The Art of Editing

 I miss the grand old magazines; you trusted their editors to give you some perspective. 

I miss The Economist, as it once was and is no longer. I realized they had lost it when they abruptly switched from referring to Jean-Marie LePen as “that thug” to “that wily old paratrooper.” He had become a legitimate contender for the French presidency. So I realized they were subject to influence. Then I started noticing a feminist slant. As a comment online has it, “You’d think that a magazine called The Economist would understand something about economics — but only if you hadn’t read The Economist in the last 15 years or so.”

I miss the old Time magazine, which used to have such editorial style. It used to delightfully break the rules. Everyone knew you sold more copies with a photograph on your cover; for years, Time insisted on being artistic, and having a cover illustration. It made its own rules: it introduced, for example, the "interrobang." I realized they had lost it when an article described the Nazis as rejecting progress; as if that was the problem. This was the opposite of the Nazi concept. They were the “progressives,” the “futurists.” This mischaracterization struck me as deeply sinister. They were apparently trying to identify the Nazis with modern conservatives. 

I miss the old Free Press Weekly; now long gone. I expect few will know what I am talking about. I cannot even find it in any archives online. A publication of the Winnipeg Free Press. It was supposedly a farmers’ paper, but the editorial selection was wonderfully quirky. Crazy things like experiments in ESP; but not sensationalist. Not like the Weekly World News. More like listening to Joe Rogan today.

I miss the old Hit Parader. The title is misleading; it was not just a fan magazine. It was musically literate and excellent on insights into the best in current popular music. The editor, whoever it was, just had great taste.

National Geographic: I used to love it in my youth. Many did. At one point I bought all the back issues on CD. Great photography as well as great, informative articles. Now if I pick up an issue it is all politics, and nothing you couldn’t predict without bothering to read.

I miss the old National Lampoon. It was the product of fine creative minds. I assume, as is usually the case, its success depended on one particular editor, and when he moved on, he could not be replaced.

Alberta Report was once great. But the founder and original editor, Ted Byfield, retired from it, and it did not last much longer. Catholic Insight used to be great, but the editor, Father de Valk, retired, and it quickly withered to an online publication of irregular bland articles.

Harrowsmith was once great. But the original editor lost control in a divorce settlement and it soon spiralled downwards into trite politics.

A similar thing happened online with Arts and Letters Daily. It used to be the place to go for everything new in arts, culture, and ideas. Now it’s not worth bothering with.

Drudge Report is another striking online case: it used to be a place you had to visit regularly in case you missed something. It broke many stories. Then something happened. I don’t know what—supposedly Matt Drudge is still editing it. But I suspect he has secretly retired and delegated editorial decisions. Or maybe he just got lazy.

Conclusion: a great managing editor is a rare and invaluable creative talent. Bad editors tend to cover for lack of judgement or imagination by going political. And for some reason, always leftist politics. If their politics are on the right, they remain unpredictable and interesting.

I think the same thing happens in academics.