Newsweek Merges With The Daily Beast... To Shut Down Newsweek?

from the sense-and-nonsense dept

Fri, Nov 12th 2010 4:33pm — Mike Masnick

Lots of talk today about the fact that Newsweek, the struggling magazine that's been around for 77 years, has merged with two-year old website The Daily Beast, which never really picked up all that much traffic considering its ambitions. But in an odd move, reports now are saying that the plan is to shut down the Newsweek site and to keep The Daily Beast running. If that's the case... um... why merge at all? Newsweek has the more well known brand and much more traffic. This sounds like an ego merger, where the idea is just to promote the fact that The Daily Beast devoured Newsweek. And that gets you, what, the attention of a tiny group of media business insiders for a couple weeks?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: deals, media
Companies: newsweek, the daily beast

7 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

fogbugzd (profile), 12 Nov 2010 @ 4:41pm

>>And that gets you, what, the attention of a tiny group of media business insiders for a couple weeks?

It also gets you a mention in TechDirt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 12 Nov 2010 @ 4:42pm

Meh.
"And that gets you, what, the attention of a tiny group of media business insiders for a couple weeks?"

That tiny group writes all the shit for most of the news sites, so it's bigger than it sounds.

And they paid what? A buck or something for it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chris Maresca (profile), 12 Nov 2010 @ 5:06pm

Wierd
and stupid. Newsweek has quite a few content partnerships, and I regularly read their stuff when it appears at the MSNBC website. I've never been to the Daily Beast website (and probably never will).

It's too bad, Newsweek was better than Time, IMHO. I guess there's always the Economist.

Chris.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Nov 2010 @ 11:51am

If you did some research you might have had a story to write about ... but your just a blogger so you just expect someone on the web to do your research for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 13 Nov 2010 @ 2:03pm
  
  Re:
  Your cave under the bridge called, it misses you.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2010 @ 7:00am

AOL gobbled up Time Warner only to have the board vote the dude out that owned AOL. Now Time Warner simply owns AOL.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2010 @ 11:35am

Newsweek has been going downhill anyway...
What is this garbage?
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/11/15/harry-potter-deathly-dull.html?from=rss
[ link to this | view in chronology ]