PARE CHE CI sia chi comincia a ritenere che quasi ci siamo. La crisi dei giornali avanza. Adesso tocca i settimanali in lingua inglese tipo Newsweek e Time. Scrive l'Atlantic Monthly:
Money Quote: Newsweek's recent decision to get out of the news-digesting business and reposition itself as a high-end magazine selling in-depth commentary and reportage follows Time magazine’s emergency retrenchment along similar lines. It accelerates a process by which the 76-year-old weekly will purposely reduce its circulation from 2.7 million to a bit more than half of that. (Its circulation was nearly 3.5 million in 1988.) Likewise, Time’s circulation, which 20 years ago was close to 5 million, is now at 3.4 million. Both newsweeklies are seeking to avoid the fate of U.S. News & World Report, which after years (decades?) of semi-relevance gave up on the idea of weekly publication entirely.
These tactical retreats by Newsweek and Time are brave stabs at relevance in a changing media environment. They’re also a decade late.
Chi non sembra toccato, anche perché sul web è praticamente irrilevante (o proprio per questo, sostiene l'Atlantic) è il britannico Economist, che raccoglie e seleziona, con una certa pesantezza ma anche completezza e gusto, le notizie, anziché cercare scoop e alleggerimenti. È a questo modello che i due settimanali sopra citati si starebbero orientando. Forse con fin troppo zelo.
Money Quote 2: Perhaps Time and Newsweek simply can’t mimic The Economist in function as well as form. The rapid marketplace shifts that are forcing the newsweeklies to retrench may have bled them of the resources necessary to imitate their British rival’s globe-saturating coverage—say, the reports on trade policy in Botswana; the 30-page specials on fusion energy in Indonesia; the correspondents who scamper (or give the impression that they’re scampering) across backwaters and remote deserts, spraying assured advice along the way like so much confetti.
Grazie a
Luca per il link