The New Yorker has acquired the satirical news site The Borowitz Report. The site, which is written by Andy Borowitz, is now housed at Newyorker.com. In announcing the move to the New Yorker, Borowitz says everything will stay the same, and that all topics are fair game, aside from one.
Posts Tagged ‘David Remnick’
Jonah Lehrer, formerly of Wired and recently hired by The New Yorker, is in serious trouble. Jim Romenesko pointed out that Lehrer lifted parts of a New Yorker piece from one he wrote for The Wall Street Journal, and the situation has snowballed since then. New York’s Daily Intel noted several other instances of Lehrer plagiarizing himself and now Edward Champion explains that Lehrer recycled material for his book, Imagine. Poynter also found that he lifted quotes from a story written by someone else:
An editor’s note at the foot of his excellent New Yorker piece on brainstorming says some Noam Chomsky quotes within it ‘were not made directly to Jonah Lehrer’ and that ‘Chomsky and his colleague were interviewed by Peter Dizikes for his article in the November/December issue of Technology Review.’ Gulp.
Gulp indeed. As of now, the only comment from the New Yorker is from its web editor, Nicholas Thompson, who called the plagiarizing “a mistake.” A slew of Lehrer’s posts on his “Frontal Cortex” blog also have editors notes tacked onto them. But how long until Lehrer gets the axe? He can’t possibly keep his job after all this, can he?
The New Yorker is quite pleased with its digital operations, and its editors aren’t shy about telling everyone. David Remnick, the magazine’s editor-in-chief, appeared on CBS This Morning and when the subject of paywalls came up, Remnick got testy. “Look, you cannot get these stories for free,” he explained. “I cannot give you everything on the Internet for free and make you think The New Yorker is something that comes out of the faucet.” Agreed!
On Friday afternoon, Vanity Fair and a slew of guests gathered to celebrate the late and great Christopher Hitchens. According to WWD, a few of those in attendance included Graydon Carter, Anna Wintour, Salman Rushdie, Sean Penn, David Remnick, Tina Brown, Stephen Fry and Steve Kroft.
Excerpts from Hitchens’ works were read by many, but Fry probably had the quote of the afternoon. According to Fry, Hitchens thought that “The four most overrated things in life are Champagne, lobster, anal sex and picnics.” Fry then added, “Three out of four isn’t bad.”
For more about the celebration, click through.
It’s no secret that David Remnick, the Editor-in-Chief of The New Yorker, is a big Barack Obama fan, but it’s still fun to hear what he has to say about our commander in chief. Capital New York reports that Remnick and a panel of authors were discussing Obama’s tenure and Remnick had plenty to say.
The editor said that Obama’s achievements have been “remarkable,” defended the “fist-bump” New Yorker cover of Obama and his wife, and offered a realistic portrait of the president:
‘Barack Obama is radical in one way: he’s an African American who won the presidency. After that, he’s kind of a center-left, conventional Democratic Party rendering. I mean, he’s intellectually a lot more than that, he’s a lot more interesting. He’s certainly a lot more literary. There’s more dimensions to him as a personality both historically and personally. But, in terms of policy, in terms of the policy of the possible, in terms of the policy of his own ambitions, he is no radical.
Aside from praising Obama, Remnick opened up about his feelings toward Mitt Romney when someone asked about him. “In my life, I’ve never seen a vessel so empty of precisely what you’re asking about, which is principle,” said Remnick. Surely Obama will appreciate that.
The first thing you need to understand when discussing the Condé Nast luncheon yesterday is that it was just a lunch. Luncheon is just a rich person word for lunch. With that out of the way, let’s get to some of the more notable moments from the meal at the Four Seasons.
The New York Post reports that everyone was in pretty good spirits. Charles Townsend, the CEO of Condé, said, “We had a very good year — up in high single digits,” and said the company’s digital business was doing well. Si Newhouse was sitting at a table with Scott Dadich, David Remnick, Brandon Holley and a few others. This seating arrangement can mean something or nothing. Feel free to pick one and spread those thoughts to everyone you know.
In the last issue of The New Yorker, a piece detailing the raid of Osama bin Laden’s compound received rave reviews – at least at first. The article, by Nicholas Schmidle, is by far the most thorough account of the raid as it includes many details about the Navy SEALs team, down to what some of them were wearing. We love the piece, but apparently not everyone feels that way.
The problem – according to critics like Paul Farhi at The Washington Post – is that Schmidle doesn’t explicitly state that he didn’t interview any SEAL directly; instead he relied on interviews with officials who had debriefed the men. But that seems to be nitpicking. There are no direct quotes from the SEALS, so why would anyone think that they were interviewed? David Remnick, Editor-in-Chief at The New Yorker, told WWD via email that the people who were interviewed was pretty clear:
The piece does not say that Nick interviewed the SEALs. In all, he interviewed officials with direct access both in the military, intelligence and in the White House; some of those officials are quoted by name, some not – hardly unusual. All of these sources were known to Nick’s editors and spoke extensively with two experienced New Yorker fact-checkers.
We find it hard to believe that a magazine as good as The New Yorker would go through with publishing Schmidle’s piece without knowing that it was quality work. The article is a great read, and the criticism coming from others is a stretch. A jealous stretch if you ask us.
This is great. John Perry, a painter who was portrayed in a New Yorker article as stalking the actor John Lurie, is in day 17 of a hunger strike regarding the article. He says the magazine shouldn’t have published it (uh, in August of 2010, by the way) and won’t eat until a correction is issued.
The piece was thoroughly reported and fact-checked, and is a fair representation of both sides of the story. We looked into [Perry's] complaints carefully and found nothing to correct or retract. As concerned as we are about his health, we can’t print something we don’t believe is true.
Not only is Perry not eating, he’s also going to Lurie’s house and sitting outside for about eight hours a day. So yes, he’s protesting being portrayed as a stalker by acting like a stalker.
(hat tip to Daily Intel)
But how about some not-so-good news for Condé staffers: the New York Post reports that the new office plan calls for open floor seating in the 1 million square feet of office space. In the current office, walled offices are the rule, and “Condé Nasties fought hard for each square inch of office space.”
Uh-oh. So who has the most to lose?
The toniest digs in the Midtown office, which went to upper level executives and chief editors, such as Anna Wintour, of Vogue; Graydon Carter, of Vanity Fair; or David Remnick, of The New Yorker, were huge offices featuring private bathrooms.
Some executive suites were even said to have showers. That is likely to come to a dramatic end.
“They are very interested in the whole cubicle world,” said one insider.
The media at large has been, too put it mildly, a little frustrated with Donald Trump and his various birther/affirmative action/book-writing conspiracy claims. President Obama‘s release of his long-form birth certificate today showed that the frustration has reached its peak, and people just can’t take it anymore. The time for politely biting one’s tongue and waiting to see the fallout is over. The floodgates have been opened, and just watch: Sideshow Don is about to get slammed, even more so than before.
New Yorker editor David Remnick unloaded this rant against Trump in the New Yorker‘s news desk blog today, revealing a quietly building fury toward the bombastic reality TV star:
What is there to say anymore about Donald Trump? That he is an irrepressible jackass who thinks of himself as a sly fox? That he is a buffoon with bathroom fixtures of gold? Why bother, after so many decades? There is no insulting someone who lives in a self-reinforcing fantasy world.
Let’s say what is plainly true (and what the President himself is reluctant to say): these rumors, this industry of fantasy, are designed to arouse a fear of the Other, of an African-American man with a white American mother and a black Kenyan father…