The New Yorker College Tour,
David Remnick in conversation with Orville Schell,
Berkeley, Calif.
11.13.06.
I've been a pretty consistent reader of the New Yorker since high school. My junior year I had an English teacher who gave each of his students a subscription to the magazine. I mean, he didn't personally give us a subscription; it was some educational program between the magazine and high schools. It was then that I first fell in love with the magazine. Needless to say, I took the teacher for a class again my senior year, and have been reading the magazine ever since. And I've got to say, reading the New Yorker once a week has to be more valuable than reading e.g., the New York Times every day. They do a much better job of separating signal from noise (this is the difference between magazines and newspapers, but still), plus they have a finger on the pulse of music, writing, art generally, and the market place of ideas better than any other general interest publication around. So I was excited to get the chance to hear David Remnick, the magazine's editor, in conversation with Orville Schell, the Dean of the Berkeley School of Journalism, and himself a contributer to the New Yorker. Remnick said that at the beginning of the decade, the LA Times had roughly 1.2 million subscribers while the New Yorker had roughly 700,000. Today, the LA Times has roughly 700,000 subscribers while the New Yorker has roughly 1.2 million. Some lament this as an early warning sign of the demise of the newspaper and culture generally. I don't see it as that at all. I actually think it's a good thing. One should obviously compliment ones reading of the New Yorker with a variety of daily newspapers. But like I said above, I believe a weekly reading of the New Yorker makes a more informed citizen than a daily reading of the newspaper.
I tried to snap a few pictures of the event. But I'm not seeing much improvement in my photo-shooting-skills. Which is pretty crappy, because girls only want boyfriends who have great skills.
