Alert the death panel. Magazines are dying. And left wing weekly news magazines are dying faster than most.
The New York Times, of all places, reports the story:
Magazines’ newsstand sales plummeted in the last six months of 2009, and subscriptions dropped as well.
Newsstand sales for the 472 consumer titles in the United States measured by the Audit Bureau of Circulations declined 9.1 percent, to 39.3 million, in the last half of 2009 versus the same period a year earlier, the organization reported this morning. That follows an 11.12 percent decline from July through December 2007 compared to July through December 2008.
Some of the well-known titles with dramatic single-copy declines included W, down 41.7 percent to about 25,000 for an average issue; Newsweek, down 41.3 percent to about 62,000 (Newsweek had decreased the number of copies on sale, noted a spokesman) ; SmartMoney, down 37 percent to about 26,000; Time, down 34.9 percent to about 90,000; Good Housekeeping, down 30.7 percent to 395,000; and Redbook, down 30.1 percent to 126,000.
Hilarious. Newsweek says its circulation decreased because they reduced the number of copies on sale. We’re no publishing geniuses, but it seems to us that they may have that sequence of events reversed.
Source: New York Times
This post was last modified on March 13, 2021
View Comments (5)
"Hilarious. Newsweek says its circulation decreased because they reduced the number of copies on sale. We’re no publishing geniuses, but it seems to us that they may have that sequence of events reversed."
Like you, I'm not a publishing genius.. but it seems pretty obvious to me that that should be the other way around. The number of issues selling have been on the decline so in order to save costs, they have decrease the number of copies they publish.
reducing newsstand circulation was newsweek's strategic decision to hone in on their most engaged and core audience - their subscribers. advertisers see this as a positive move as engagement and quality of audience are two important factors when choosing media vehicles to run their ads.
What's scary and is that photo mosaic of Obama Time covers doesn't represent even a tenth of the total magazine covers he's been on since 2008. *barf*
This is scary and gross... I am sure this they did not do with Bush.
They should change their name from Time to ObamaTime!