Here’s a sign of the new embodiment of journalism…

Newsweek will discontinue it’s printed edition  with the December 31st Issue. All of Newsweek’s information and branded publications will be on line after that, making it the leading news publication to make its entire presence on the web.

The all digital format is being adopted after more than 80 years in print. Newsweek Global, as the all-digital publication will be named, will be a single, worldwide edition targeted for a highly mobile, opinion-leading audience who want to learn about world events in a sophisticated context. It will be a paid subscription site (like the NY Times) and will be available on both tablets and the Web, with select content available on its current bl9g, The Daily Beast. The Daily Beast, which depends on Newsweek’s editorial content, now attracts more than 15 million visitors a month.

Tina Brown is the editor-in-chief of The Daily Beast and Newsweek. Baba Shetty is CEO of The Newsweek Daily Beast Co.

 

Related articles

• A Turn of the Page for Newsweek (thedailybeast.com)
• Newsweek to cease print edition (bbc.co.uk)
• Newsweek going digital-only by year-end (todayonline.com)
• After 80 Years, Newsweek Is Abandoning Print (businessinsider.com)
• Newsweek ending print edition, job cuts expected (miamiherald.com)
• Big news on the publishing front: Newsweek is going all-digital, two years after its merger with The Daily Beast. (shortformblog.com)
• Newsweek Will Stop Print Edition, Go All-Digital Next Year [Newsweek] (gizmodo.com)

CNBC Anchor Mark Haines dies at 65 (gosh… I’m 65!)

The founding editor of CNBC‘s Squawk Box morning show, Mark Haines, has died at age 65. Rather than me going into it, here’s the announcement from CNBC:

Mark Haines...on My 24th

Farewell, Mark Haines.

Matt Taibi at Rolling Stone has commented on the Olbermann layoff…

Bring Back Keith!

I like Matt Taibi. Here is about half of his comment. The rest is HERE.

We had a whole generation of journalists who sat by and did nothing while, for instance, George Bush led us into an idiotic war on a lie, plus thousands more who spent day after day collecting checks by covering Britney’s hair and Tiger’s text messages and other stupidities while the economy blew up and two bloody wars went on mostly unexamined… and it’s Keith Olbermann who should “pay the price” for being unethical? Because, and let me get this straight, he donated money, privately, to politicians?

This is absurd even by GE‘s standards. There is no reason, not even a theoretical one, why any journalist should be prevented from having political opinions and participating in election campaigns in his spare time. The policy would be ridiculous even if we were talking about an evening news anchor — because the only “ethical” question here is the issue of NBC wanting to preserve the appearance of impartiality and being unable to do so, because political contributions happen to be public record and impossible to hide from viewers.

Again, that would be true even if we were talking about Brian Williams or Tom Brokaw, someone from whom viewers expect a certain level of impartiality. But what Olbermann does is advocacy journalism and it’s not exactly a secret. NBC punishing Olbermann for donating to Democratic candidates is like Hugh Hefner fining the Playmate of the Year for showing ankle. It’s completely and utterly retarded.

These periodic spaz attacks the people in our business have over obscure and usually completely made-up ethical controversies — often over this whole “objectivity” issue, which provides a seemingly endless source of false piety for some of the more obnoxious journo-ethicists — are really irritating. I’m biased, obviously, because I’m a guest on the show, but this is beyond stupid. And by the way, has anyone checked the donation lists for CNBC anchors? I’m guessing a few of those have shelled out to the Rs. What’s the deal, GE?

Related Articles

• Olbermann Tossed For Political Contributions (plastic.com)
• Keith Olbermann Sidelined for Contributions (abcnews.go.com)
• Sean McBride: MSNBC’s Phil Griffith the Worst Person in the World, as Olbermann Joins Donahue, Banfield | Informed Comment (juancole.com)

Rachel Maddow: Bring Back Olbermann…

Here’s Rachel’s comment in full from her show last night (which, I’ll admit, I didn’t watch since I won’t watch MSNBC until Keith is reinstated… I picked this up on Mediaite.com):

You may have heard today that my friend and colleague Keith Olbermann was temporarily suspended from his job hosting Countdown on this network, because he made three personal political donations to candidates in this last election cycle. The reason that resulted in Keith’s suspension is that, here at MSNBC, there is an explicit employee rule against hosts making contributions like that. You can do it if you ask in advance, and if management tells you ‘okay.’ That’s what I understand happened with our morning show host’s political donations in 2006 under previous management. But if you don’t ask in advance for an exemption from the rule, you are more bound by the rule. For the record, the rule applies to us hosts here at MSNBC and NBC News staff. CNBC is not under NBC News, so CNBC staffers are not bound by the same thing.

I understand this rule. I understand what it means to break this rule. I believe that everyone should face the same treatment under this rule. I also personally believe that the point has been made and that we should have Keith back hosting Countdown. Here’s the larger point though. That’s going mysteriously missing, from all the right-wing cackling and the beltway, old-media cluck cluck clucking about this. This is what I think is missing.

Let this incident lay to rest forever the facile, never true, bullpucky, lazy conflation of Fox News and what the rest of us do for a living. I know everyone likes to say ‘Oh, that’s cable news, that’s all the same, Fox and MSNBC, mirror images of each other. Let this lay that to rest forever. Hosts on Fox raise money on the air for Republican candidates. They endorse them explicitly, they use their Fox News profile to headline fundraisers; heck, there are multiple people being paid by Fox News to essentially run for office as Republican candidates, If you count not just their hosts but their contributors, you are looking at a significant portion of the whole line up of Republican presidential contenders for 2012, they can do that because there is no rule against that as Fox, they run as a political operation, we’re not.

Yes, Keith’’s a liberal and so am I, and there are other people on this network and their political views are shared with you, our beloved viewers. But we are not a political operation, Fox is. We are a news operation. And the rules around here are how you know that. Before it was politically safe to do it, Keith Olbermann attracted the ire of the right wing and a lot of others besides when he brought to light and raged against what he saw as the errors and sins of the previous presidential administration. Keith was also the one who brought to light Fox News’ water carrying role for the Bush administration, he was one who point-of-view journalism posed and put exclamation points on the problems in the political operation disguised as a news network model embraced by the guys across the street at Fox.

Now weirdly, it is Keith who is illustrating the difference between what he does on TV, what we do here at MSNBC and what goes on across the street. Good night.

Related Articles

• Some helpful context, details on Olbermann flap (washingtonmonthly.com)
• Dr. Rachel Maddow Speaks Out About Olbermann Suspension (lezgetreal.com)
• Dr. Rachel Maddow Speaks Out About Olbermann Suspension (pinkbananaworld.com)
• Chris Hayes Will Not Sub for Keith Olbermann After All (bigthink.com)
• MSNBC suspends Keith Olbermann indefinitely over political contributions (capitolhillblue.com)