Falling over themselves

Falling over themselves: Gawker is following up with naming news regarding that CondeNast home-shopping vaporzine we blogged last March. When it finally arrives, the magazine will be called Domino, according to the the press release. I guess it must have something to do with shopping for pizza from home. It’s due out next year, so we’ll have plenty of time to anticipate it. Oh, great: two new Advance shopping magazines in one day. (via The Media Drop)

Buckley bows

Buckley bows: This weblog has been intending all day to blog the “divestiture” of the National Review by its founder, William F. Buckley Jr. But, one thing after another happened and the next thing this weblog knows, it was watching the movie Dodge Ball with a 13-year-old.

National Review has a rather unique magazine business model. For the past 50 years, it has never been profitable, but, as the NY Times explains in its eulogistic coverage of today’s announcement, “It makes up any shortfalls each year with contributions from about 1,000 to 1,500 donors, and every other year it sends a solicitation to its subscribers in an effort to add names to the “A list” of regular donors. Mr. Buckley will continue to write the fund-raising letters, he said.”

By the way, one of the recipients of Buckley’s divested share of the unprofitable magazine is his son, who, as we’ve pointed out, is not a fan of Esquire, but is one of the this weblog’s favorite authors of humorous novels and who, if the directory by the elevator is accurate, has an office in a same rather large building in Washington D.C. where this weblog hangs out when working in our nation’s capital.


Wfluxed: If this weblog knew anyone who worked for someone named Newhouse, this weblog would suggest that at a convenient time, they drop a hint to Mr. Big that the whole shopping-magazine thing perhaps has jumped the shark. By the way, this weblog also thinks the phrase “jumping the shark” has jumped the shark. On second thought, the Newhouses have done just swimmingly without any advice from this weblog so we take it all back.

Fast Co.’s slow linking update

Fast Co.’s slow linking update: BoingBoing’s Cory Doctorow says Fast Company’s new in-bound linking policy is only slightly less clueless than the previous one the magazine has been shammed (primarily, by Cory) into replacing.

Cory says their linking policy should be something like this:

The Web exists because no one has the right to grant or withhold permission for links. Fast Company exists because of the Web. Accordingly, we neither grant nor deny permission to link to our site, and urge you to do the same.

If they’d post that policy, he says he’ll buy 20 subscriptions to the magazine. (Which they’ll report as 30 Which the new circulation staff will appreciate.)

When is a magazine not a magazine?

When is a magazine not a magazine? This weblog doesn’t get too hung-up over people using the word “magazine” to describe something other than a magazine. However, it would be nice if announcements of “new magazines” would at least bury in the press release some where what kind of “magazine” it is. Is it a print magazine — the usage of the word that’s been around for few hundred years? Or, is it a website that changes on a regular schedule, as Slate magazine (which only uses “magazine” in the header and in describing what’s in “other” magazines? Or is it a PDF? As for this weblog, we’ll stick to focus on magazines containing atoms.