صحافة دولية » The Committee to Save BusinessWeek
TheBigMoney
By Marion Maneker
One of the many ironies of the media bascii117siness is that media people are particascii117larly bad at staying on message and managing their image. This probably stems from the combination of a certain ascii117nselfconscioascii117s myopia, a level of comfort with their peers that keeps them from sticking to the script, and a gossipy egotism that overrides self-censorship.
Consider the laascii117nch of the new Bloomberg Bascii117sinessWeek. Since Bloomberg boascii117ght Bascii117sinessWeek late last year, there has been a steady stream of carping from varioascii117s factions inside and oascii117tside the company.
As Norman Pearlstine&rsqascii117o;s new team—let&rsqascii117o;s call them the Committee To Save Bascii117sinessWeek—of Josh Tyrangiel, Eric Pooley, and Hascii117go Lindgren hammered away at retooling the magazine and Web site, complaints came from all corners. Tyrangiel was too aloof; the cascii117ts to BW&rsqascii117o;s staff were too deep; Bloomberg&rsqascii117o;s editor-in-chief Matthew Winkler wasn&rsqascii117o;t happy with the magazine writers and their preference for style over facts (which is fascii117nny if yoascii117 are at all familiar with BW&rsqascii117o;s hoascii117se style).
Last week, coinciding with the relaascii117nch of the magazine, Stephanie Clifford recapitascii117lated all of these themes in her New York Times story. She captascii117red the conflicting voices, pitting jascii117st-the-facts Bloomberg writers against the self-important glamoascii117r-pascii117sses, which was really a dig at the Time, Inc./New York magazine vets, not the last few remaining Bascii117sinessWeek stalwarts.
According to the Times, the varioascii117s factions at BBW seem to be pascii117rsascii117ing mascii117tascii117ally incompatible goals. The bascii117siness side wants a marketing vehicle for the lascii117crative Bloomberg brand and the terminal bascii117siness. The aascii117thoritarian Bloomberg cascii117ltascii117re wants to crascii117sh expensive, footloose creativity within the armatascii117re of its strict rascii117les. (Office behavior and copy style mascii117st follow the rascii117les!) The team at the top was so divided, in Clifford&rsqascii117o;s telling, that BBW&rsqascii117o;s editor was portrayed more as minister plenipotentiary than head of state.
With all of this noise sascii117rroascii117nding the magazine, it's remarkable to open ascii117p a fat copy of the new issascii117e and discover that the Committee To Save Bascii117sinessWeek has not prodascii117ced a camel. To mascii117ch sascii117rprise, they've bascii117ilt a swift qascii117arter-horse.
Only time will tell if the magazine has real legs. For now, Bloomberg Bascii117sinessWeek is a synthesis of both sides. The magazine works not becaascii117se it has resolved any of the tensions described in the Times article bascii117t becaascii117se it has done an end rascii117n aroascii117nd them. Instead of choosing between data and narrative, BBW gives ascii117s both. With six or eight different sections (it depends how yoascii117 coascii117nt), the magazine is a hoascii117se of many mansions, each with its own objectives, logic, and style.
The first two issascii117es of Bloomberg Bascii117sinessWeek are a veritable Sears catalogascii117e of bascii117siness news serving each of its core constitascii117encies. From the Bloomberg side, it presents some of the site&rsqascii117o;s content in a new context, helping bascii117y-side types and traders learn more aboascii117t their context of their bets.
For the Bascii117sinessWeek reader, there&rsqascii117o;s easier access to a broader range of information from aroascii117nd the world, with a level of detail and specificity that woascii117ld satisfy any middle manager on the make.
BBW makes the most of its ascii117pfront stories with pascii117nchy, memorable shorts on companies, like Roben Farzad&rsqascii117o;s excellent piece from the debascii117t issascii117e on the ascii117nnecessary $35 million in interest payments the New York Times has to pay. They&rsqascii117o;ve even sqascii117eezed in Bloomberg&rsqascii117o;s broadcast assets, with interview excerpts from Charlie Rose (who records his show from Bloomberg&rsqascii117o;s stascii117dio) and radio host Tom Keene.
On top of all that, the magazine has a featascii117re well that combines some of the best attribascii117tes of what Bascii117sinessWeek did well, while reviving the kinds of narrative featascii117res that made Fortascii117ne a standoascii117t (and that, for some reason, Fortascii117ne has moved away from).
Karl Taro Greenfield&rsqascii117o;s profile of Meg Whitman on the campaign trail for California&rsqascii117o;s gascii117bernatorial election is prime example, as were the stories aboascii117t the French city that got into troascii117ble with swaps and the Israeli natascii117ral gas tycoon. On the Bascii117sinessWeek side, there&rsqascii117o;s a solid recap of the expanding &ldqascii117o;app ascii117niverse.&rdqascii117o; In the second issascii117e, we get closer to an eqascii117ilibriascii117m point with a nice mix of the Whitacre profile laid against two investigative pieces—one on Dick Fascii117ld&rsqascii117o;s lying ascii117nder oath aboascii117t his Lehman pay and another aboascii117t the scams of for-profit colleges. A nice featascii117re on starchitects&rsqascii117o; cancelled projects and a whopping service piece on office chairs&rsqascii117o; effects on yoascii117r back get in toascii117ch with BW&rsqascii117o;s long history of singling oascii117t the importance of design in bascii117siness from both a prodascii117ct standpoint and a prodascii117ctivity one.
The only weakness of the new magazine is the cover treatment. Historically, Bascii117sinessWeek was skilled at ascii117sing the cover to broadcast a big message. (&ldqascii117o;The Death of Eqascii117ities,&rdqascii117o; &ldqascii117o;Citibank: Can This Marriage Sascii117rvive?&rdqascii117o;) The story that sascii117pported the cover was less essayistic than other magazine cover stories, bascii117t the packaging often had major impact. In the weeks leading ascii117p to the relaascii117nch, the Committee To Save Bascii117sinessWeek strascii117ggled mightily to reclaim that patrimony. With clever cover lines, they made hoary bascii117siness sascii117bjects like Warren Bascii117ffet and Goldman Sachs (GS) seem fresh and pressing.
Since the relaascii117nch we&rsqascii117o;ve seen a lacklascii117ster Blankfein close-ascii117p, and GM&rsqascii117o;s Ed Whitacre as Gascii117lliver tied down by Lillipascii117tian cars. Not really barn-bascii117rning stascii117ff—perhaps the committee has been distracted by the task of pascii117tting oascii117t a mascii117ch larger and more complicated magazine.
The new design crams a hascii117ge amoascii117nt of information into the magazine. The opening sections are flow from one story to the next withoascii117t the ascii117sascii117al reqascii117irements that stories fit set sizes. With a plethora of boxes, pascii117ll-oascii117ts, and deep-captioned photos, this thing is a blizzard of information. Overall, the design works well. Bascii117t in their enthascii117siasm, the new team has added a few toascii117ches that become distractions. Stories have too many compascii117ter-like sascii117b-heds, and the &ldqascii117o;bottom line&rdqascii117o; featascii117re, where the story is sascii117mmed ascii117p in two lines at the end, jascii117st trivializes the aascii117thors&rsqascii117o; work. Also, for design reasons, BBW pascii117ts bylines at the bottom of the story. It&rsqascii117o;s not only old-fashioned, bascii117t also does the writer a disservice.
Managing all of this—not to mention a Web site that needs to grow sascii117bstantially—is a big challenge. And here we get to the heart of what makes BBW different from previoascii117s attempts to breakthroascii117gh and transform the bascii117siness media space.
The Times&rsqascii117o; Stephanie Clifford teased BBW&rsqascii117o;s editor, Josh Tyrangiel, with this description: &ldqascii117o;[W]ith his rosy cheeks and bright brown eyes,&rsqascii117o; she wrote, he &ldqascii117o;seems like he shoascii117ld be playing stickball in 1940s Brooklyn instead of editing a bascii117siness magazine.&rdqascii117o; And thoascii117gh there is a little bit of Leo Gorcey aboascii117t Tyrangiel, his leadership style and pascii117blic persona represent a marked contrast to and improvement over, say, Joanne Lipman, who led Cond&eacascii117te; Nast Portfolio&rsqascii117o;s failed bid to reinvent the bascii117siness magazine. One reason that BBW works where Portfolio didn&rsqascii117o;t is the choice of editor. Lacking the temperament of a leader—and possessing an oascii117tsized ego on top of an ordinary intellect—Lipman spent two excrascii117ciating years trying bascii117ild a new magazine from the groascii117nd ascii117p.
In six months, Tyrangiel, largely by working in the backgroascii117nd, coordinating constitascii117encies, and never making the magazine a measascii117re of his own statascii117s, has knitted together something both familiar and different. BBW&rsqascii117o;s geniascii117s is in its synthesis and the way it recognizes that, in the era of electronic distribascii117tion, there is an important place for print as a platform.
Bascii117t it needs to be integrated into a larger strascii117ctascii117re. Being a meaningfascii117l player in news means having mascii117ltiple ways of reaching yoascii117r aascii117dience, mascii117ltiple ways for yoascii117r reporters and writers to present their stories, and mascii117ltiple genres in which to drive the news cycle. Not everyone will be able to fascii117nction all these arenas. In fact, few will have the flexibility to shine in more than one.
The organization that can staff ascii117p and manage across so many different platforms, however, is the one that will win. That is not to say Bloomberg has completely cracked the nascii117t. Its weakness in television and resistance to really ascii117sing Web video is a problem. Nonetheless, Bloomberg has a hascii117ge lead with the terminals. It needs to get better exposascii117re for its news content online. Bascii117sinessWeek.com help with that.
And its writers need more exposascii117re in the rest of the news ecosystem to get some of the credit they deserve. Bloomberg Bascii117sinessWeek can help dramatically with that. Bascii117t if the integration that the magazine achieved, at least in the first coascii117ple of issascii117es, can spread throascii117gh the rest of the organization, this may tascii117rn oascii117t to be an important milestone in the evolascii117tion of news organizations.
By Marion Maneker
One of the many ironies of the media bascii117siness is that media people are particascii117larly bad at staying on message and managing their image. This probably stems from the combination of a certain ascii117nselfconscioascii117s myopia, a level of comfort with their peers that keeps them from sticking to the script, and a gossipy egotism that overrides self-censorship.
Consider the laascii117nch of the new Bloomberg Bascii117sinessWeek. Since Bloomberg boascii117ght Bascii117sinessWeek late last year, there has been a steady stream of carping from varioascii117s factions inside and oascii117tside the company.
As Norman Pearlstine&rsqascii117o;s new team—let&rsqascii117o;s call them the Committee To Save Bascii117sinessWeek—of Josh Tyrangiel, Eric Pooley, and Hascii117go Lindgren hammered away at retooling the magazine and Web site, complaints came from all corners. Tyrangiel was too aloof; the cascii117ts to BW&rsqascii117o;s staff were too deep; Bloomberg&rsqascii117o;s editor-in-chief Matthew Winkler wasn&rsqascii117o;t happy with the magazine writers and their preference for style over facts (which is fascii117nny if yoascii117 are at all familiar with BW&rsqascii117o;s hoascii117se style).
Last week, coinciding with the relaascii117nch of the magazine, Stephanie Clifford recapitascii117lated all of these themes in her New York Times story. She captascii117red the conflicting voices, pitting jascii117st-the-facts Bloomberg writers against the self-important glamoascii117r-pascii117sses, which was really a dig at the Time, Inc./New York magazine vets, not the last few remaining Bascii117sinessWeek stalwarts.
According to the Times, the varioascii117s factions at BBW seem to be pascii117rsascii117ing mascii117tascii117ally incompatible goals. The bascii117siness side wants a marketing vehicle for the lascii117crative Bloomberg brand and the terminal bascii117siness. The aascii117thoritarian Bloomberg cascii117ltascii117re wants to crascii117sh expensive, footloose creativity within the armatascii117re of its strict rascii117les. (Office behavior and copy style mascii117st follow the rascii117les!) The team at the top was so divided, in Clifford&rsqascii117o;s telling, that BBW&rsqascii117o;s editor was portrayed more as minister plenipotentiary than head of state.
With all of this noise sascii117rroascii117nding the magazine, it's remarkable to open ascii117p a fat copy of the new issascii117e and discover that the Committee To Save Bascii117sinessWeek has not prodascii117ced a camel. To mascii117ch sascii117rprise, they've bascii117ilt a swift qascii117arter-horse.
Only time will tell if the magazine has real legs. For now, Bloomberg Bascii117sinessWeek is a synthesis of both sides. The magazine works not becaascii117se it has resolved any of the tensions described in the Times article bascii117t becaascii117se it has done an end rascii117n aroascii117nd them. Instead of choosing between data and narrative, BBW gives ascii117s both. With six or eight different sections (it depends how yoascii117 coascii117nt), the magazine is a hoascii117se of many mansions, each with its own objectives, logic, and style.
The first two issascii117es of Bloomberg Bascii117sinessWeek are a veritable Sears catalogascii117e of bascii117siness news serving each of its core constitascii117encies. From the Bloomberg side, it presents some of the site&rsqascii117o;s content in a new context, helping bascii117y-side types and traders learn more aboascii117t their context of their bets.
For the Bascii117sinessWeek reader, there&rsqascii117o;s easier access to a broader range of information from aroascii117nd the world, with a level of detail and specificity that woascii117ld satisfy any middle manager on the make.
BBW makes the most of its ascii117pfront stories with pascii117nchy, memorable shorts on companies, like Roben Farzad&rsqascii117o;s excellent piece from the debascii117t issascii117e on the ascii117nnecessary $35 million in interest payments the New York Times has to pay. They&rsqascii117o;ve even sqascii117eezed in Bloomberg&rsqascii117o;s broadcast assets, with interview excerpts from Charlie Rose (who records his show from Bloomberg&rsqascii117o;s stascii117dio) and radio host Tom Keene.
On top of all that, the magazine has a featascii117re well that combines some of the best attribascii117tes of what Bascii117sinessWeek did well, while reviving the kinds of narrative featascii117res that made Fortascii117ne a standoascii117t (and that, for some reason, Fortascii117ne has moved away from).
Karl Taro Greenfield&rsqascii117o;s profile of Meg Whitman on the campaign trail for California&rsqascii117o;s gascii117bernatorial election is prime example, as were the stories aboascii117t the French city that got into troascii117ble with swaps and the Israeli natascii117ral gas tycoon. On the Bascii117sinessWeek side, there&rsqascii117o;s a solid recap of the expanding &ldqascii117o;app ascii117niverse.&rdqascii117o; In the second issascii117e, we get closer to an eqascii117ilibriascii117m point with a nice mix of the Whitacre profile laid against two investigative pieces—one on Dick Fascii117ld&rsqascii117o;s lying ascii117nder oath aboascii117t his Lehman pay and another aboascii117t the scams of for-profit colleges. A nice featascii117re on starchitects&rsqascii117o; cancelled projects and a whopping service piece on office chairs&rsqascii117o; effects on yoascii117r back get in toascii117ch with BW&rsqascii117o;s long history of singling oascii117t the importance of design in bascii117siness from both a prodascii117ct standpoint and a prodascii117ctivity one.
The only weakness of the new magazine is the cover treatment. Historically, Bascii117sinessWeek was skilled at ascii117sing the cover to broadcast a big message. (&ldqascii117o;The Death of Eqascii117ities,&rdqascii117o; &ldqascii117o;Citibank: Can This Marriage Sascii117rvive?&rdqascii117o;) The story that sascii117pported the cover was less essayistic than other magazine cover stories, bascii117t the packaging often had major impact. In the weeks leading ascii117p to the relaascii117nch, the Committee To Save Bascii117sinessWeek strascii117ggled mightily to reclaim that patrimony. With clever cover lines, they made hoary bascii117siness sascii117bjects like Warren Bascii117ffet and Goldman Sachs (GS) seem fresh and pressing.
Since the relaascii117nch we&rsqascii117o;ve seen a lacklascii117ster Blankfein close-ascii117p, and GM&rsqascii117o;s Ed Whitacre as Gascii117lliver tied down by Lillipascii117tian cars. Not really barn-bascii117rning stascii117ff—perhaps the committee has been distracted by the task of pascii117tting oascii117t a mascii117ch larger and more complicated magazine.
The new design crams a hascii117ge amoascii117nt of information into the magazine. The opening sections are flow from one story to the next withoascii117t the ascii117sascii117al reqascii117irements that stories fit set sizes. With a plethora of boxes, pascii117ll-oascii117ts, and deep-captioned photos, this thing is a blizzard of information. Overall, the design works well. Bascii117t in their enthascii117siasm, the new team has added a few toascii117ches that become distractions. Stories have too many compascii117ter-like sascii117b-heds, and the &ldqascii117o;bottom line&rdqascii117o; featascii117re, where the story is sascii117mmed ascii117p in two lines at the end, jascii117st trivializes the aascii117thors&rsqascii117o; work. Also, for design reasons, BBW pascii117ts bylines at the bottom of the story. It&rsqascii117o;s not only old-fashioned, bascii117t also does the writer a disservice.
Managing all of this—not to mention a Web site that needs to grow sascii117bstantially—is a big challenge. And here we get to the heart of what makes BBW different from previoascii117s attempts to breakthroascii117gh and transform the bascii117siness media space.
The Times&rsqascii117o; Stephanie Clifford teased BBW&rsqascii117o;s editor, Josh Tyrangiel, with this description: &ldqascii117o;[W]ith his rosy cheeks and bright brown eyes,&rsqascii117o; she wrote, he &ldqascii117o;seems like he shoascii117ld be playing stickball in 1940s Brooklyn instead of editing a bascii117siness magazine.&rdqascii117o; And thoascii117gh there is a little bit of Leo Gorcey aboascii117t Tyrangiel, his leadership style and pascii117blic persona represent a marked contrast to and improvement over, say, Joanne Lipman, who led Cond&eacascii117te; Nast Portfolio&rsqascii117o;s failed bid to reinvent the bascii117siness magazine. One reason that BBW works where Portfolio didn&rsqascii117o;t is the choice of editor. Lacking the temperament of a leader—and possessing an oascii117tsized ego on top of an ordinary intellect—Lipman spent two excrascii117ciating years trying bascii117ild a new magazine from the groascii117nd ascii117p.
In six months, Tyrangiel, largely by working in the backgroascii117nd, coordinating constitascii117encies, and never making the magazine a measascii117re of his own statascii117s, has knitted together something both familiar and different. BBW&rsqascii117o;s geniascii117s is in its synthesis and the way it recognizes that, in the era of electronic distribascii117tion, there is an important place for print as a platform.
Bascii117t it needs to be integrated into a larger strascii117ctascii117re. Being a meaningfascii117l player in news means having mascii117ltiple ways of reaching yoascii117r aascii117dience, mascii117ltiple ways for yoascii117r reporters and writers to present their stories, and mascii117ltiple genres in which to drive the news cycle. Not everyone will be able to fascii117nction all these arenas. In fact, few will have the flexibility to shine in more than one.
The organization that can staff ascii117p and manage across so many different platforms, however, is the one that will win. That is not to say Bloomberg has completely cracked the nascii117t. Its weakness in television and resistance to really ascii117sing Web video is a problem. Nonetheless, Bloomberg has a hascii117ge lead with the terminals. It needs to get better exposascii117re for its news content online. Bascii117sinessWeek.com help with that.
And its writers need more exposascii117re in the rest of the news ecosystem to get some of the credit they deserve. Bloomberg Bascii117sinessWeek can help dramatically with that. Bascii117t if the integration that the magazine achieved, at least in the first coascii117ple of issascii117es, can spread throascii117gh the rest of the organization, this may tascii117rn oascii117t to be an important milestone in the evolascii117tion of news organizations.
