It’s always interesting to feature the up-and-comers, the movers, the shakers, the geniuses, and the wunderkinds that are making an indelible mark on an expanding, rapidly transforming media landscape that, not too long ago, belonged to a few storied media institutions. But the big names cannot be forgotten easily; they might not be driving the change, but they certainly need to react to it. What kind of strategies are the legacy institutions developing to still be considered relevant and necessary? Enter New York Times Magazine, a 119-year old institution that just went through a major redesign and is still in the process of diversifying its presence on various platforms while still retaining the print flagship.
-The last decade has not been easy for the New York Times. The revered Gray Lady of print, used to a slower pace of news where her voice reigned supreme, has been shaken up by the fast-moving, ever-evolving digital revolution. In the past years it’s undergone two abrupt Editor-in-Chief changes (Keller1Farhi, Paul. “Bill Keller to Step down as New York Times Executive Editor.” Washington Post. The Washington Post, 2 June 2011. Web. 17 Mar. 2015.-Abramson2-Baquet3) and has had to buy out or lay off a significant portion of their staff – 21 layoffs and 57 buyouts – as recently as December 2014.
+The last decade has not been easy for the New York Times. The revered Gray Lady of print, used to a slower pace of news where her voice reigned supreme, has been shaken up by the fast-moving, ever-evolving digital revolution. In the past years it’s undergone two abrupt Editor-in-Chief changes (Keller1Farhi, Paul. “Bill Keller to Step down as New York Times Executive Editor.” Washington Post. The Washington Post, 2 June 2011. Web. 17 Mar. 2015.-Abramson2-Baquet3) and has had to buy out or lay off a significant portion of their staff – 21 layoffs and 57 buyouts – as recently as December 2014.
Way to go Jill Abramson! #smartgirlshavemorefun RT @Ed2010News The @NYTimes just hired its first female exec editor! http://mbist.ro/lSFdhO
— Sarah Smith (@smisarah) June 2, 2011We wanted a ‘voicier’ magazine
+ ###### In this era of instant content creation and consumption, what is the contribution of a weekly magazine? - + It’s tricky because we’re putting our toe in creating original content every day, and we roll out the content of each week’s magazine before the issue actually reaches subscribers. So on some level we’re trying to think of ourselves less as a weekly magazine and more as a daily operation. + +We’re trying to think of ourselves less as a weekly magazine and more as a daily operation
+ We have to create a weekly print product that is a wonderful experience for the readers that want to experience it that way--and that is still such a huge portion of our readership— and yet we understand that as people age and as times change, the conversation is slowly and steadily, and sometimes not so slowly, moving onto digital platforms. We also need to create individual stories that will be part of the NYT’s mix that will grab digital readers that way too. - + ###### What feedback have you gotten from readers? - - It’s been really positive. Most of the angrier, upset mail we’ve gotten had been about the changes in the front of the book in the sense that people missed the way that it was. The new paper stock, it turns out, doesn’t work as well with certain pens and pencils as the old one did so some of the dedicated crossword, puzzle fans are upset with that. But by and large the feedback has been overwhelmingly positive. - + + It’s been really positive. Most of the angrier, upset mail we’ve gotten had been about the changes in the front of the book in the sense that people missed the way that it was. The new paper stock, it turns out, doesn’t work as well with certain pens and pencils as the old one did so some of the dedicated crossword, puzzle fans are upset with that. But by and large the feedback has been overwhelmingly positive. + ###### The cover on Knausgaard’s American road trip was big… - + Yeah. That is an example of a piece that we knew was going to have strong reactions on both sides, but I think that people liked the fact that we did it even if they didn’t like the actual piece and they appreciate that that’s the sort of magazine we want to be. - + ###### In 2009, you already had your eye on Buzzfeed. In that same sense, what or who is on your radar now? - + Well, I'm still very bullish on Buzzfeed. A lot of times people try to create oppositions between the NYT and Buzzfeed, but I think I speak for most people here at the Times when I say we really admire what Buzzfeed does. Great journalism has always been about cross-subsidy, meaning that you’re going to have journalism that is important for the public interest that is getting paid for by stuff that is a little bit more populist and commercial and grabs people’s eyeballs. - + The NYT itself is based on a form of cross-subsidy, all of those reporters that we have out there in the war zones are getting paid for by some of the more popular stuff that we do: real estate, style, we do lighter things all the time in the Times. It’s all about creating a mix that works. - + Buzzfeed has this really innovative model: they have these listicles or gifs and they are doing this content that is genuinely entertaining for people and they’re creating a mix of that with really serious, breaking news. They’re writing really important pieces that everybody should read whether it’s about campus sexual assault or Eastern Europe. They’re building a full service media organization that mixes entertaining content with really important content and I am really rooting for them to succeed and for that type of cross subsidy to work. The more different models that can prove to be viable ways of supporting important journalism, the better off we’re all going to be because we’ll all be able to learn from one another, borrow from one another. Five years ago the story on Buzzfeed was “What are they going to become? How are they going to make a splash?” and the story now is can they make the transition to become a media organization that gets its arms around very different forms of writing, but manages to make it really coherent and to marry that with a very innovative sponsorship model. - + ###### What else are you excited about? - + Getting video right as a way to do journalism online. Understanding how to use video in an innovative way to tell what would’ve previously needed to be a more traditional treatment either sort of a TV-style treatment or just a straight text treatment. It’s doing something that’s neither of both things, like a hybrid, and maybe also having audio elements or interactive elements or infographic elements. Understanding how to fit all those things together in a way that not just makes sense in an individual story level but makes sense on a whole, platform level is one of the most interesting challenges right now. Fusion is doing stuff on an individual project level that is exciting, and then there’s Vice, Pitchfork, The Verge. Eventually you will see media organizations with video as their anchor, but really what they’re providing are these hybrid-designed things that use video in ways that are uncategorizable right now. Eventually you will have ways of doing whole takes on the news that blend all these different elements in a really native feeling way that we don’t even have a good word for right now. - + +We’re going through this period of great experimentation
+ + ###### Finally, what’s your take on the next five to 10 years? - - We’re going through this period of great experimentation where individual organizations are trying to find models that work. Everybody is looking at what everybody else is doing and asking whether that would work for this or that organization. What we can all hope is that these next five or 10 years find models that really work and create proven ways to excite subscribers to pay for content and excite advertisers to be associated with content. We think of it as a very competitive time but that’s not nearly as important as the experimental part of this phase, in which we are all going to benefit from what everybody else discovers. What we can hope is that in 10 years, we can all learn from everybody else to create an industry that is on really solid footing. - - ###### Experimental era sounds better than the doom we had grown accustomed to hearing, don’t you think? - - Yeah, I don’t believe in doom. I believe that people need what we do, they want to read it, and they want to pay for it. Advertisers will also want to continue to pay for it. We just need to get from here to there. We certainly are trying really, really hard to experiment and find new ways to satisfy readers and excite advertisers, and everybody else is trying the same. I'm optimistic that we’re going to figure it out… but it’s going to take a few more years. - - Pull quotes: - “I'm optimistic that we’re going to figure it out… but it’s going to take a few more years.” + We’re going through this period of great experimentation where individual organizations are trying to find models that work. Everybody is looking at what everybody else is doing and asking whether that would work for this or that organization. What we can all hope is that these next five or 10 years find models that really work and create proven ways to excite subscribers to pay for content and excite advertisers to be associated with content. We think of it as a very competitive time but that’s not nearly as important as the experimental part of this phase, in which we are all going to benefit from what everybody else discovers. What we can hope is that in 10 years, we can all learn from everybody else to create an industry that is on really solid footing. - “We’re going through this period of great experimentation” - - “We wanted a ‘voicier’ magazine” + ###### Experimental era sounds better than the doom we had grown accustomed to hearing, don’t you think? - “We’re trying to think of ourselves less as a weekly magazine and more as a daily operation” +I'm optimistic that we’re going to figure it out… but it’s going to take a few more years.
+ Yeah, I don’t believe in doom. I believe that people need what we do, they want to read it, and they want to pay for it. Advertisers will also want to continue to pay for it. We just need to get from here to there. We certainly are trying really, really hard to experiment and find new ways to satisfy readers and excite advertisers, and everybody else is trying the same. I'm optimistic that we’re going to figure it out… but it’s going to take a few more years. diff --git a/source/interviews/callie-beusman.html.haml b/source/interviews/callie-beusman.html.haml index 6881058..47d1256 100644 --- a/source/interviews/callie-beusman.html.haml +++ b/source/interviews/callie-beusman.html.haml @@ -1,71 +1,73 @@ - content_for :title, "Feminism in Cyberspace" -:markdown -How feminist online platforms are changing the world right before our eyes.
- -The relationship between feminism and the internet is contentious to say the least. The majority of big news and social media sites like Gawker, Facebook, Twitter, and VICE were all founded and continue to be run by men. When Gawker started their blog Jezebel, in 2007, it was a voice aimed at Gawker’s female readers focused on delivering “celebrity, sex, and fashion for women. Without airbrushing.” Since then, other websites like Slate and The Huffington Post have followed suit and created feminist sites of their own. As is VICE, the edgy news and culture website famous for its unflinchingly honest journalism, and for being a total boy’s club. But all of that is about to change this year with its upcoming vertical site, Broadly, which will feature female writers and provide the gritty, feminist voices that the internet is in desperate need of.
- VICE has worked hard these past few years to create a website that functions on multiple platforms with diverse content, but the one thing that has been crucially missing is one focused on women and feminism. With the past year being full of debates about reproductive justice and slogans like Emma Watson’s #HeForShe campaign, the moment for a leading feminist voice on the Internet has never been more necessary or relevant. This is especially true considering the rise of the Men’s Rights movement and its associated websites and bloggers, all of which advocate for the silencing of feminists, and some even violence against women. Their main thesis is that (white, heterosexual, cisgender) men are the most oppressed group in society today. They routinely spew their anti-woman vitriol on websites like Return of Kings and online “pick-up artist” forums, as well as advise their fellow activists to undermine women’s safety and rights every chance they get. With misogynists lurking in every corner of Congress and the Internet, the question remains: will the formerly male-dominated VICE be able to successfully create a voice for feminism on their website? +The relationship between feminism and the internet is contentious to say the least. The majority of big news and social media sites like Gawker, Facebook, Twitter, and VICE were all founded and continue to be run by men. When Gawker started their blog Jezebel, in 2007, it was a voice aimed at Gawker’s female readers focused on delivering “celebrity, sex, and fashion for women. Without airbrushing.” Since then, other websites like Slate and The Huffington Post have followed suit and created feminist sites of their own. As is VICE, the edgy news and culture website famous for its unflinchingly honest journalism, and for being a total boy’s club. But all of that is about to change this year with its upcoming vertical site, Broadly, which will feature female writers and provide the gritty, feminist voices that the internet is in desperate need of.
- Callie Beusman is a writer, Vassar graduate, former Jezebel staff member, and in her own words, a “professional feminist with a corporate sponsor.” She is poised to be a senior editor for Broadly, which is set to launch this coming Spring 2015. VICE has done their homework by picking Callie as the senior editor of Broadly: she is the perfect fit to create the feminist voice that VICE is searching for because of her background working at Jezebel, the Hairpin, V, Interview, and IMPOSE. Callie has also written several articles for VICE before, aimed towards a feminist audience about hot-button issues such as rape culture, feminist DIY products on Etsy, and a story about Women in Waves — an activist group that provides safe abortions for women living in areas where abortion is inaccessible by sailing them into international waters to administer safe abortion options. + VICE has worked hard these past few years to create a website that functions on multiple platforms with diverse content, but the one thing that has been crucially missing is one focused on women and feminism. With the past year being full of debates about reproductive justice and slogans like Emma Watson’s #HeForShe campaign, the moment for a leading feminist voice on the Internet has never been more necessary or relevant. This is especially true considering the rise of the Men’s Rights movement and its associated websites and bloggers, all of which advocate for the silencing of feminists, and some even violence against women. Their main thesis is that (white, heterosexual, cisgender) men are the most oppressed group in society today. They routinely spew their anti-woman vitriol on websites like Return of Kings and online “pick-up artist” forums, as well as advise their fellow activists to undermine women’s safety and rights every chance they get. With misogynists lurking in every corner of Congress and the Internet, the question remains: will the formerly male-dominated VICE be able to successfully create a voice for feminism on their website? - When I met up with Callie for coffee, I was expecting her to only talk about VICE Women, but what we ended up talking about was much more than just a small project she will soon become a part of; we talked about writing, feminism and what it means to be a woman working in media today. + Callie Beusman is a writer, Vassar graduate, former Jezebel staff member, and in her own words, a “professional feminist with a corporate sponsor.” She is poised to be a senior editor for Broadly, which is set to launch this coming Spring 2015. VICE has done their homework by picking Callie as the senior editor of Broadly: she is the perfect fit to create the feminist voice that VICE is searching for because of her background working at Jezebel, the Hairpin, V, Interview, and IMPOSE. Callie has also written several articles for VICE before, aimed towards a feminist audience about hot-button issues such as rape culture, feminist DIY products on Etsy, and a story about Women in Waves — an activist group that provides safe abortions for women living in areas where abortion is inaccessible by sailing them into international waters to administer safe abortion options. + + When I met up with Callie for coffee, I was expecting her to only talk about VICE Women, but what we ended up talking about was much more than just a small project she will soon become a part of; we talked about writing, feminism and what it means to be a woman working in media today. ###### Chloe Gold: Can you talk a bit about Jezebel and the kind of work that you did with them? - Callie Beusman: I really think that Jezebel changed the entire way that we process news, the way that we read news, and the way that we respond to news. Someone asked me “why do you think the Bill Cosby thing only got attention now?” I think it’s because of Jezebel and sites like Jezebel that people are starting to not victim blame and take women seriously. I think something like the Monica Lewinsky incident wouldn’t be able to happen again because it’s like there is this voice standing up for women’s interests and teaching women to be hypercritical of media institutions in a way that they weren’t before. + Callie Beusman: I really think that Jezebel changed the entire way that we process news, the way that we read news, and the way that we respond to news. Someone asked me “why do you think the Bill Cosby thing only got attention now?” I think it’s because of Jezebel and sites like Jezebel that people are starting to not victim blame and take women seriously. I think something like the Monica Lewinsky incident wouldn’t be able to happen again because it’s like there is this voice standing up for women’s interests and teaching women to be hypercritical of media institutions in a way that they weren’t before. ###### How did Jezebel get started? - Jezebel started as a reaction to women’s magazines. [The founders] went through women’s magazines and were like “what do we hate about this?” Women’s magazines were really different when it started, and now I think that they adopted a lot of Jezebel-like stuff. Tracy, who’s my boss at VICE Women, was one of the founders of Jezebel, she said that they were reading a magazine and the headline was “What He Thinks of Your O Face,” How insulting is that? You have to be perfect all the time, even when you’re having an orgasm? So they wanted to interrogate the idea of aspirational women’s lifestyle magazines, and they changed the discourse in general. + Jezebel started as a reaction to women’s magazines. [The founders] went through women’s magazines and were like “what do we hate about this?” Women’s magazines were really different when it started, and now I think that they adopted a lot of Jezebel-like stuff. Tracy, who’s my boss at VICE Women, was one of the founders of Jezebel, she said that they were reading a magazine and the headline was “What He Thinks of Your O Face,” How insulting is that? You have to be perfect all the time, even when you’re having an orgasm? So they wanted to interrogate the idea of aspirational women’s lifestyle magazines, and they changed the discourse in general. - But with that said, I think it’s gotten to the point now where so many blogs are doing that, being really hypercritical of media stuff, and media criticism is becoming synonymous with women’s writing. Women’s blogs now are almost dependent on sexism. If they woke up tomorrow and the patriarchy was gone, what would they write about? It’s this sort of whole reacting to something without providing an alternative solution. It’s like, “Oh, can you believe Rush Limbaugh said this about women?” Instead of having the conversation that’s already been started and having the last word, a better solution seems to be having another entirely different conversation. You don’t have to just battle the sexism: create an alternate model where instead of getting mad at people for saying sexist shit about Hillary Clinton, report on Hillary Clinton yourself. I like op-eds, but I don’t like how women’s writing has become synonymous with op-ed writing about sexism. + But with that said, I think it’s gotten to the point now where so many blogs are doing that, being really hypercritical of media stuff, and media criticism is becoming synonymous with women’s writing. Women’s blogs now are almost dependent on sexism. If they woke up tomorrow and the patriarchy was gone, what would they write about? It’s this sort of whole reacting to something without providing an alternative solution. It’s like, “Oh, can you believe Rush Limbaugh said this about women?” Instead of having the conversation that’s already been started and having the last word, a better solution seems to be having another entirely different conversation. You don’t have to just battle the sexism: create an alternate model where instead of getting mad at people for saying sexist shit about Hillary Clinton, report on Hillary Clinton yourself. I like op-eds, but I don’t like how women’s writing has become synonymous with op-ed writing about sexism. ###### How did you get started? What made you want to do more feminist journalism and feminist media? - I’ve always been a feminist. It’s the one thing that I actually genuinely care about. I studied Women’s Studies when I was in school, and I continued to do that. When I was graduating high school, my parent’s friends were all like “what are you going to do? What job are you going to have?” and I was like “Oh, i’m going to be a professional feminist with a corporate sponsor.” That’s exactly what I am. I applied for a job at Gawker and they told me “you shouldn’t work at Gawker, you should work for Jezebel.” It’s really fortunate and I think I got lucky. I worked really hard and I did a lot of writing. I think a lot of people had to segway into becoming a feminist writer. You know, you just start writing about pop culture and then something else, and then kind of segway into a career in women’s media and I’m fortunate because I just started doing that right off the bat, by chance. + I’ve always been a feminist. It’s the one thing that I actually genuinely care about. I studied Women’s Studies when I was in school, and I continued to do that. When I was graduating high school, my parent’s friends were all like “what are you going to do? What job are you going to have?” and I was like “Oh, i’m going to be a professional feminist with a corporate sponsor.” That’s exactly what I am. I applied for a job at Gawker and they told me “you shouldn’t work at Gawker, you should work for Jezebel.” It’s really fortunate and I think I got lucky. I worked really hard and I did a lot of writing. I think a lot of people had to segway into becoming a feminist writer. You know, you just start writing about pop culture and then something else, and then kind of segway into a career in women’s media and I’m fortunate because I just started doing that right off the bat, by chance. ###### How do you think that social media has impacted other sources of media? - I think it’s tough for people to figure out how to do it, but it gives a platform for people who wouldn’t have a voice otherwise. It’s a lot of women of color, queer women, transwomen who wouldn’t necessarily be propped up in the mainstream media, and now they can have a way to make themselves heard, which is really cool because there’s a way they can now hold mainstream media accountable. + I think it’s tough for people to figure out how to do it, but it gives a platform for people who wouldn’t have a voice otherwise. It’s a lot of women of color, queer women, transwomen who wouldn’t necessarily be propped up in the mainstream media, and now they can have a way to make themselves heard, which is really cool because there’s a way they can now hold mainstream media accountable. ###### What do you mean? - There was this huge controversy at Jezebel when they had hired this man who systematically silenced women of color. He was this gross guy and they had given him this platform to write, and then he had this breakdown and people got mad, like “Jezebel, why did you give him a voice?” They’re right — and around the same time Jezebel had only one woman of color on staff, and everyone was pointing that out, and they were right about that too. When the new editor-in-chief Emma took over, she hired such amazing and brilliant diverse women with amazing and diverse interests and she really responded to that criticism well. The site is infinitely better now because of it. + There was this huge controversy at Jezebel when they had hired this man who systematically silenced women of color. He was this gross guy and they had given him this platform to write, and then he had this breakdown and people got mad, like “Jezebel, why did you give him a voice?” They’re right — and around the same time Jezebel had only one woman of color on staff, and everyone was pointing that out, and they were right about that too. When the new editor-in-chief Emma took over, she hired such amazing and brilliant diverse women with amazing and diverse interests and she really responded to that criticism well. The site is infinitely better now because of it. ###### Are there any downsides to social media? - There’s sometimes a policing of other people’s feminism, like “it’s not feminist that you did that,” or if you have an opinion, that’s not the right feminist opinion to have. That can be exhausting and a bit frustrating. Instead of attacking each other, how about we attack sexism? Especially if everyone wants the same thing, which is equal rights for men and women. I think there’s a lot of stuff that’s objectionable, but it is sometimes frustrating. + There’s sometimes a policing of other people’s feminism, like “it’s not feminist that you did that,” or if you have an opinion, that’s not the right feminist opinion to have. That can be exhausting and a bit frustrating. Instead of attacking each other, how about we attack sexism? Especially if everyone wants the same thing, which is equal rights for men and women. I think there’s a lot of stuff that’s objectionable, but it is sometimes frustrating. ###### What are your thoughts on the popular feminist bloggers and vloggers, like Anita Sarkeesian and Laci Green, and the myriad controversies surrounding their content? What about the stalking, doxing, and the death threats that both women have received? - It sucks when that happens. It sucks that when you enter women’s media, you have to prepare yourself for it. I have a really weird full name that I’ve never gone by and I was telling my boss about it, and saying to them that I should get it legally changed, and they were like “No, it’s good that you have a weird name. Now no one will be able to get your address.” I know so many women who’ve received personal threats. I know at least three people who had to file police reports because of online harassment. It’s insane. There just needs to be better security. I think there’s this idea that free speech is being able to say whatever you want, but I think that’s not what free speech should be because allowing these anonymous misogynists to say whatever they want makes it so women can’t speak. Whose freedom are we protecting? We’re protecting these misogynists’ right to attack women, and by doing so we are directly contributing to the silencing of women. And this silencing increases exponentially when it’s a woman of color, a transwoman, or a queer woman. You’re protecting this anonymous person on the internet to the direct detriment of women. On Twitter, people can say “you should have your head cut off and get raped.” And Twitter’s like “that’s free speech, they can say whatever they want. They didn’t make a direct threat. They said you SHOULD have your head cut off and get raped. They didn’t actually do it.” You need to have a twitter handle to work, and as a writer, you can’t shut it down. Someone found out my friend’s address because she was tagged in a picture on Instagram and it was geotagged — so you have to remove all of your geotags if you want to be a feminist writer. You have to be really savvy about personal security. At one point I was getting harassing phone calls every night. It was just someone breathing heavily and it got to the point where I called the cops. I don’t know if it was someone from the internet or just some guy, but i think that once you get through your first bad one, you’re less afraid. It is sad that I have to say that. Roosh from Return of Kings directed all these people at me and I was really shook up at first, but it was stupid personal attacks. Who cares if a bunch of internet misogynists are calling me ugly? But 10 people an hour tweeting mean stuff at you does rattle you, and I don’t think its something that you can ever get used to. It doesn’t really happen to me anymore at VICE because I think people have a weird antipathy for Jezebel specifically. VICE has a reputation of being a boy’s club, which is why I think it's really important to have a women’s site on it. We have these big empty conference rooms now, and I’ll walk by a meeting happening that’s just all women. And they also hired a female COO, and I bet that was never there before we got here. It really makes you feel proud. + It sucks when that happens. It sucks that when you enter women’s media, you have to prepare yourself for it. I have a really weird full name that I’ve never gone by and I was telling my boss about it, and saying to them that I should get it legally changed, and they were like “No, it’s good that you have a weird name. Now no one will be able to get your address.” I know so many women who’ve received personal threats. I know at least three people who had to file police reports because of online harassment. It’s insane. There just needs to be better security. + + I think there’s this idea that free speech is being able to say whatever you want, but I think that’s not what free speech should be because allowing these anonymous misogynists to say whatever they want makes it so women can’t speak. Whose freedom are we protecting? We’re protecting these misogynists’ right to attack women, and by doing so we are directly contributing to the silencing of women. And this silencing increases exponentially when it’s a woman of color, a transwoman, or a queer woman. You’re protecting this anonymous person on the internet to the direct detriment of women. On Twitter, people can say “you should have your head cut off and get raped.” And Twitter’s like “that’s free speech, they can say whatever they want. They didn’t make a direct threat. They said you SHOULD have your head cut off and get raped. They didn’t actually do it.” You need to have a twitter handle to work, and as a writer, you can’t shut it down. Someone found out my friend’s address because she was tagged in a picture on Instagram and it was geotagged — so you have to remove all of your geotags if you want to be a feminist writer. You have to be really savvy about personal security. At one point I was getting harassing phone calls every night. It was just someone breathing heavily and it got to the point where I called the cops. I don’t know if it was someone from the internet or just some guy, but i think that once you get through your first bad one, you’re less afraid. It is sad that I have to say that. Roosh from Return of Kings directed all these people at me and I was really shook up at first, but it was stupid personal attacks. Who cares if a bunch of internet misogynists are calling me ugly? But 10 people an hour tweeting mean stuff at you does rattle you, and I don’t think its something that you can ever get used to. It doesn’t really happen to me anymore at VICE because I think people have a weird antipathy for Jezebel specifically. VICE has a reputation of being a boy’s club, which is why I think it's really important to have a women’s site on it. We have these big empty conference rooms now, and I’ll walk by a meeting happening that’s just all women. And they also hired a female COO, and I bet that was never there before we got here. It really makes you feel proud. - ###### What’s your dream for the future of feminist journalism? + ###### What’s your dream for the future of feminist journalism? - I hope that we can get to a point one day where women’s interest writing isn’t defined as writing about all the awful stuff that happens to women. We don’t want to do only rape stories! We don’t want to do all abortion stories. We want to write about cool stuff that women are doing, and I think that’s another unfilled niche in online feminism that’s well done in magazine feminism, and again this is something that Jezebel’s doing much better now. Basically it got really cool when I left. It’s like cultural stuff, profiles on cool women, articles drawing attention to cool projects that women are working on in arts and music and film, and pieces showing us who we all should admire. That’s something I’d love to see more of. I think Jezebel’s definitely doing a lot more of it. They have amazing interviews now, and wonderful historical pieces. If you read a lot of women’s interest, the takeaway you get is that being a woman sucks and that’s not how I feel. I never want to be a man. Sometimes, the way that the experience of being a woman is written about gives you the message that “who would ever want to be a woman?” I hope we can create this conversation where you realize that there are so many reasons why you would want to be a woman. Being a woman rules. I think it’s really important that the media that we consume and we create reminds us of that, rather than thinking that we’re all going to get raped and no one will let us abort the baby afterwards. I don’t want that to be anyone’s takeaway. + I hope that we can get to a point one day where women’s interest writing isn’t defined as writing about all the awful stuff that happens to women. We don’t want to do only rape stories! We don’t want to do all abortion stories. We want to write about cool stuff that women are doing, and I think that’s another unfilled niche in online feminism that’s well done in magazine feminism, and again this is something that Jezebel’s doing much better now. Basically it got really cool when I left. It’s like cultural stuff, profiles on cool women, articles drawing attention to cool projects that women are working on in arts and music and film, and pieces showing us who we all should admire. That’s something I’d love to see more of. I think Jezebel’s definitely doing a lot more of it. They have amazing interviews now, and wonderful historical pieces. If you read a lot of women’s interest, the takeaway you get is that being a woman sucks and that’s not how I feel. I never want to be a man. Sometimes, the way that the experience of being a woman is written about gives you the message that “who would ever want to be a woman?” I hope we can create this conversation where you realize that there are so many reasons why you would want to be a woman. Being a woman rules. I think it’s really important that the media that we consume and we create reminds us of that, rather than thinking that we’re all going to get raped and no one will let us abort the baby afterwards. I don’t want that to be anyone’s takeaway. ###### So no more “Roe v. World” then? (“Roe v. World” is the tag on Jezebel.com that deals with reproductive justice.) - Abortion is another thing that’s troubling to me, because in the past few years women have really lost their abortion access. It’s crazy because feminism is having this pop culture moment and more women are identifying as feminist, and yet while this is happening, women across the United States are losing control of their own reproductive freedom. How does that happen? How is it that feminism is getting so popular, but politically things are the worst they’ve ever been for women in the past 50 years? I wish that women were as engaged and concerned with their political future as they are with pop culture right now, but I think that women’s engagement with pop culture has changed the world for the better and I hope we can translate that into politics. + Abortion is another thing that’s troubling to me, because in the past few years women have really lost their abortion access. It’s crazy because feminism is having this pop culture moment and more women are identifying as feminist, and yet while this is happening, women across the United States are losing control of their own reproductive freedom. How does that happen? How is it that feminism is getting so popular, but politically things are the worst they’ve ever been for women in the past 50 years? I wish that women were as engaged and concerned with their political future as they are with pop culture right now, but I think that women’s engagement with pop culture has changed the world for the better and I hope we can translate that into politics. ###### Do you know of any other publications that are trying to do what VICE will be doing this year? - I mean, Cosmo’s doing their big feminist thing. I don’t subscribe to Cosmo, but I’ve heard that a lot of feminist writing doesn’t make it into the magazine and I don’t know whether or not that’s true, but I think some of it does. I think its interesting to read some of the comments on Cosmo. Some of it is like, “What the fuck is this? This isn’t the Cosmo I know”. I think another thing with online feminism is the pressure to respond when something awful happens. I’ve gotten so many emails like “why hasn’t Jezebel responded to this yet?” You want to respond quickly and you want to respond coherently, and you kind of want to be the first person to respond. I think that’s why it’s easy for stuff to lose its nuance. With print magazines though, you can take more time to thoroughly research something. + I mean, Cosmo’s doing their big feminist thing. I don’t subscribe to Cosmo, but I’ve heard that a lot of feminist writing doesn’t make it into the magazine and I don’t know whether or not that’s true, but I think some of it does. I think its interesting to read some of the comments on Cosmo. Some of it is like, “What the fuck is this? This isn’t the Cosmo I know”. I think another thing with online feminism is the pressure to respond when something awful happens. I’ve gotten so many emails like “why hasn’t Jezebel responded to this yet?” You want to respond quickly and you want to respond coherently, and you kind of want to be the first person to respond. I think that’s why it’s easy for stuff to lose its nuance. With print magazines though, you can take more time to thoroughly research something. ###### How has it been transitioning from Jezebel to VICE? - Jezebel is amazing and I get worried because I think some “ex-Jezebel” people think there’s some kind of rivalry. When I left, it was because it was a huge step up. I went from being editorial assistant to senior editor, but when I left, I was sobbing. Working with all women is just phenomenal. I literally haven’t experienced sexism in the workplace since I left college. I was at Vassar when I studied Women’s Studies, and then went right to Jezebel and worked with all women, and now at VICE I basically only work and talk with women. + Jezebel is amazing and I get worried because I think some “ex-Jezebel” people think there’s some kind of rivalry. When I left, it was because it was a huge step up. I went from being editorial assistant to senior editor, but when I left, I was sobbing. Working with all women is just phenomenal. I literally haven’t experienced sexism in the workplace since I left college. I was at Vassar when I studied Women’s Studies, and then went right to Jezebel and worked with all women, and now at VICE I basically only work and talk with women. ###### Where do you see the future of online feminism going? - I’m mostly really happy with online feminism. It’s not perfect obviously, but I think it’s great that so many smart talented women are having platforms, and people are listening to them. I think it's really cool. I’m watching the world change right before my eyes. I’m watching women learn how to advocate for themselves and learn what kind of world they want to live in and talk about how they’re going to make that happen. + I’m mostly really happy with online feminism. It’s not perfect obviously, but I think it’s great that so many smart talented women are having platforms, and people are listening to them. I think it's really cool. I’m watching the world change right before my eyes. I’m watching women learn how to advocate for themselves and learn what kind of world they want to live in and talk about how they’re going to make that happen. diff --git a/source/interviews/john-herrman.html.haml b/source/interviews/john-herrman.html.haml index d8d326f..d63c98e 100644 --- a/source/interviews/john-herrman.html.haml +++ b/source/interviews/john-herrman.html.haml @@ -1,17 +1,17 @@ - content_for :title, "The Future of the Media Beat" -:markdown -Predicting the future of technology and the media industry always has been notoriously difficult. But, just maybe the pieces are beginning to fall into place. Snapchat’s Discover. Facebook hosting media content. The slow death of websites. The future is already here; John Herman saw it before all of us.
- John Herrman has been covering the technology and media beat as a reporter at various web and print publications, and as the co-founder of Buzzfeed’s tech vertical, FWD. + John Herrman has been covering the technology and media beat as a reporter at various web and print publications, and as the co-founder of Buzzfeed’s tech vertical, FWD. - He defined the [hot take](http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hot+take). He foresaw that the battle between social networks would make them [Web 1.0 portals](http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/03/facebook-is-the-new-aol.html). He also essentially predicted (#GamerGate will return under different names in multiple venues) the [biggest controversy in science-fiction](http://www.vox.com/2015/4/26/8495415/hugos-sad-puppies-controversy) since… Jar-Jar Binks? + He defined the [hot take](http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hot+take). He foresaw that the battle between social networks would make them [Web 1.0 portals](http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/03/facebook-is-the-new-aol.html). He also essentially predicted (#GamerGate will return under different names in multiple venues) the [biggest controversy in science-fiction](http://www.vox.com/2015/4/26/8495415/hugos-sad-puppies-controversy) since… Jar-Jar Binks? Now, Herrman works as an editor at The Awl, along with Matt Buchanan, the other co-founder of FWD. Founded by the current NY Times writer and former Gawker editor-in-chief Choire Sicha, the Brooklyn-based blog’s coverage eclectically ranges from media, culture, technology, and [bears](http://www.theawl.com/2014/01/bears-are-all-its-too-hot-to-sleep). Its near-trademarked tone alternates between lighthearted and serious. Since coming on board in 2014, Herrman has maintained a regular column, The Content Wars, which takes notes on the awkward, slow-motion entanglement of media and tech companies. @@ -19,19 +19,19 @@ ###### Tell me about the content wars, how did it get started? - The content wars was just an offhand comment. We did [this interview](http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2014/07/8549591/60-second-interview-matt-buchanan-and-john-herrman-awl-co-editors) when Matt and I started at The Awl. One of these quick interviews about what we were going to do, and we didn't really have anything to say. So we wrote back a bunch of jokes, and one of them was some dumb joke whose kicker was “The content wars have been hard on everyone.” Then I started tagging posts with that as a joke, and ended up just tagging a bunch of stuff I'd already written with it, and calling it a column. + The content wars was just an offhand comment. We did [this interview](http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2014/07/8549591/60-second-interview-matt-buchanan-and-john-herrman-awl-co-editors) when Matt and I started at The Awl. One of these quick interviews about what we were going to do, and we didn't really have anything to say. So we wrote back a bunch of jokes, and one of them was some dumb joke whose kicker was “The content wars have been hard on everyone.” Then I started tagging posts with that as a joke, and ended up just tagging a bunch of stuff I'd already written with it, and calling it a column. - If I go back and look at them and try to figure out what I was actually getting at, it would be clear that they are all just really similar stories about platforms; a lot of them read as if i’m this cranky old guy yelling at the new kids. I think it’s good to have a healthy skepticism about non-journalistic platforms kind of stumbling into huge positions of power. I don't know anything about their intentions. I tend to assume that they are as good as they can be, but they're also sort of... + If I go back and look at them and try to figure out what I was actually getting at, it would be clear that they are all just really similar stories about platforms; a lot of them read as if i’m this cranky old guy yelling at the new kids. I think it’s good to have a healthy skepticism about non-journalistic platforms kind of stumbling into huge positions of power. I don't know anything about their intentions. I tend to assume that they are as good as they can be, but they're also sort of... ###### I mean their intention is to make money right? At the end of the day. - It should be very interesting to people that right now we now have these enormous middlemen companies whose interests are definitely currently aligned with some large media companies.There's a powerful mutually beneficial relationship there. + It should be very interesting to people that right now we now have these enormous middlemen companies whose interests are definitely currently aligned with some large media companies.There's a powerful mutually beneficial relationship there. - The problem is that will not always be true, and the ones who will change are Facebook, not their partners. The stakes are much lower for Facebook. + The problem is that will not always be true, and the ones who will change are Facebook, not their partners. The stakes are much lower for Facebook. So it's this super classic tech story where a company comes in, creates this product or platform that everyone uses, and then from that position of power semi-intentionally absorbs the things around it, but inadvertently changes everything around it. Then it's replaced because something new comes along because it's technology, especially when it's software. This kind of thing happens so quickly. - We were talking about Snapchat as a joke two years ago. Now it's having meetings with ESPN boardrooms and maybe they're going to be it for 10 years. But according to the world that Snapchat came up in, it doesn't seem to be slowing down, that's not what happens. + We were talking about Snapchat as a joke two years ago. Now it's having meetings with ESPN boardrooms and maybe they're going to be it for 10 years. But according to the world that Snapchat came up in, it doesn't seem to be slowing down, that's not what happens. ###### Yeah, the web is littered with dead sites, like Livejournal and Myspace. @@ -39,13 +39,13 @@ ###### You just jump from wave to wave... - Yeah, and maybe you build your whole operation around an ability to do that. The best model for this kind of thing is a really nimble and fast-moving advertising agency. That's the model I think that some newer media companies are going to have to adopt. And that is complicated. + Yeah, and maybe you build your whole operation around an ability to do that. The best model for this kind of thing is a really nimble and fast-moving advertising agency. That's the model I think that some newer media companies are going to have to adopt. And that is complicated. - So you're an ad-agency in the sense that your goal is to gather attention from as many different channels and places as possible. Your reason to exist and your priorities are relatively clear: you're serving your clients interest. You want your company to grow, and maybe you want to take over some particular type of the market. + So you're an ad-agency in the sense that your goal is to gather attention from as many different channels and places as possible. Your reason to exist and your priorities are relatively clear: you're serving your clients interest. You want your company to grow, and maybe you want to take over some particular type of the market. ###### I guess that’s when you get like Pierre Omidyar (the billionaire founder of eBay, who founded the media venture, First Look Media). A billionaire who just says 'go'. - That was such a funny fantasy for people, because it actually seems like a great model going forward, if someone gives you money and you can do what you were doing before. It was the [biggest fucking disaster for the weirdest reasons](https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/10/30/inside-story-matt-taibbis-departure-first-look-media/), but honestly they were reasons that people should have foreseen. I guess? + That was such a funny fantasy for people, because it actually seems like a great model going forward, if someone gives you money and you can do what you were doing before. It was the [biggest fucking disaster for the weirdest reasons](https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/10/30/inside-story-matt-taibbis-departure-first-look-media/), but honestly they were reasons that people should have foreseen. I guess? You could probably make a lot of similar arguments about old business models that kept publications going. Maybe an organization gets to be big enough that they just elect to do things that they see as necessary or important or interesting but not necessarily successful. @@ -55,48 +55,49 @@ ###### VICE? - That's an interesting question. I mean Vice has never gotten good traffic. People read and watch Vice, but they were always so much more of a powerful brand. Their deal with HBO now is an enormous business triumph, and if it works out it will result in people thinking of Vice in a totally different way. But it's the result of years of savvy business and marketing decisions. You get the sense now that their eyes were always on a much a bigger prize than just becoming the next great publication. + That's an interesting question. I mean Vice has never gotten good traffic. People read and watch Vice, but they were always so much more of a powerful brand. Their deal with HBO now is an enormous business triumph, and if it works out it will result in people thinking of Vice in a totally different way. But it's the result of years of savvy business and marketing decisions. You get the sense now that their eyes were always on a much a bigger prize than just becoming the next great publication. - They’ve been like: We are going to be this huge advertising agency. We are going to be this huge journalistic operation. We are going to be a TV channel. And we're going to be this globally recognizable youth brand. And they seem to be pulling it off. + They’ve been like: We are going to be this huge advertising agency. We are going to be this huge journalistic operation. We are going to be a TV channel. And we're going to be this globally recognizable youth brand. And they seem to be pulling it off. - People that aimed a little lower created a huge site or a huge network of sites, and now they are faced with finding the next thing before they ever got to the point of feeling like they had time to breathe. I'm sure it's terrifying for a lot of people. But it's also fun. + People that aimed a little lower created a huge site or a huge network of sites, and now they are faced with finding the next thing before they ever got to the point of feeling like they had time to breathe. I'm sure it's terrifying for a lot of people. But it's also fun.I think that’s where a lot of people's anxieties about social stuff comes from. They're like "We're not done with the web yet; we didn't even figure this out yet." There's this assumption that it's going to be the next thing and then it's going to be permanent.
- I think that’s where a lot of people's anxieties about social stuff comes from. They're like "We're not done with the web yet; we didn't even figure this out yet." There's this assumption that it's going to be the next thing and then it's going to be permanent. So you put yourself in a position where you're dependent on these platforms that had just arrived very quickly. There is an implicit assumption that they are going to stick around for a long time, and that what they did to other people won't happen to you. Which doesn't seem right. + I think that’s where a lot of people's anxieties about social stuff comes from. They're like "We're not done with the web yet; we didn't even figure this out yet." There's this assumption that it's going to be the next thing and then it's going to be permanent. So you put yourself in a position where you're dependent on these platforms that had just arrived very quickly. There is an implicit assumption that they are going to stick around for a long time, and that what they did to other people won't happen to you. Which doesn't seem right. - I was joking with [Jonah Peretti](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonah_Peretti) today about this. He did an [interview about the LA Times](http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/03/print-newspapers-are-for-rich-people/388757/), saying, "It's a challenge to have a legacy product, I think they should charge more and more for their print product. And treat it as sort of like a product for their biggest fans.” + I was joking with [Jonah Peretti](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonah_Peretti) today about this. He did an [interview about the LA Times](http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/03/print-newspapers-are-for-rich-people/388757/), saying, "It's a challenge to have a legacy product, I think they should charge more and more for their print product. And treat it as sort of like a product for their biggest fans.” - Then he said something to the effect of “It's our big luxury not to have a legacy product.” I was kidding with him, saying “Isn't your website the legacy product at this point?” If things really do move in this direction, and all successful media companies become multi-channel networks, then the website's just sort of there... and it takes a lot of employees to keep websites going. + Then he said something to the effect of “It's our big luxury not to have a legacy product.” I was kidding with him, saying “Isn't your website the legacy product at this point?” If things really do move in this direction, and all successful media companies become multi-channel networks, then the website's just sort of there... and it takes a lot of employees to keep websites going. - And that's when you have to start making decisions about what you keep and what you scrap. People tend to keep things, but really ruthless, successful and ambitious companies have to make hard decisions. A few years down the line everyone will be like “This website thing... Why are we even bothering, what was the point of this?” + And that's when you have to start making decisions about what you keep and what you scrap. People tend to keep things, but really ruthless, successful and ambitious companies have to make hard decisions. A few years down the line everyone will be like “This website thing... Why are we even bothering, what was the point of this?” ###### Well now, what website feels fresh and new? Yeah, none. - It's not like newspapers at the height of their profitability felt fresh. It's not like the Times had a huge teen readership in the 90s. It's like they are teenagers, of course they didn't give a shit about you, but now there is this whole idea that teenagers are really engaged in the world and they want to know about everything. If only you can get where they already are, they will talk to you. But you can't trick them. I mean, they're teenagers. You can sort of trick them, but not with that. Or if you're going to do that, you are doing something totally different. + It's not like newspapers at the height of their profitability felt fresh. It's not like the Times had a huge teen readership in the 90s. It's like they are teenagers, of course they didn't give a shit about you, but now there is this whole idea that teenagers are really engaged in the world and they want to know about everything. If only you can get where they already are, they will talk to you. But you can't trick them. I mean, they're teenagers. You can sort of trick them, but not with that. Or if you're going to do that, you are doing something totally different. ###### You see that with companies trying to get into the Youtube game. - Youtube's got a funny platform thing too, because for years it was just people uploading their own stuff that no one watched. And then stuff would unexpectedly get big. Then people developed their own individual followings, but it was all really low budget and it was never stuff that YouTube could anticipate becoming huge. + Youtube's got a funny platform thing too, because for years it was just people uploading their own stuff that no one watched. And then stuff would unexpectedly get big. Then people developed their own individual followings, but it was all really low budget and it was never stuff that YouTube could anticipate becoming huge. - And then they spent all of this money three years ago on partners, and some of those deals worked out, but the ones that worked out were all native YouTubers who understood that world. [All the big media partners that went in really fizzled out in the end](http://adage.com/article/digital/advertisers-brand-camp-youtube-stars/292766/). They would take a billion dollars or whatever and make shittier versions of TV shows and put them on YouTube, and YouTube people were like "What is this, why is this here? What does this have to do with this whole world I've been living in for five years?" + And then they spent all of this money three years ago on partners, and some of those deals worked out, but the ones that worked out were all native YouTubers who understood that world. [All the big media partners that went in really fizzled out in the end](http://adage.com/article/digital/advertisers-brand-camp-youtube-stars/292766/). They would take a billion dollars or whatever and make shittier versions of TV shows and put them on YouTube, and YouTube people were like "What is this, why is this here? What does this have to do with this whole world I've been living in for five years?" - Someone made a comment yesterday about [this whole Facebook video thing](http://marketingland.com/youtube-vs-facebook-video-two-titans-face-off-123419), he was trying to straight talk and be like, ‘Well, you know, Youtube was never about video discovery and that's an opportunity for Facebook video,” but that doesn't seem to be true at all. + Someone made a comment yesterday about [this whole Facebook video thing](http://marketingland.com/youtube-vs-facebook-video-two-titans-face-off-123419), he was trying to straight talk and be like, ‘Well, you know, Youtube was never about video discovery and that's an opportunity for Facebook video,” but that doesn't seem to be true at all. The best thing about YouTube is that there are thousands and thousands of things going viral all the time. How do you turn that into the big movie and TV business that you want? - ###### How do you predict what is going to spike and become viral? + ###### How do you predict what is going to spike and become viral? - Right, and the answer is to interfere with it and kind of fuck it up. Which is I'm sure a struggle for YouTube partners, but they figured it out. They just end up being really different from what anyone expected. I'm sure YouTube wasn't having big discussions early on about how one day if they were lucky they could have millions of people watching people play video games. It turns out that our big thing is going to be weird video game themed cooking tutorials that are four minutes long and have sound effects. It's just that you don't know know these things happen. + Right, and the answer is to interfere with it and kind of fuck it up. Which is I'm sure a struggle for YouTube partners, but they figured it out. They just end up being really different from what anyone expected. I'm sure YouTube wasn't having big discussions early on about how one day if they were lucky they could have millions of people watching people play video games. It turns out that our big thing is going to be weird video game themed cooking tutorials that are four minutes long and have sound effects. It's just that you don't know know these things happen. - The coolest thing is when you find someone on Youtube who is 18 and feels totally comfortable using their phone as a camera, who has a really natural relationship with that camera. That comes through in the videos and you're just like “these people are from a different time, they are really not that far away in age." I grew up with Internet forums and whatever, and they grew up with this. This is their thing, and they're going to get better at this. + The coolest thing is when you find someone on Youtube who is 18 and feels totally comfortable using their phone as a camera, who has a really natural relationship with that camera. That comes through in the videos and you're just like “these people are from a different time, they are really not that far away in age." I grew up with Internet forums and whatever, and they grew up with this. This is their thing, and they're going to get better at this. ###### So about Facebook Publishing, I guess no one knows, but what will that look like? Will you go to a New York Times page, will you go to facebook.com/newyorktimes? I'm sure it'll be really good. Facebook has the best tech talent in the world. - The little stuff is kind of fun to think about too… What will the typography and articles look like? I think it has to exist somewhat in the newsfeed. If you have multiple types of media, and they are really being published and not just posted to the brand page, that will make those pages look a lot more like websites. + + The little stuff is kind of fun to think about too… What will the typography and articles look like? I think it has to exist somewhat in the newsfeed. If you have multiple types of media, and they are really being published and not just posted to the brand page, that will make those pages look a lot more like websites. But that won't really matter, that's not how people are going to consume it. People are still going to be in their feeds, or passing things around on Messenger or somewhere else. I'm sure you'll be able to see these things on the outside too. They'll just be like websites. From the rest of the internet they won’t be any faster or better than a good web page, but within Facebook they'll be better. @@ -115,33 +116,33 @@ ###### How do you think the content wars will affect the creation of content? - I do think it'll have the funny effect of keeping media kind of young. It will also have an interesting effect on — this depends on whether or not money keeps flowing and the economy stays okay — the state of constant hiring and people then moving on to different things. That's great for bringing people from diverse backgrounds in. On the other hand, it doesn't really guarantee any kind of future. So it's like people are coming in, but they're not sure where they're going next. + I do think it'll have the funny effect of keeping media kind of young. It will also have an interesting effect on — this depends on whether or not money keeps flowing and the economy stays okay — the state of constant hiring and people then moving on to different things. That's great for bringing people from diverse backgrounds in. On the other hand, it doesn't really guarantee any kind of future. So it's like people are coming in, but they're not sure where they're going next. ###### Do journalists just kind of move into the industry they cover? - Yeah, that's what you would do when you had your second kid and got tired of working at the newspaper, and you're like ”You know what, I'm going to go work for that PR firm. I'm tired of covering pharmaceuticals.” But you can't make plans like that now. You kind of have to wait and see. + Yeah, that's what you would do when you had your second kid and got tired of working at the newspaper, and you're like ”You know what, I'm going to go work for that PR firm. I'm tired of covering pharmaceuticals.” But you can't make plans like that now. You kind of have to wait and see. - If you got the most coveted new media job right now, you were straight out of school and you just threw yourself into it, then things will probably work out, but you don't know how. It's not like you just landed some super-coveted slot at the Times 20 years ago and you're like, “You know what, if I just stick with this, in 10 years I'm going to be there.” + If you got the most coveted new media job right now, you were straight out of school and you just threw yourself into it, then things will probably work out, but you don't know how. It's not like you just landed some super-coveted slot at the Times 20 years ago and you're like, “You know what, if I just stick with this, in 10 years I'm going to be there.” ###### Right, if you're an intern at Buzzfeed right now. - Yeah, like, “Congratulations, you're in a good position to do...something.” Who knows what you're going to be doing? People who are working in establishment media companies now have no idea what they're going to be doing in five years. No one does. It's really weird. People have different titles but they don't mean anything. + Yeah, like, “Congratulations, you're in a good position to do...something.” Who knows what you're going to be doing? People who are working in establishment media companies now have no idea what they're going to be doing in five years. No one does. It's really weird. People have different titles but they don't mean anything. - People in media companies are paid weirdly disparate amounts working for the same company but doing very different things and serving totally different audiences. It's a big huge confusing mess, which probably means that it's an enormous opportunity. + People in media companies are paid weirdly disparate amounts working for the same company but doing very different things and serving totally different audiences. It's a big huge confusing mess, which probably means that it's an enormous opportunity. So, thinking ahead to what the next set of problems are going to be for people who want to share ideas for a living is an optimistic thing to do. On one hand, I would definitely say to someone going into journalism school right now to think about it really hard, but on the other hand, I have to blindly assume that things will be really interesting and that the next five years are going to be really weird, and that they will probably be the most interesting for people who are the newest. And that's cool, I guess. ###### Okay, before I have to go, what’s been the reaction to your content war stuff? - I've been trying to do a bit of self-justification with this content wars stuff because the pushback that you get is kind of funny. It's inside baseball kind of fun stuff for some people, but when you're part of this larger shift, you become defensive about it. If you're defensive about something that is just really exciting and you understand that it is the future, your defensiveness is like optimism. But when your defensiveness is for a partnership with a social network, these things aren't so clear. Any partnership between two companies must be a negotiation. There are power dynamics at play — something's being gained, something's being given up. + I've been trying to do a bit of self-justification with this content wars stuff because the pushback that you get is kind of funny. It's inside baseball kind of fun stuff for some people, but when you're part of this larger shift, you become defensive about it. If you're defensive about something that is just really exciting and you understand that it is the future, your defensiveness is like optimism. But when your defensiveness is for a partnership with a social network, these things aren't so clear. Any partnership between two companies must be a negotiation. There are power dynamics at play — something's being gained, something's being given up.Any partnership between two companies must be a negotiation. There are power dynamics at play — something's being gained, something's being given up.
- I think people lose a little bit of that reflexive skepticism when the powerful outsiders are also the companies that are changing the world. It's fun and kind of easy now to puncture that a little bit because people still ascribe magical qualities to tech companies that are truly crazy and new. + I think people lose a little bit of that reflexive skepticism when the powerful outsiders are also the companies that are changing the world. It's fun and kind of easy now to puncture that a little bit because people still ascribe magical qualities to tech companies that are truly crazy and new. Anyways, I keep coming back to this: The tech and media story is the media story. It has been for a few years, and it will be for a number of years. Media reporters were very fixated for a long time on newspaper ownership, newsroom politics, celebrity journalists, and journalistic fuck-ups. I think part of that was because the modes of distribution faded into the background. - If any of them survive, and I suspect a lot of them certainly will, they will just become part of life and people will settle around them in superficial ways, and then start to take them more seriously. I hope this kind of thing becomes a constant low-level story in media. I hope that this becomes the media beat. + If any of them survive, and I suspect a lot of them certainly will, they will just become part of life and people will settle around them in superficial ways, and then start to take them more seriously. I hope this kind of thing becomes a constant low-level story in media. I hope that this becomes the media beat. diff --git a/source/javascripts/all.js b/source/javascripts/all.js index 7cf35bd..4ea31d5 100644 --- a/source/javascripts/all.js +++ b/source/javascripts/all.js @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ $(window).load(function(){ if ( $('body').is('.d7')){ // do - $( '.menu ul').addClass('collapsed').toggle(); + $( '.menu ul').addClass('collapsed').toggle(); } }); diff --git a/source/javascripts/footnotehandler.js b/source/javascripts/footnotehandler.js index 9414807..32a5cfb 100644 --- a/source/javascripts/footnotehandler.js +++ b/source/javascripts/footnotehandler.js @@ -13,11 +13,11 @@ function footnoteHandler() { if ($(footnote_id).hasClass('active')) { $(footnote_id).fadeOut(); - $(footnote_id).removeClass('active'); + $(footnote_id).removeClass('active'); } else { if (!$(footnote_id).hasClass('active')) { - $(footnote_id).fadeToggle(); + $(footnote_id).fadeToggle(); $(footnote_id).addClass('active'); } } diff --git a/source/javascripts/tochandler.js b/source/javascripts/tochandler.js new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e17b40c --- /dev/null +++ b/source/javascripts/tochandler.js @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ +function tocHandler() { + $('#close-modal').click(function(){ + $('#toc').toggle(); + }); +} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/source/layouts/layout.haml b/source/layouts/layout.haml index cd13078..8a2d67a 100644 --- a/source/layouts/layout.haml +++ b/source/layouts/layout.haml @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ mapHandler(); footnoteHandler(); teamHandler(); + tocHandler() $("#editor-note-trigger").click(function(){ $("#editorial_note").slideToggle(); diff --git a/source/partials/interviews/_index.haml b/source/partials/interviews/_index.haml index 01e1828..ccae576 100644 --- a/source/partials/interviews/_index.haml +++ b/source/partials/interviews/_index.haml @@ -1,47 +1,49 @@ +#toc.modal.body + #close-modal + × -#toc.modal.body - %h1 - Media Landscape Two Thousand Fifteen + %h1 Media Landscape + %h2 Two Thousand Fifteen - A critical overview of contemporary media from The New School + %p.toc-dek A critical overview of contemporary media from The New School %hr %h3 Process - + .toc-item .toc-item-art %h4.toc-item-title %a{:href => "http://cpcj.tumblr.com/"} Behind the Scenes %p.toc-byline - The making of Media Landscape by the CPCJ’s first Multimedia Publishing, Production and Writing Lab + The making of Media Landscape by the CPCJ’s first Multimedia Publishing, Production and Writing Lab %h2 Table of Contents - + %h3 Editorial Note - + .toc-item .toc-item-art -# = image_tag '#' %h4.toc-item-title - %a{:href => "#"} - What Are the Stakes? + %a{:href => "/about.html"} + What Are the Stakes? %p.toc-byline - + %h3 The IRL Feature - + .toc-item %h4.toc-item-title %a{:href => "https://vimeo.com/130199067"} The (New) New Republic %p.toc-byline All CPCJ Media interview subjects - + %h3 Interviews @@ -62,7 +64,7 @@ The New Collective Intelligence: Genius %p.toc-byline Emily Segal and Cecilia Mezulic - + .toc-item .toc-item-art = image_tag 'logos/repeater-books.png' @@ -134,7 +136,7 @@ The Age of Engagement: Medium/Matter %p.toc-byline Mark Lotto and Silje Kristine Andersen - + .toc-item .toc-item-art = image_tag 'logos/snapchat.png' @@ -143,7 +145,7 @@ When Viral Goes Viral: Snapchat Discover %p.toc-byline Nathan Jurgenson and Troy O’Neill - + .toc-item .toc-item-art = image_tag 'logos/ref-29.png' @@ -197,5 +199,11 @@ .toc-item-art %h4.toc-item-title %a{:href => "http://cpcjpanorama.tumblr.com/"} - Experimental Works + Experimental Works + + %hr + %p.final-toc-note + To learn more about The New School and the MA Creative Publishing & Critical Journalism program, visit creative-publishing.org. + %p + %em The New School for Social Research. 2015. New York City, NY. diff --git a/source/stylesheets/body.css.scss b/source/stylesheets/body.css.scss index 6d63466..c39521c 100644 --- a/source/stylesheets/body.css.scss +++ b/source/stylesheets/body.css.scss @@ -4,11 +4,11 @@ @media #{$D7} { - + .body { color:$black; font: 18px/24px Garamond, Baskerville, Baskerville Old Face, Hoefler Text, Times New Roman, serif; - + p { margin:0; width:100%; @@ -37,9 +37,7 @@ h5 { font:bold 16px/21px Helvetica; - margin-bottom: 20px; - color:$orange; - border-top:1px dotted lightgray; + color:$black; padding-top:25px; } @@ -153,7 +151,7 @@ padding-bottom:0; } } - } + } } @@ -180,7 +178,7 @@ @media #{$D5} { .body { p { - padding-right:400px; + padding-right:400px; } } @@ -228,5 +226,11 @@ p { padding-right:400px; } + h6 { + padding-right:140px; + } + .pullquote { + padding-right:100px; + } } } \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/source/stylesheets/footnote.css.scss b/source/stylesheets/footnote.css.scss index d533ff3..232ae0f 100644 --- a/source/stylesheets/footnote.css.scss +++ b/source/stylesheets/footnote.css.scss @@ -5,12 +5,12 @@ .footnote { display:none; - } + } } @media #{$D6} { - + } @media #{$D5} { @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ -webkit-user-select: none; /* Chrome all / Safari all */ -moz-user-select: none; /* Firefox all */ -ms-user-select: none; /* IE 10+ */ - user-select: none; /* Likely future */ + user-select: none; /* Likely future */ div.fn-block { padding-top:150px; @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ .fn-caption { padding-right:0; - } + } .fn-close-button { display:inline-block; @@ -85,5 +85,14 @@ } @media #{$D4} { - + .marginal-fn.footnote { + width:160px; + } + .fullscreen-fn { + div.fn-block { + width:600px; + margin: 0 auto; + } + } + } \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/source/stylesheets/menu.css.scss b/source/stylesheets/menu.css.scss index 410ed5f..5a4269f 100644 --- a/source/stylesheets/menu.css.scss +++ b/source/stylesheets/menu.css.scss @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ bottom:0; left:0; padding:0; - + box-sizing: border-box; background-color:$white; @@ -45,9 +45,9 @@ font-size:20px; letter-spacing: 0.11em; text-align:right; - + a { - text-decoration: none; + text-decoration: none; color:$white; } h2 { @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ padding-top:2px; padding-bottom:2px; letter-spacing:0; - } + } li:hover a { color:$orange; } diff --git a/source/stylesheets/shame.css.scss b/source/stylesheets/shame.css.scss index a9c0bb2..75289ef 100644 --- a/source/stylesheets/shame.css.scss +++ b/source/stylesheets/shame.css.scss @@ -4,7 +4,55 @@ @media #{$D7} { - + + .thank-you { + float:left; + margin-top:20px; + padding-top:20px; + padding-bottom:200px; + h3 { + font-family: $sans; + text-transform: none; + letter-spacing: 0; + font-size:18px; + margin:0; + padding:0; + } + ul { + padding:0; + margin:0; + } + li { + list-style: none; + display:inline-block; + font-style: italic; + color:gray; + &:after { + content: ", "; + font-size: 15px; + position: relative; + top:1px; + color:lightgray; + } + &:last-of-type:after { + content:""; + } + &:last-of-type:before { + content:" and "; + color:gray; + font-style: normal; + } + a { + color:gray; + text-decoration: underline; + } + } + } + + #close-modal { + display:none; + } + // SETTINGS body { max-width:100vw; @@ -52,24 +100,32 @@ font:14px/20px 'Times New Roman'; } h4 { - font:14px/20px 'Times New Roman'; + font:14px/20px 'Times New Roman'; } } - + } @media #{$D6} { - + } @media #{$D5} { - + } @media #{$D4} { - + #close-modal { + display:block; + position: absolute; + top:20px; + right:40px; + font-weight: 700; + color:$orange; + cursor:pointer; + } } diff --git a/source/stylesheets/toc.css.scss b/source/stylesheets/toc.css.scss index 8f0fb05..667e527 100644 --- a/source/stylesheets/toc.css.scss +++ b/source/stylesheets/toc.css.scss @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@ @media #{$D7} { - - #toc { + #toc { padding-left:80px; + padding-top:40px; hr { margin-top:40px; @@ -15,36 +15,53 @@ h1 { font-family: $sans; + font-size: 28px; + line-height: 30px; + margin-bottom: 0; + padding-bottom: 0; + } + + h2 { + font-family: $sans; + font-size: 18px; + color:gray; + line-height: 20px; + padding:0; + padding-bottom: 10px; + margin:0; } - + h3 { font: 14px/26px Helvetica; color:$darkorange; } + .toc-dek { + padding-top:40px; + } + .toc-item { position: relative; - border-bottom: 1px dotted whitesmoke; - margin-bottom:26px; + margin-bottom:10px; } - - // ARTICLE - // TITLE + + // ARTICLE + // TITLE .toc-item-title { padding:0; margin:0; - font: italic 21px/26px Garamond, Baskerville, Baskerville Old Face, Hoefler Text, Times New Roman, serif; - + font: bold 18px/20px Garamond, Baskerville, Baskerville Old Face, Hoefler Text, Times New Roman, serif; + a { color:$black; } } - // ARTICLE - // SUBTITLE + // ARTICLE + // SUBTITLE .toc-byline { color:gray; @@ -52,20 +69,21 @@ } - // ARTICLE - // THUMB + // ARTICLE + // THUMB .toc-item-art { width:50px; height: 50px; float:left; - left:-70px; - top:14px; + left:-65px; + top:13px; position: absolute; img { margin-top:-10px; width:100%; + box-shadow: 0 0 10px gray; } } } @@ -73,6 +91,9 @@ @media #{$D4} { #toc { + .toc-item { + padding-right:180px; + } .toc-item-art { width: 40px; height: 40px;