magazine has morphed into a left wing propaganda rag. True reporting died long ago and became nothing more than an op/ed outlet for liberal views.

It's pretty simple, when the legacy media lies, does not cover certain stories or obfuscates stories that harms their lefty (read liberal, statist, etc) positions, they will fail in the modern era of instantaneous news promulgation.

We do not need legacy media any longer, we do not need your narrative enforcement. We can see the news as it happens. The legacy media will continue on, but only those that are funded by large corporations that can afford to lose money, like CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, New York Times, LA Times, etc will still exist over time. Just as in other larger corporations, where they have divisions that lose money, will they be able to exist.

What I like to call the lefty news, the DNC media, will still be around for a long time, but now this is the time for conservative media giants to be created. Fox News in no ways is conservative, they have their own lefties that they allow to spew their lies, therefore there is a large vacancy for a smart investor to make a few bucks. Time for someone to create an actual conservative news outlet on cable and maybe a few conservative entertainment channels.

Their is a glut in the liberal markets and any smart investor can see this. Smart money always finds the best investments. Time to make some money.

Yawn. My, what big words you have....

Newsweak is dead because -- in a media marketplace where liberals are way-y-y over-represented -- it offered nothing unique or noteworthy.

The turning point for Newsweek was when it decided to go all left wing all the time, shutting out half of it potential audience in the hope of getting a bigger share of the remaining half.

Dumb idea, poorly executed. Will Time understand the lesson?

Could it be the Newsweek publication was irrelevant as you could find the same stories online for free? Perhaps the angle they took on every story was seen as pushing a liberal agenda? Maybe declaring "We Are All Socialists Now" wasn't a good move?

If Newsweek had tough interviews that no one else had, deep investigations or thoughtful/well articulated opinions they would still be around in print.

Wow, with stimulating writing liike this, one wonders why Newweek is folding. And Michael Kinsley, of course, America longs to hear more from Michael Kinsley. I'm sure we will all remember where we were when Newweek ran out of GAS.

Newsweek died because they turned into a total partisan left wing rag. I cancelled my subscription several years ago. They went the route of Time, MSNBC and CNN.........all dead or dying a slow death. Just a crazy idea......but half your audience......lthe half that buys things and pays taxes....aren't Dems.

Perhaps if they had not had such blatant Liberal bias and had studied market demographics they would have realized that most Liberals don't buy magazines, they steal them or just claim to read them after scanning the website.

Conservatives actually buy magazines because they are educated and enjoy reading political analysis and other articles in depth.

A sign of our times are essays like this one which are just barely readable-- and all too trivial.

One more liberal rag down, many more to go....

Newsweek failed because they became too liberal in their content. I had a subscription for over ten years. I dropped it 6 or 7 years ago because their content became irrelevant. That is what Ms. Brown needs to know if she is to learn from this epic failure.

The death of another progressive rag. Big deal!

Ms. Brown has a mental bock that does not allow her to see that Newsweek's inability to be politically objective is what killed this rag. There are so many pop/pap culture purveyors of slanted 'news' - even liberals realize that they are dishonest, even if they rarely admit it.

Good riddance, Newsweak.

I used to love reading Newsweek in high school & college. That was before it became a liberal rag not delivering news but propaganda.
Sorry Tina, you lost your magazine because you lost your way. Forgetting to report the news and fairly covering both sides of debates eroded Newsweek’s creditability. This is why the only print newspaper that is solvent is the Wall Street Journal.

Haber's insights into the demise of Newsweek are excellent. People get their news from a variety of sources these days--mostly electronic and free--and certainly don't need to pay a subscription fee to a print magazine to have it filtered for them by the Michael Isikoffs, Michelle Goldbergs, Fareed Zakarias, and George Wills of the world. Call this trend the zeitgeist, or democratization, or whatever you prefer, but there's one piece Haber overlooked that may have been another key factor in Newsweek's decline. I subscribed to Newsweek for nearly 30 years but dropped my subscription a few years back because it seemed to me that the magazine was becoming more of a mouthpiece for liberal idealism than an objective news source. What finally pushed me over the edge was the "How do you Solve a Problem like Sarah?" cover that appeared in 2008. I'm not a fan of Sarah Palin, but that cover showed me exactly how manipulative, cheap, and sexist this once respectable magazine had become. Perhaps this is consistent with the proclivity for hype that Haber says Newsweek has always displayed, but to me it was a sign they were more interested in political propaganda and selling magazines than telling the truth.

I stopped reading that mag twenty years ago as it closely aligned with the DNC. It's not been Newsworthy for a long, long time.

How about people stopped buying crap?

Zeitgeist. German noun for liberal news manipulation.

Just another useless liberal mouth piece gone into the trashbin of time. Liberals keep trying to sell their garbage of uber news and frankly it turns off the folks who might be willing to spend a few bucks buying a magazine with substance.

Clueless, blindly leftist, out of touch, hysterical, intellectually dishonest... who had a subscription to "News"week anyway?

Could've gone conservative and more people like me would have appreciated it.

"Inverted commas?" On this side of the Atlantic they're know as "quotation marks" Mr. Haber. When writing for an American website you would do well to change to American style. I recommend you read the AP Style Guide or The Chicago Manual of Style.

I used to be a paid subscriber and originally thought highly of the magazine, enough to get a 3 year subscription. As time went by and the magazine became a leftwing vehicle and left its news reporting in the dust, it just made me and others angry that we were swindled. We want, enjoy and search out getting both sides of an argument but when it is strictly onesided and strongly to the point of intolerance of any other views, it is sadly not deserving of its former glory let alone continuity.

I remember reading Newsweek regularly years ago. It became obvious that their political reporting was relentlessly biased and distorted, based on their liberal outlook. They could not keep their editorializing on their opinion pages and out of their so-called 'news' articles. Since that time, I've only looked at it occasionally, which showed me that the bias still continued.

Maybe they could get enough readers to stay in the magazine business if they changed their name to better reflect their content. They could try renaming it "Liberal Opinion Masquerading as News Week" and see if they could get more readers. I, myself, however, get enough of that so-called 'news' elsewhere to bother getting more of it by buying a magazine that laughingly pretends to give us 'news'.

Apparently a lot of other people agree.

When Newsweek, as well as Time, became nothing but leftist propagandists, I not only quit subscribing but even quit reading these publications in dentists' and doctors' waiting rooms.

Newsweek died because it sucks and no one wants to read it anymore. Good bye and good riddance. 9,999 more liberal publications to go.

Their too frickin' liberal to read. It's sickening.

Zeitgeist? The death of Newsweek can be attributed to what will kill Time and many major newspapers: a leftist agenda that allows for half-truths, untruths, and ignoring news that reflects poorly on the Dems. True journalists present the the news unfiltered and know their readership is smart enough to judge the story properly. Unfortunately, they're a rare breed now. Good riddance Newsweek.

Good riddance you leftist rag

You cannot utter "moral majority" as having "origins in philosophy, psychology, or other specialized branches of the humanities or social sciences," That is disgusting. "Moral Majority" was a vile sales slogan for the GOPer wingnut funnymentalists. You are attempting to grant to Jerry Falwell intellectual status he does not deserve.

Its my understanding that the whole long boring article above is all code for.... " the liberal disconnected views and agenda couldn't sell anymore". Jay in Colorado

Poor Tina. If only she had held on a couple more years, the liberalization of the country would have been complete. As it is, the literate in this country are still slightly conservative, and her magazine's drift to the left alienated a large part of her circulation.
In a couple of years, someone will launch "Nuzweek" - a picture weekly with short photo captions with one or two syllable words, and it will be a big hit with the 50 percenters, as we old school conservatives will call the unemployed leeches living off "Obama money."

"victims of changing reader habits, the high cost of print and a Darwinian newsstand". You forgot a flawed leftist leaning and a preachy editorial staff who thought they knew better than the American (non- NYC) reader. It is Darwinian that the survival goes to the imaginative, adaptable, and fittest.

Let me see if I can distill this down. The magazine sucks, therefore it failed.

The folks at NEWSWEEK are like the modern artist who produces work for himself and the accolades from his fellow artists while never getting to know the masses he is trying to reach. When the artist finds out that people are not willing to pay for his work he thinks he is either misunderstood or the people are stupid. NEWSWEEK has become commentary and political advocacy under the guise of journalism. Independent and conservative minded folks that are interested in world and national events outnumber liberal minded folks probably by 6 to 1 and that is a massive disconnect considering that the Journalistic elites write and author opinions as if they are in the vast majority and when it does not sell---the problem is always someone else.

Not one word about it's leftist agenda and alienating half of it's potential customers. I just hope this is just the first of many liberal rags to go down.

Newsweek thrived when there was little competition. With so many places to get information today, you need to be better and/or different from your competitors. Newsweek is just one of many publications that has a liberal spin on the news, and it just doesn't stand out in any way.

Newsweek, just like many other printed news outlets are failing not because of the times we are in, but because of leaderships failure to understand just how biased their content has become. I quit reading Newsweek because it became a mouthpiece to liberal worldviews, period! News executives regularly give false explanations to why their viewers/readers are declining, but it really has to do with content!

What the Web has done is open the eyes of readers to other views and perspectives. They are no longer sheep to the liberal elite media worldview...they now have alternatives! The baby-boomers are a great market for print media in particular, but readers have lost faith/trust in the Newsweeks' of the word. All your expensive New York marketing executives live in this liberal bubble and feed media executives what they want to hear as to content changes...thus a continued spiral downward of readers and viewers!

I assume here "Zeitgeist" means "facts." Newsweek became the print version of MSNBC, and its leftist lean produced the same results as that sinking network.

Packaging propaganda as news only works on those too stupid to know the difference, and unfortunately for Newsweek, there's evidently not enough of them to provide a profit (thank God for the rest of us).

Goodbye print Newsweek, nobody with an IQ higher than a retarded Cocker Spaniel will miss you.

Next: "New York Times circles the drain, blames Zeitgeist."

Maybe "zeitgeist" isn't to blame for Newsweek's failure. Maybe Newsweek failed because it just sucked.

I read Newsweek for years but dumped it when it became another part of the Democrat political machine.

Good Riddance!

Newsweek is gone because it became a propaganda magazine for the Democratic party and people are smart enough not to pay good money for propaganda.

"Dentist's waiting room sample?" I always thought of it as comic relief in the form of leftist media self-parody...at least when it wasn't committing overt treason by making up stories of Korans being flushed down toilets to inflame the "Arab Street", get people killed by the predictable reaction and sabotage our efforts in the Middle East.

Well, goodbye Newsweek. At least you all can go into the ash-heap of history knowing you've done your best to bring all this mess about. It does a soul good to know that you are among the earlier departures, victims of your own agendas and lack of genuine investigative journalism. If things get 'uncomfortable' in the future for all of us, you can rest well knowing you've accomplished much.

Editor Brown's zeitgeist excuse is a real cop out. I have written for Time and Newsweek. From my perspective Newsweek failed to reinvent itself like Time has successfully done. Brown brought nothing to the table except for a few sensational stories which you correctly pointed out. Indeed, she has not had a success since leaving Conde Nast to launch the ill-fated Talk. As for the Daily Beast, it runs a poor second to the HuffPost. Sadly Brown made the mistake of believing her own PR. The New Yorker and Vanity Fair were the brands--not Tina Brown.

Bravo Matt Haber Speaking of nailing it, please take a bow, hammer in hand. Tina Brown is one of the last
remaining media frauds dangling like an errant chad waiting for final inspection by the uber lib greyhairs
who continue to believe that what they characterize as the "spirt of the times" is definable by the output
of their own media products.
History has a harsher judgement on these pea brained pundits. The vast sweep of history proves beyond
dispute that simple, everyday economic realities that define one's ability to survive is the only spirit of the
times strong enough to move individuals, societies, political decisions. Brown's penchant to see vast
trends in the incipid meandering of her self-invented people who count syndrome world, may have been
once interesting but now it's pathetic.
What she and her faded ilk tend to forget is that for all the puffery about Zeitgeist the simple fact is
that nobody cares anymore about trends because people know they are largely the creation of gatekeepers.
And one thing is certain, the age of gatekeeping whether at magazines, newspapers, movies or tv is
gone. Paper and electronic dinosaurs lumbering around a deserted savannah.
So the message to Tina is guess what? The Daily Beast may be next. There's much more fun and
easy tiltilation to have on You Tube and Twitter. And with what we will have is a world of individual
gatekeepers talking to other gatekeepers. We are all hosts of our own talk shows. And all the better.
When you have a nutty Korean gyrating like an electrocuted crack addict that gets a billion hits
on You Tube the bell doth tolleth for thee. Tina has to lose her zeitgeist jones and leave us all
to our own quotidiens.

Newsweek failed because it's a propaganda arm of the elites. No one believed their lies anymore. Same with the rest of the corporate Mockingbird media.

I don't think it so much a change in reading habits but the fact tha, like most of the print media, all they were printing was the same boring, re-hashed, trival bovine excrement of the Progressive movement. You know like reading Pravda.

Complete BS from Tina Brown...Newsweek failed because she and it refused, given repeated chances, to cover straight news. Newsweek and Time were both in the tank for the Democratic Party and Obama...it just happens that most of the people who used to subscribe to these rags chose to cancel due to the blatant bias seen in the reporting. Good riddance.

Newsweek. A once great news magazine that degenerated into a weekly propaganda piece of the left. It's last editor, Tina Brown, like the magazine, lived on a reputation of past glory. She drove the magazine in its remaining days further and further from reporting facts to "Explain(ing) What It All Means", but only if you are a liberal Democrat.

Newsweek expired today, age somewhere in the 80's. It will not be missed.

The folding of Newsweek's print edition is a direct result of Newsweek's complete lack of journalistic credibility and the incompetence of it's editorial staff. The lack of accurate, unbiased and ethical journalism combined with editorial decision making characterized by overt political bias and a distinct lack of perspective and wisdom, is killing all of journalism and is the driving force behind the zeitgeist. This article is a case in point.

It died because not enough readers were interested in its radical leftist, politically correct drivel.

I once read Newsweek, just like Time and The World Report. When they became leftist trash mouthpieces I moved on, so did millions of others. Unwilling to admit the mistake to themselves, these magazines as well as the nation's once great newsprint organizations, have stepped in caa-caa and yet they never cleaned their shoes. Well the consuming public did it for them. Such a shame, these folks at one time would create and print masterpieces, now I'm kinda ashamed to lay down their products for my puppy to piddle on, my puppy deserves better.

Newsweek's demise may have been caused by the Internet, or changing consumer habits, or zeitgeist. More likely the American reader got bored with another liberal tabloid. Stay tuned, Time Magazine is next on death row.

good riddance!

It had nothing to do with the fact that Newsweek was merely a clone of Time. Same POV and editorial philosophy. And so was US News. Liberals just aren't smart businesspeople.

Hahahaha! Good riddance to another propaganda rag..there are so many more to go!

Newsweek, like so many other, jumped in bed with obama during the 2008 campaign and has remained ever since Isn't it interesting that circulation in liberal publications has plummeted since that time? For those of you who claim that this trend is economically based, well, I have heard of the Wall Street Journal having any troubles.

Newsweeks demise was a confluence of several factors. one is the shift from some print media and the other is that instead of reporting news, Newsweek became "Newsweak" and blended opinion with news and became the mouthpiece for the left. I dropped my subscription of decades a year ago after they went so unaplogicatically hard left without any balance. Furgeson was a breath of fresh air and his accuracy attracted so many naysayers and deniers that it was heartening.

To the rest of the media, you got your man re-elected so please go back to the great tradition of a free press. Learn from Newsweek.

Sic transit.

Newsweek's demise was a confluence of several factors. one is the shift from some print media and the other is that instead of reporting news, Newsweek became "Newsweak" and blended opinion with news and became the mouthpiece for the left. I dropped my subscription of decades a year ago after they went so unaplogicatically hard left without any balance. Furgeson was a breath of fresh air and his accuracy attracted so many naysayers and deniers that it was heartening.

To the rest of the media, you got your man re-elected so please go back to the great tradition of a free press. Learn from Newsweek.

Sic transit.

Newsweek's demise was a confluence of several factors. one is the shift from some print media and the other is that instead of reporting news, Newsweek became "Newsweak" and blended opinion with news and became the mouthpiece for the left. I dropped my subscription of decades a year ago after they went so unaplogicatically hard left without any balance. Furgeson was a breath of fresh air and his accuracy attracted so many naysayers and deniers that it was heartening.

To the rest of the media, you got your man re-elected so please go back to the great tradition of a free press. Learn from Newsweek.

Sic transit.

Not one thing about all of the liberal crap they proclaimed in that worthless rag. talk about dumbing down to your audience too? I'm surprised it lasted this long! Good riddance.

It is liberal trash , that is why it failed

WHAT?? No more PRAVDA US version???

THANK GOD!!!!

Perhaps if it was not so left-wing it could have survived longer. I gave up reading that trash 15 years ago.

It will not be missed.

Lasted way beyond it's usefulness, IMO. Good ridance.

Or it could be your Mag turned into Leftest Crap! Glad your gone.

Newsweek is an example of what happens when the liberal media forget about the average American who don't want to read the liberal clap-trap in magazines today. Time Magazine will be next. They are irrelevant in our day and age. Their well-known bias to the left also helped nail the coffin closed. People are tired of being told what to believe and only getting the leftist side of everything. Newspapers are also going to suffer the same fate.

Goodby to a left wing rag...
Could not happen to a better so called "news" source...
NY Times is next...

Good Riddance

dont let the door hit you on the way out. at least we wont see Obama's face on the cover any more from this rag!!!!!!

Good riddance.

Reality sets in, newsweek had to make a profit, unlike CNN, and the rest of the so-called news organizations. People are not going to buy or support liberal mouthpeices, therefore Newsweek needed to be associated with another corporation that could support money loosing liberal nonsense. Newsweek was not news, just nutty propaganda that people did not want.

Good riddance to bad rubbish!

Now, if the know-it-all Lefties that have run NEWSWEEK were to have had an ear for what the folks really expect from the news (more truth and less Liberal hate and bias) ...THEY WOULDN'T NEED TO HAVE A "LAST ISSUE"!

It's about time that this Democrat house organ played it's last notes.

With any luck, not only will Newsweek lose on the net, but so will the other Obamaweek magazines. and go completely out of business. I look forward to ObamaTime's total demise.

Like the children of Hamlin, the MSM has "followed" the piper out of town and will hopefully get well deserved oblivion a few years the road. It wil probably come from dying of heartbreak after Obama leaves office.

#finally

Never liked the Left-wing slant. Good riddance.

The magazine failed because few people wanted to pay to read the propaganda espoused by this sorry shadow of a once former staple of reliable and credible reporting. Sad to see it go on the one hand; on the other, "Goodbye slanted rag."

With biased headlines like, "Why Are Obama Critics So Dumb?", it's no wonder this rag is nosediving. They can join their Far Left brethren in the unemployment lines along with CNN, New York Times, Current TV, MessNBC, and the three networks.

Just simply liberal garbage that gave us fraudbama.

RIP. Hopefully all the liberal rags will be destroyed. I say MSNBC AND CNN will be next

Sheeple make it so before we have the fraud obama for life

The fall of print media is because of one thing. They quit taking their responsibility to investigate and report seriously. In the era of celebrity they spent their time and efforts to be on TV as a talking head. They forgot Who, What, Why, Where, and When. Tell the story and let the public decide and you will get readers. It will probably be on an E reader as it is more convenient. And it is on our schedule.

Zeitgeist ? BS. The reason(s) Time folded is because it is trash journalism. The NATIONAL Enquirer has more ethics and integrity and professionalism than does Time. Time killed itself.

Too large of a percentage in America reject political philosophies integral to the (former) publication for them to continue. Difficult to put that into their thought processes let alone words. Buh bye.

Alas, poor Newsweek - the first of the liberal media dinosaurs to go! Won't be the last either.

Oh, come on, Tina Brown and Newsweek failed because they could not change and could not operate a profitable business. Give me a break.

They failed because their skills and vision could not hack it in the marketplace.

Dinosaurs!

Yes, zeitgeist, the spirit of the times, betrayed the once-venerable Newsweek. That spirit over time moved Newsweek ever further into an agenda and into its very own spirit of imbalance and loss of impartiality. Call it karma, Newsweek. I'll miss the old version, which I believe would still be alive and well. Sic Semper Tyrannis and Merry Christmas!

Good riddance....... May the digital version of the magazine fail as well!

The aging Brown didnt get it. That says it all. Too taken with her own narrow and aged view. No one under age 50 would find her idea of fascinating anything more than cardboard boring.

Liberal biased news doesn't sell on TV, radio, or magazine.

Good riddance to this worthless liberal rag.

Very sad to see the print edition of Newsweek die. I for one will not be reading the online edition. Am I the only person left in America who still likes to savor a print news magazine while relaxing in a long, hot soaking bath?

It ceased to objectively and reliably report facts. Therefore it became irrelevant. The same thing is happening to newspapers and even network TV news. Yet it's so much easier to blame the Zeitgeist than to actually work at truthful journalism. Good riddance.

No, Tina, we cancelled Newsweek at my office over its bias reporting. I remember the day we cancelled it. We cancelled Time as well, although they keep sending it to us for free. My parakeet appreciates that, I don't put it out in the waiting room.

The left media has no reading audience. It is the propaganda aimed at the masses...who no longer read.

The left media has no readers. It is propaganda for the masses...who no longer read.

After reading a recent copy of Newsweek at a doctors office, it is clear why this periodical is dying along with their subscribers.

Newsweek didn't go out of business because of the zeitgeist. It went out of business because it ceased to be a credible news source and instead became a shill for left wing causes.

If Newsweek made even the most feeble attempt at truth rather that hard-left propaganda, they could have controlled their "Zeitgeist." But, like all liberal sycophants, they couldn't control themselves. Newsweek brought the curtain down upon themselves...and the walls were attached.

Newsweek/Washington Post Group committed “Reader/Subscriber Assisted Suicide” a few years ago when the Editors’ (who was that guy, again?) made the conscious decision to abandon the mainstream news reporting and move to a Northeastern, liberal-driven agenda. Say what you will, but the fact is the rest of the Fourth Estate is caught up in the very same death spiral.

Sad times for print media, but Newsweek shot itself in both feet and then in the head. I predicted its demise (and what it could do to avoid it) back in July: http://baskinbrand.com/?p=771

Honest Injun
They were destined to fail when Newsweek took on the political agenda of the left. The left is in
power because of the dumbing down of their voters, thus non-readers.

Newsweek became just another media arm of the far-left wing of the Democratic Party. It had always been slightly liberal, but in recent years and under Tina Brown's idiotic and incompetent management, it became a shill for the left. Brown ignored the first part of the magazine's name and her foolishness killed the publication.

Good riddance to this left wing rag!

another democrat mouth piece junked. happy days are here again. it was inevitable the people who vote democrat dont read and cannot write a sentance with more than 5 words. to all you ex employees welcvome to the obama economy you voted for!

The Zeitgeist? Newsweek's demise is well deserved for its long spiral into becoming shallow, loud and biased.

Awesome-It's a liberal rag, Most people dont have anything in common with those Leftist's.

Verbose, and the cover should have read "The End". As always the media loves the sound of their own words no one wants or has time to read or listen to. I speak as a reader going to his second job on Christmas day. You could have wrote how the Chinese do all the next great wonders and get all the jobs as we slowly die as a nation with reporters and editors standing silent. The traitorous rag deserves to go the way of the buggy whip.

I sure hope it's the last issue. I keep getting it without ever having asked for it. It's embarrassing to think people at our post office might assume that I actually ordered it.

Huh? Newsweek disappeared because it was one-sided trash without any intellectual form or function whatsoever. It was opinionated without fact or intellectual knowledge to back it up, and the American people saw thru it and rejected all of its premises. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

Simply, the facts of your complete incompetence, your lack of any integrity, has finally caught up to you.

People don't believe the crap you printed, I doubt they ever did.

What print media generally doesn't get in this country is this:

The people are sick and tired of publications that try to tell them how to think.

Print publications generally think the world revolves around them...thus, they believe everyone wants to know their opinion on the issues.

Nothing could be more wrong.

Average Joe American wants to read about the issues from both or all sides. He considers himself smart enough to read the various opinions and then make a decision on his own about which side he's on.

You see, print media forgets they are called "NEWSmagazines" and "NEWSpapers" for a reason. Report the news...leave your opinions out of it. Average Joe can think for himself, regardless of what you publishers and self-aggrandizing reporters think.

Wow. Your enthusiasm is wholly apparent; I mean, who doesn't enjoy bearing witness to another's professional passing? Nothing makes me feel better about my life than watching someone else's life -professional or personal(doesn't really matter)- unravel before my eyes. Zeitgeist you say? Funny. After reading your article I can't help thinking of another, equally fun German word. Schadenfreude. Looking forward to seeing the zeitgeist you speak come back to bite you in the ass. Merry Christmas.

No, the primary reason for Newsweek's demise is that once they turned so unabashedly to the far Left no one wanted to read a news magazine turned propaganda rag.

The only thing Darwinian was the fact that "Newsweek" rarely reported the news so much as it gave it's idiotic Liberal opinion on the news and was too stupid to see it. When you routinely insult the intelligence of over half of your potential customers with Progressive drivel, that has zero basis in even the most basic of "common" senses, it's understandable that your appeal will be to the "Low Information" voter. The very voter that feels they should spend other peoples money, not their own. Thus Newsweek, like all the other Liberal rags, finds themselves in a Capatalist market, where they cannot compete in the arena of ideas and they go the way of the Dinosaur. Good Riddence!

good ridence

Just maybe Newsweek failed because it alienated too many potential readers with its hard left viewpoints? You cant constantly give the middle finger to half the country and not even consider the possibility this had something to do with the magazines demise.

The consideration not discussed here, while dwelling on the reasons for failure of Newsweek, is the deliberate ( not ? ) decision to filter all that is written about through the Liberal/Progressive lens. Vast populations that once read this magazine with an expectation of objective writing came to the conclusion that what was written about was being defined by a political point of view. Since purchase and subscription have to be affirmatively acted upon, many of us decided to look elsewhere for something to inform. Based on generally acknowledged statistics about political points of view, this served to cut the market in half. One statistic I've never seen has to do with what percent of each political point of view are readers, people who seek out sources of information and enlightenment. A great portion of one party is made up of what can be charitably referred to as "low information" types. Promise them anything to get them to vote so power is retained. Again, I don't know what the numbers look like, but I have my suspicions. I think Newsweek and its leaders bet and lost on the size of their potential readership. Practically every publication available to the public has the same point of view and is on the same trajectory. Too bad.
Thank God for the internet.

So much B.S. I quit subscribing to Newsweek years ago when it became a total liberal rag. It's one thing to bump into the liberal by accident, it is totally another thing to have to pay for it too. So long Newsweek, you get what you deserve.

I put a comment here so it seemed like someone read this article and cared whether Newsweek exists or not. No one did, and no ones does. That is not zeitgeist at work, it is irrelevance.

Another rag bites the dust..... New York Times you need to be next

Lets be really "green" (snicker, snicker) this worthless newsrag was a waste of paper/trees and ink!!!

Sorry. The editorial bias killed this fine magazine.

Good riddance to the left wing rag.

in an age of instant news, a weekly magazine is d o a. it is as simple as that. it is not about zeitgeist, nothing philosophical. by the time newsweek comes out, the world has moved on.

Did not help that NewsWeek socked......

It was a big conspiracy!
Or maybe her and her so called "journalists" radical politics drove people away.

Whoever heard of a liberal paying for something?

Of course it had nothing to do with the fact it had become a liberal propaganda machine. When all you do is repeat the same talking points pushed by NBC, CBS, CNN, the Post, the Times, etc... what good are you?

You've taken an already small market and divided it over twelve ways. The TV factions are going to stomp you by having reported those talking points fifty times and round tabled them in discussion after after discussion before you make it to print.

Good bye and good riddance Tina, hopefully this the last mail in yours and your staff's careers.

This rag was good for one thing only....to line the bottom of my bird cage. Unfortunately overtime even my parrot began mimicking the lefts agenda. The article supposes to understand the reason for Newsweeks demise, the simple answer is that people can see through the liberal left-wing propaganda.

"Gatekeepers," withholders of truth, and enablers of the JFK-assassinating, 9/11-committing Rockefeller/Rothschild CIA/Mossad false-elite, like Tina Brown and Newsweek, shall all fail, thank God.

Nobody reads them anymore because they are not trustworthy sources of news.

Professors, educationalists and journalists are the Gramscian shock troops of the future to control the culture and once you control the culture you can shape the thought of rising generations and change the country in a way where it can never be changed back again. Journalists now trained to interpret events and not report facts...Good riddance to the liberal, progressive, pollution that Newsweek has been for years

got one question for anyone on this blog – do you know who Fabians (with logo of wolf in sheep's clothing), SDS, Frankfurt School and Willi Munzenberg, John Dewey , Antonio Gramsci, Mattechine Society, Alinksi (who dedicated his book "Rules for Radicals to Lucifer), which Obama taught in Chicago for years, Committees of Correspondence are? Connect all the dots that allowed Obama to waltz into the White House...
All part of the Agenda to create an America so corrupt it stinks and to drive this culture in a direction designed to destroy it. If you don’t know all this you need to find out!
This is the most comprehensive, best movie I have seen pulling all this
together. Watch it. Share it. It is free on line for the moment
https://vimeo.com/52009124

Call your Congressman. We need a new bailout! Newsweek is "too big to fail". Isn't saving this Liberal dinosaur worth another year or two of your children and grandchildrens future. Restart the printing presses.

i will save you the mindmelt, liberalism sucks,and the only people who (buy) this tripe,cant afford to pay for it!....

Yeah Ms. Brown, it wasn't totally the Zeitgeist. Content still matters. Maybe it was because at some point the magazine had shifted from "Newsweek" to "Essay Week." (Essays for people who think just like us.) Hmmm...someone better warn "The Economist" about the Zeitgeist. Actually no, you can actually find news from around the world in "The Economist." Plus, "The Economist" wouldn't have decided not to run the Lewinsky story in 1998 when it first broke. Time Magazine there's still time for you to change.

95% of journalists, editors, teachers, professors, and authors have become infected with the same kind of close-minded fundamentalism they pretend to despise.

How boring, predictable, and hypocritical.

They see "right wing" zealots under every rock while pushing far left fundamentalism with every hackneyed breath.

Brown could not put her pulse on the topics as the topic moved ever so quickly on to the next. Print was just to slow

She went from editing magazines packaging fantasies and hot air to a "respectable news magazine" that claimed an "above it all" objectivity. But she didn't have it in her to report facts and conduct sober analysis. She had to find "the maeaning" behind everything. That kind of eleventh grade philosophying makes for juvenile journalism at best, shallow nonsensical fluff stuff at its worst. Bye bye, go retire in Florida.

Is it possible that this magazine tanked because it was horrible and NOT worth the money required to read it?The political skewering of every story and person profiled got really tedious and BORING. The inaccuracies or out right falsehoods mitigated against the magazines creditability.

Even the use of the tired old word "zeitgeist" illustrates how out of touch this relic truly is. All the old left wing is dying off and new readers don't want to be assaulted with cliches and tired "analysis" of things they read a week ago.

Their big deal "Person of The Year" has devolved into a silly popularity contest of no interest to most people outside the closed world of media. They are about as "hip" as an old 1960s college professor still longing for the groovey days of his youth. Sad that is all it happens to be.

Sorry should have been "Newsweek. Had Time on my mind. Person of the Year comment stands as relates to TIME but off topic with this story. Too late to be commenting brain fog!!

How about another German word to describe this happy event: Schadenfreude? Certainly gives me pleasure to see this vapid, shrieking intellectually void excuse for journalism collapse under the weight of its own emptiness.

http://tracesofevil.com

Wonderful another leftist rag gone from the face of the earth. dance in celebration.

Newsweek failed because every other major national news outlet gives you the same politically-motivated propaganda, and there's better quality propaganda in the New York Times or on CNN.

I had a free subscription to Newsweek years ago. I Canceled it years ago. Too much selective reporting selective outrage and liberal mind manipulation.

FYI. Hegel died in 1831, at a time when Thomas Carlyle had only published some translations and book reviews. His On Heroes (the so-called "great man theory"--a term he never used) was published ten years later.

It's easy to blame the zeitgeist. It feels a lot better to say that an unstoppable amorphous external force drove the magazine to death instead of you hammering it into the dirt nap.

Why do you think newspapers and other """news""" magazines are going out of business? People with a half of brain don't like reading left wing socialists rags. We are sick and tired of working hard for our money and then do gooders taking our money from us and redistributing it.

Good riddance.

This is very apropos-good riddance to really really bad rubbish

I'm surprised Newsweek died before Time did. Although they are both cut from the same liberal cloth, Time's bias seems to be even more apparent than Newsweek. Perhaps naming Obama "Man of the Year" saved Time for at least one more year.

I spent ten years hiding turning Newsweek upside down and backwards hiding it under other less anti American magazines in airports. This, after being disgusted for ten years having to see its headlines insulting everything I hold dear. I, and millions of Americans are VERY glad to see it consigned to the internet and not polluting news stands anymore. One small victory for America.

Sadly...it was the lack of real news that sank this once proud magazine. Journalism is simply telling/writing what happened and allowing your readers/listeners to determine their opinions. Nothing more, nothing less. So it goes.

Zeitgeist? No. Old fashioned supply and demand in action. People were no longer demanding what Newsweek was supplying. No revenue stream, no magazine.

>>Is The Social Network as innovative in its revelation of the way we live in the era of social media as Network was of the television-saturated '70s? <<

Nope.

Quit trying to import relevance, gravity and immortality into an era absent of all three, and you know it. Those three attributes belong to an era that ended the moment this digital one began.

Grace belongs to analog.

Your words and mine on this page cease relevance and become forgotten garbage the instant the person reading them right now spots another irrelevant clickable lede thirteen inches up on their screens, clicks it, and vanishes to read the next tasteless puffed-popcorn "storylette".

We are in the styrofoam age, you journos invented it, you journos loved it, and it's now too late for you journos to mourn it. As Stephen King would say, "Hug it. Love it up."

It's yours.

That's what happens when you replace journalism with liberal ideology. Good riddance.

I highly doubt it was the spirit of the times, at least as portrayed here.
Somebody had a poll, I think it Pew, and it/they concluded that 60% of the public did not believe the media was honest or trustworthy. So if that is to be believed, then why would anyone pay for it?
You can put any face on it you desire, but an honest evaluation would show that only one side of most any story is reported. The old adage that there are two sides to every story is no longer evident in most any media outlet.

Example-
I was stationed in Japan during the LA riots. On base all we had for news station was CNN.
All CNN showed was Rodney King getting beat.
The Japanese stations, while I could not make out the commentary, showed the entire video.
Where ole Rodney threw a deputy across the hood of his car.

Societal differences aside, the Japanese I knew could not understand why all hub bub.
When I explained ratings to them, they understood, but as one said, "That is not telling the truth."

I have many more examples as over the years I have cut out articles up to making pdf versions of the "news" that comes from the media webpages.
Until more media outlets print/broadcast the news, and not the news as they view it, then this will continue until no facts will ever be believed, only opinions that pass as such.

I feel bad for demise of Newsweek. I was probably the only kid in high school that had subcriptions to Newsweek, Time and U.S. News and World Report.
Even then I could see the path away from factual reporting towards selective factual presentation.
I had always hoped it was something that would pass.

No Tina, it wasn't zeitgeist that killed Newsweek and is killing most major publications-people simply don't like being lied to, whether through omission or just regurgitation of whatever the government wants people to think. Good riddance to ancient rubbish...

Nw was so liberal and twisted in their thinking and reporting that I could hardly bring myself to even read it for free in a waiting room---they were completely away from reality

She has been the most over rated fad in publishing, increasing the circulation of the New Yorker by hastening its downward glide from America's pre-eminent literary magazine to celebrity obsessed shlock.

I'm suspicious about some of the postings here. The constant similar phrasing of "left leaning" and "left-leaning" smack of people getting the same memo asking them to blizzard this thread with the same phraseology. A true rightist would think for himself and express for himself. That would be a thread worth reading.

It's a cold hard fact that print media is dying, just as the networks, cable formats and terrestrial radio- Regardless of political slant from either Newsweek or the amazing amount of right-wing, close-minded grunts that have graciously commented on this board, organizations that release information are learning the hard way that slow adaptation to technology equals death- period.

How can Tina Brown be such a failure - touching gold and turning it zinc - and still be such a "magazine legend" without getting propped up by the media she cocktails with?

Is a bot writing these comments? They all say the same thing. Commie, commie, commie. Leftist, leftist, leftist. Blah, blah, blah. It's like kindergarten, only sillier.