3 ms·
Conde Nast has never bought specialty mags, and doesn't own Outdoors or Bicycling. It bought Wired mag (but not the online site) in like 1998. The closest Con
by rsingel 3y ago
Conde Nast has never bought specialty mags, and doesn't own Outdoors or Bicycling.
It bought Wired mag (but not the online site) in like 1998.
The closest Conde Nast has now to a specialist site is Ars Technica, which it bought almost 20 years ago
- whynotminot 3y agoAnd Ars is still great!
- teh_infallible 3y agoArs used to have interesting articles about novel intersections between technology and the law. Now it’s like a Sharper Image catalogue.
- Ghos3t 3y agoPress X for doubt
- ledauphin 3y agoit really isn't. but to be fair, it got a lot worse many years after the acquisition (2008), so it's hard to be certain whose fault it was.
- dlivingston 3y agoI read Ars multiple times a week. It's not Pulitzer-winning stuff, but certainly more thoughtful than The Verge. Can someone help me understand why it's being panned as losing quality?
- rsingel 3y agoIt has monthly page view quotas for writers, which changes what gets covered. It laid off or lost most of its best tech policy writers, including Joe Mullin, Cyrus Farivar, David Kravets, and Timothy B Lee.
- postmodest 3y agoCondé Nast turned Wired and Ars from being magazines for tech workers interested in long-form articles, into magazines for VC bros who want to read about Porsches and Burning Man. They became catalogues for Silicon Valley Money to keep in a rack next to the toilet.
- sybercecurity 3y agoYou are correct, it's a Hearst publication. Thought it was CN. Still, Hearst could be said to be doing the same thing: watering down niche publications in the name of synergy.