The slate story is interesting because it assumes Newsweek will continue as a printed publication. Somehow I don’t see that as likely, especially if newsweek.com is being nuked.
Most likely I would think Diller imagines that a new printed publication titled “The Daily Beast” is what’s going to happen in place of print-publising Newsweek. Is this really why Harman bought Newsweek? So he could see it’s name completely discarded and The Daily Beast arise in it’s place? I really don’t think so.
If there really is a 50-50 control between Harman and Diller, it’s going to be interesting to see what kind of tug-of-war results, because I suspect that Diller and Harman have wildly different notions about the future. I also suspect that Diller totally snookered Harman in this whole deal. Diller may have also built in a tie-breaker that favors his 50-50 side of things.
(BTW, it’s also hilarious about how much importance this fool Jack Shafer assigns to this story, like all the regular folks are just waiting with bated breath as to what happens to Tina Brown, Newsweek, and The Daily Beast. Most of the regular folks have never heard of Tina Brown and the Daily Beast, and are barely aware of Newsweek.)
As savvy as Diller is, I think he is still stalled in the 90’s thinking that “we will print/post it and they will come and read it.”
With so many choices now available for the rest of us, Tina Brown snark has a very limited audience.
It’s all about the distribution system, and that’s all its ever been about.