'Bi(weekly)-curious'

New York Magazine announced last night that, as of March 2014, the print edition will only be published on a biweekly basis. Milos Balac at the Huffington Post wrote, “Nooooo.” Pamela Paul at the New York Times shared the sentiment: “Oh, no! No, no, no, no, no.”  Jessica Goldstein at the Washington Post wondered: “But what will become of the @nymag Approval Matrix?” Alex Rees at Cosmopolitan.com saw the bright side: “So exciiiiited to hear that @thecut will be getting more of a print presence in the new biweekly @nymag.” Scott Bixby at Bloomberg Businessweek crunched some numbers: “My math may be fuzzy, but 20% more content per issue after going biweekly means a 30% drop in overall content, right?”

For more details on the change, read David Carr’s story about the cutback in the New York Times: Long on Cutting Edge of Print, New York Magazine Cuts Back. Simon Carswell at Irish Times called it a, “Sign (sigh) of the times.” Amy Virshup there wrote, “As a NYMag alum, I can't help but feel saddened by news it's going biweekly.” Mandi Woodruff at Yahoo! News wrote, “Sad times are upon us. Looked fwd to @nymag every week.” Carl Swanson at New York Magazine explained, “We've been bi(weekly)-curious for a while, and it'll be a better magazine for how people actually read us.”

Learn how to get more press, set up alerts that are "better than Google Alerts" and make reports on the impact of articles.

Request a Muck Rack Demo