"The age of newspapers as cheap, mass-market goods—the throbbing pulse of any city worth the name—is fast disappearing. But that doesn’t mean that there’s no future for upscale publications like the Times and the Journal—or the Financial Times, or any other publishing entity that can engage the attention of people with plenty of disposable income."
The Mail is the most powerful newspaper in Great Britain. A middle-market tabloid, with a daily readership of four and a half million, it reaches four times as many people as the Guardian, while being taken more seriously than the one paper that outsells it, the Sun. In January, its Web arm, Mail Online, surpassed that of the New York Times as the most visited newspaper site in the world, drawing fifty-two million unique visitors a month. The Mail’s closest analogue in the American media is perhaps Fox News. In Britain, unlike in the United States, television tends to be a dignified affair, while print is berserk and shouty. The Mail is like Fox in the sense that it speaks to, and for, the married, car-driving, homeowning, conservative-voting suburbanite, but it is unlike Fox in that it is not slavishly approving of any political party. One editor told me, “The paper’s defining ideology is that Britain has gone to the dogs.” Nor is the Mail easy to resist. Last year, its lawyers shut down a proxy site that allowed liberals to browse Mail Online without bumping up its traffic.
- In this week’s issue, Lauren Collins writes about how the Daily Mail conquered England: http://nyr.kr/GQqWLE
When she was being considered for the New York Times editor position, Jill Abramson “was candid” with Arthur Sulzberger, Jr. “about her weaknesses,” Ken Auletta writes, in this week’s issue. “I said I needed to work on listening more and talking less, and not interrupting,” Abramson tells Auletta. Read the whole profile here.