Newsweek to go digital only in 2013 with focus on Apple iPad app and other platforms
45th most popular free app for the tablet, although it has received only 2.5 stars out of 5 because of issues like crashes and stories that go missing. With Apple iPad users spending $70,000 on Newsstand every day to read content, a successful digital magazine has the opportunity to make much more money than a printed edition. Besides not having to pay for paper and ink, there would be no need for expensive distribution networks that make sure each issue of a magazine is on retailer's shelves in time each week.
Newsweek's last print edition will be dated December 31st and the new online magazine will be known as Newsweek Global. It will be supported by paid subscriptions and will be available on e-readers for both tablet and the Web. In making the shift, Newsweek pointed out that the number of tablet users in the states will rise to 70 million by the end of this year, up from 13 million just two years ago. A study done by Pew Research shows that 39% of Americans use an online source to get their news.
Unfortunately for employees of the magazine, the new focus on digital delivery of Newsweek will mean a reduction in staff on both the business and editorial sides, both in the states and internationally.
source: TheDailyBeast via AppleInsider
9. pikapowerize (banned) posted on 18 Oct 2012, 19:32 0
lol...even though i dont want to because pencil and paper are still the best...but atleast we can save trees and they cant be cut now! we save mother nature!
6. rusticguy posted on 18 Oct 2012, 15:44 0
They should go responsive so would truly become device / app independent. M$ already has homepage responsive now. Future is of Responsive APP free sites :)
4. DaNTRoN posted on 18 Oct 2012, 11:36 0
I'm a big proponent of software based media, ie magazine app. But there is no reAson why it should cost ad much, or more than a physical publication. I will fully support efforts such as this...if the price is right.
5. PotDragon posted on 18 Oct 2012, 14:34 0
Interesting that journalistic standerds can be maintained.... makes all the squawking about the decline of newspapers seem like the BS it always had been.
Few more years the ww2 generation will be dead along with yesterdays news on cheap bleeding paper.
7. jmoita2 posted on 18 Oct 2012, 16:29 1
How disrespectful. My grandad fought in WW2. It could be argued that in a few years you too will be dust, but so what???
10. PotDragon posted on 18 Oct 2012, 20:26 0
And your grand dad"s generation destroyed the environment, supported segregation, subjugated women, ended American manufacture, allowed priests to molest, and cling to the belief of an invisible man in the sky.
If not for Pearl Harbor...the USA would have sat out the "war in Europe". Read history.
So....hope they die off soon. Is that disrespectful too?
11. jmoita2 posted on 19 Oct 2012, 10:10 0
As a matter of fact, he served in the Italian Army. On another note, you need a shrink man.
8. downphoenix posted on 18 Oct 2012, 16:48 1
Given the lower distribution costs, they could start removing those ads. Magazines are half advertisements nowadays anyway.