Author Archives: Martin

The New Yorker Digital Edition, a Few Early Reactions

I’m looking at the “New Yorker Digital Edition,”:http://archives.newyorker.com/ and I thought I’d get a few initial thoughts down here.
* Is this the most ambitious integration of a magazine on the Internet that we have yet seen? If anybody reading this can think of something comparable, please write in and let us know! To summarize: every subscriber to the magazine now receives, in addition to the physical version in the mailbox, an identical version of the magazine (including layout and ads) in a digital format that can be viewed in any browser wherever there is an Internet connection. Furthermore, every subscriber may now view every single issue the magazine has ever published. The Internet is a palpable problem for magazine publishers, because they are an expensive proposition and the audience is spoiled by widespread free content on the Internet. _The New Yorker_ can use assets that less lofty magazines cannot bring to bear, but this may be an exciting model for other magazine publishers to consider.
* If you attempt to access an archived issue as a non-subscriber, the program inquires whether you would like to purchase the issue for $4.99. In this way the model could potentially increase revenue over and above the subscription revenue. Quoting from the Digital Edition: “For $4.99, you’ll receive access—for one year—to the entire issue in which the article you’re looking for originally ran.” Question: will people confronted with such a demand opt for a subscription instead? How many articles does one have to want to read before a subscription is a better use of one’s money? On “Amazon”:http://www.amazon.com/The-New-Yorker-1-year/dp/B00005N7T5/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=magazines&qid=1226059422&sr=8-1 you can get a year’s subscription for $39.95, so that’s about the cost of 8 individual articles. I think this aspect of the model may well lead to an increase in subscriptions.
* The search function within the Digital Edition itself is limited to the issue you are viewing. I noticed something rather tantalizing: I was looking at the “May 31, 2004, issue”:http://archives.newyorker.com/?i=2004-05-31#folio=032 (the one with the “William Finnegan article”:http://emdashes.com/2008/11/prescient-finnegan-gleans-poli.php on “Barack Obama”:http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2004/05/31/040531fa_fact1?currentPage=all), and I did a search on “Bill Clinton.” Two hits came up, _apparently responding to full-text hits_. (The search results seem to reproduce the actual lines of text in which “Bill Clinton” appeared.) Anyone who has used _The Complete New Yorker_ DVD archive knows that this is potentially a big item, because _The Complete New Yorker_ limits the user to a keyword/abstract search (it’s a bit more complicated than that, sometimes searches appear to respond to text that is not limited to the “library card” presented in the “article abstract” section). In any case, anything resembling full-text search capability is pretty awesome. I think we need to hear more about this.
* As Jonathan Taylor was the “first to notice”:http://emdashes.com/2008/11/take-the-new-yorker-digital-ed.php, you can now execute a search at “newyorker.com”:newyorker.com, and if an article is not available on the website, the abstract result now includes a link that brings you to the article in the Digital Edition. That works seamlessly, it’s very impressive.
* Dig the URL format for linking to articles in the Digital Edition, it looks like this:

http://archives.newyorker.com/?i=2004-05-31#folio=032

(That’s the Obama article again.) The “032” is a page number. So if you know the date of the issue and the page number (remember to use a placeholder zero or two to keep it a three-digit number), you can generate a valid URL on the fly. At Emdashes, we will endeavor to include such links to articles as we move forward.
* What about royalties? _The Complete New Yorker_ is the legacy of judicial rulings stating that a magazine publisher has the right to reproduce the full magazine but not in such a way that the individual articles can be copied with impunity. Does the Digital Edition maintain this logic? It probably does—you still can’t grab an ASCII version of any article and put it on your website. (I’ve always felt that this Solomonic judicial ruling struck an ideal middle path between protecting the rights of contributors and the public good of making the magazine available to all at an affordable price.)
* Look and feel: I like the usability but it’s juuuust a bit pinched. I’m not crazy about the dialog boxes that pop up, but that’s a small thing and I expect it to change over time. It’ll be interesting to see how it all evolves. On my MacBook, the bottom toolbar is almost always off the screen, meaning I have to scroll down to access it. The left/right buttons are a little “HTML-y” for my taste, but I do like that the interface responds well to the left and right arrow buttons. Flipping through the magazine is enjoyable, but the experience of dipping in and out of pages might need to improve a little bit. Still: this is a great beginning.
* Hey, recent issues have active links to the web! You can click on any URL in the issue, whether it be in _New Yorker_ content or in advertisements. Pretty sneaky, sis. In addition, the table of contents (for new issues) is hyperlinked to enable you to access every article directly from there, which is a nice touch.

Prescient Finnegan Gleans Political Roy Hobbs, Future President, in 2004

Oh, man. _The New Yorker_ put up William Finnegan’s 2004 “article”:http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2004/05/31/040531fa_fact1?currentPage=all about Barack Obama, and boy, is it an interesting read on this day of all days. It’s a kind of Rosetta Stone of Obama studies, so many telltale indicators of a personage we can now recognize as a future president. (One quick example: at that time they called succumbing to his charisma to work tirelessly for him “drinking the Obama juice.”)
There are tons of delicious morsels in this short article I could pass on, but I’ll just leave you with my favorite. (I remember it from when I read it at the time, too.)

Jan Schakowsky told me about a recent visit she had made to the White House with a congressional delegation. On her way out, she said, President Bush noticed her “obama” button. “He jumped back, almost literally,” she said. “And I knew what he was thinking. So I reassured him it was Obama, with a ‘b.’ And I explained who he was. The President said, ‘Well, _I_ don’t know him.’ So I just said, ‘You will.’ ”

That’s right, George. By now even you know that he’s your _successor_. He’s the fellow who disassembled that ornery coalition you and Karl Rove cobbled together. That’s who he is.
_Update_: Finnegan has “expanded”:http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/tny/2008/11/the-distance.html on the unmistakable subtext of the article, never enunciated explicitly, that Obama could someday be president. That claim seemed too bold to include in the pre–convention speech article, but reality has a way of confounding our opinions of what is and is not too bold.

A Link for the Incoming President, and a Link for You

Scott McLemee has asked some smart folks to help him compile a “reading list”:http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2008/11/05/mclemee for the new president. The suggestions include Thucydides, Henry Adams, my dad’s old boss Herman Kahn…. so _ponderous_! I think President Obama will be in need of some good beach reads to let him unwind, so I’d recommend Kate Atkinson or Tim Powers.
And “Behind the Candidates”:http://behindthecandidates.com/ is a brilliantly designed website that will help you follow who’s influencing the new leader of the free world. Sure, half the site (McCain’s half) is obsolete, but the pink and blue layout is very soothing.

My Other Favorite Moment of the Early Campaign

I already “mentioned”:http://emdashes.com/2008/11/now-is-the-moment-to-recognize.php how stirring I found Super Tuesday, that chilly day when all of New York was debating the merits of these two superlative candidates. It snowed that day; I handed out Obama leaflets at my local train station in the morning and saw William T. Vollmann speak at the Chelsea Barnes and Noble in the evening (our campaigns are so long that that branch has since closed). As I got my book inscribed, I asked Vollmann if he was supporting a candidate this year (halfway expecting a loony answer like Ron Paul or something); he said he was for Obama.
My other favorite moment was hands down, Saturday, January 26, date of the South Carolina primary. I had spent the previous two months in Austria and I was traveling back home to the tri-state area. I had a two-night layover in Madrid, where I was going to meet up with a good friend flying in from London. I had experienced a trying few weeks and was relishing the rare opportunity for a little drunken revelry. My friend and I stumbled all over central Madrid that night, I think we hit 5 different places—if you don’t know me, it’s difficult to express how out of character this sort of evening is for me. We enjoyed ample beer and _tapas_ and engaged in conversation with each other about the primaries and the economy, and talked up a number of our fellow bar patrons (those who could speak English) about Spain and Europe. It was a grand night all around.
Between 2 and 3 am, we staggered into our hotel room and switched on the TV, which of course was showing CNN. We’d forgotten that all of South Carolina had voted that day, and the result—a mammoth Obama victory—was just breaking. We watched Obama give an utterly electric acceptance speech, and drifted off to sleep knowing that the race had just changed significantly.
A couple of days ago, Ta-Nehisi Coates “posted”:http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/11/the_moment_i_went_all_in.php a YouTube clip of that speech, calling it “the moment [he] went all in.” I was already all in, but it’s really instructive to watch that speech again. We’ve all become accustomed to the power of Obama’s rhetoric, but repetition has rubbed the edges off it a bit. On this night, the difference was the audience, going completely bonkers at every pause or cue. They knew that they had upended the entire primaries. I’ll be honest, Obama’s loss in New Hampshire shook me (although it apparently “didn’t shake”:http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_stump/archive/2008/11/04/in-which-i-empty-out-my-obama-notebook.aspx Obama’s team much, as Ryan Lizza would discover), and I was getting dispirited by the rough tactics of the Clinton team. But to watch this speaker speak to this audience, you’d never know that there was anything to worry about.

Now Is the Moment to Recognize an Unsung Heroine

Hillary.
I mean, wow.
She was as good as her word, and then some. There’s something almost novelistic about the position she found herself in. A figure of such polarization, loathed by the right wing and even loathed among plenty of Obama supporters for a brief period (now over, one hopes!), obliged to support her rival, about whom she surely had and perhaps still has profound doubts, in a situation that lent itself to scurrilous speculation (she wants to run in 2012!), leading to a triumphant outcome in which her own contributions proved to be scandalously underemphasized—that’s some weighty stuff, right there.
You have to feel for her. She deserves the unmitigated thanks of every Obama supporter. One always knew that her support for the liberal project was unquestioned, and she proved that in every way one could possibly want every single day for the last few months. She is a champ.
So what is Hillary’s fate, now? I hope it is Senate Majority Leader, if she wants that role; I assume she does. I do think that she has the mind, nerve, DNA of a legislator right down to her very core; freed from the burdens of perennially preparing for her next presidential run, I fully expect her to fulfill the greatness that everyone knows her capable of.
David Remnick “said”:http://emdashes.com/2008/11/remnick-the-conservative-era-i.php that the Obama-Clinton battle of spring 2008 “is something we’re going to be talking about and thinking about for a long, long time.” I think that’s absolutely correct. My favorite moment of that race was Super Tuesday, February 5, when New York and a host of other states took to the ballot box, and all of New York City was pitched on the razor’s edge, unable to decide between the two candidates, a dynamic captured to perfection by Seth’s flippable “Eustace Tilley cover”:http://theispot.net/arttalk/seth/sethcover.jpg, which came out a couple of days before.

New Yorker Coverage Ramped Up for Amazing Night

The _New Yorker_ website has a lot of coverage for those seeking perspective after that incredible night. Go, read “David Remnick,”:http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/tny/2008/11/mr-ayerss-neighborhood.html “Hendrik Hertzberg,”:http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/hendrikhertzberg/ “George Packer,”:http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/georgepacker/ “Steve Coll,”:http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/stevecoll/ “James Surowiecki,”:http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/jamessurowiecki/ “Jane Mayer,”:http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/tny/2008/11/the-final-hurdle.html “Roger Angell,”:http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/tny/2008/11/rite.html “Nancy Franklin”:http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/tny/2008/11/sights-sounds.html, and “Blake Eskin”:http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/tny/2008/11/a-little-help-from-my-friends.html. A lot of us are looking for perspective and anecdotes, and they bring those as powerfully as anyone.

Remnick: “The Conservative Era … Is Done”

David Kurtz of “Talking Points Memo”:http://talkingpointsmemo.com/ interviewed David Remnick last night, apparently at almost the precise moment that it was becoming manifest that Obama was truly going to win. It’s fascinating footage—it’s the kind of moment when the magnitude of events tends to outstrip all of us, and yet Remnick remains as eloquent as ever. He also discusses his near-exclusive interview of earlier the same day with William Ayers.