The news isn’t
Time magazine, not so newsy these days:
I think if you look at the way the magazine has changed over the last several years, we’re getting a lot of stories that are more angled toward the point of view of the writer and there’s plusses and minuses to that in many ways. On the one hand, we’ve found that we want to be part of a conversation and to be in front of the conversation means not just recording one perspective and another, just going back and forth like that, but saying this is what we can bring to the story and this is what we think and then we start off this conversation that hopefully goes forward.
September 3rd, 2009 at 10:44 am
Time has done business that way for a long time. They are just now being honest about it.
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:00 pm
I think they should find a writer that doesn’t use run-on sentences….
September 3rd, 2009 at 4:38 pm
How do you have a conversation with a magazine? I’ve seen people yell at the TV during a game but even that seems to have no affect on the live action being displayed.
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Your quoted paragraph gets the “Gibberish of the Day” award. I think I can translate it into English;
“We want to express our opinion, and hopefully influence people.”
Or
“Our magazine is a political tool.”
We’ve known that for a long time. kbiel nailed it. What’s changed is; they’re no longer trying to hide the fact.