Dull, dull, dull (was Re: [lbo-talk] Ann Coulter's Living)

Nathan Newman nathanne at nathannewman.org
Tue Aug 5 07:42:52 PDT 2003


----- Original Message ----- From: "mike larkin" <mike_larkin2001 at yahoo.com>
>If The Weekly Standard is so "lively," so much "fun,"
>why can't they get anyone to buy it? Its circulation
>is very low for a magazine of its profile, and I've
>heard they give a lot of the subscriptions away.

High circulation is sometimes the aim of a magazine, but not always either on left of right. Sometimes you are targetting specific audiences. There is no question that the Weekly Standard's main audience is inside-the-beltway politicos, which narrows its audience outside the D.C. world. Whether targetting "opinion-makers" is the right strategy can be debated, but since their goal is to be read by Dick Cheney and other war planners NOT the broad public, measuring them by circulation numbers is wrong.

The largest mass circulation liberal publications are union magazines that go out to millions of workers each month. Does that make them "lively" and "fun" by definition?

-- Nathan Newman



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list