SoylentNews

Print Publication Shuttered at Macworld, Editorial Staff "Reduced"

posted by n1 on Wednesday September 17 2014, @03:14AM   
from the dead-tree-media-decay dept.

gewg_ writes:

Julie Balise blogs at the San Francisco Gate:

Macworld executive editor Dan Miller tweeted on Wednesday that the magazine's print edition is "going away," but its website will continue with a "reduced editorial staff."

Miller said he will remain with the company for a month to help with the transition.

Jason Snell, editorial director for Macworld, also announced his departure via Twitter:

A personal announcement: I'm leaving Macworld after 17 years. http://t.co/gozwnjN0z5
--- Jason Snell (@jsnell) September 10, 2014

On his personal website, Snell wrote that his time with Macworld was "a great ride."

"Unfortunately, many of my colleagues lost their jobs today," he wrote. "If there's anything I can do to help them, I will. I have had time to plan for this day, but they haven't. You probably know some of them. Please join with me in giving them sympathy and support."

The San Francisco-based magazine was launched in 1984, the same year Apple introduced the Macintosh.

The cuts were part of a major reorganization at IDG Communications, according to Folio Magazine. A new U.S. Media group was created. The company did not tell Folio Magazine how many employees were let go.

The Boston Globe's report notes that November's will be the last dead-tree issue and that Boston-based International Data Group has previously gone through similar moves with their other properties, Computerworld and PCWorld.

• Re:Really not surprisedRe:Really not surprised (Score: 3) by Lagg on Wednesday September 17 2014, @06:18PM

  by Lagg (105) on Wednesday September 17 2014, @06:18PM (#94636) Homepage Journal

  Cut the crap. The stuff that you read it for is the content. Everything else is side matter /or fat. Your buzzwordy use of a term does not make that any less true. This has been a term used in this context since around the mid 90s or whenever the "I'm going to put gifs everywhere" fad started when it was known as content-focused design. This is really not that hard to understand. The only people who don't get it are trying to justify use of ads by claiming that they're just as important as the rest of the page.

  and yes. Your comments are content too. Deal with it and stop buying into buzzword bullshit.

  --
  http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿

  Parent

  Starting Score:	1		point
  Moderation		+1
  Underrated=1, Total=1
  Karma-Bonus Modifier		+1
  Total Score:		3

• Re:Really not surprised(Score: 1) by pnkwarhall on Wednesday September 17 2014, @08:49PM

  by pnkwarhall (4558) on Wednesday September 17 2014, @08:49PM (#94681)

  The discussions on Soylent are the content of this website. It's what the website is made out of. While I agree that "Content" has become a buzzword, my point is that much of the content on "major" websites -- or more relevantly to this article and your comment about "content went to crap" in the print magazine -- is valueless so-called Content. It's text or video or whatever that is solely created to act as a vehicle for the real advertising content of the page.
  
  If you don't like the word 'Content' to describe what's created when a professional writer is tasked with creating a half page of BS on a certain theme or product solely to fill up space and create an audience for advertisements (or, in the case of "sponsored content", propaganda), then propose a better replacement. I know that this product has been being created for a loooong time before the creation of the Internet, but I argue that it's become much more prevalent in the Internet age of cheap-easy-quick publishing, and we need a term to describe this valueless trash.

  --
  Lift Yr Skinny Fists Like Antennas to Heaven

  Parent