Gawker
The New York Observer, the fancypants pink paper read by the city's liberal elite, is about to roll out some changes. The two major ones: its cover price is going up to $2, and it's starting a full-on book review section, called the "Observer Review of Books," or "ORB." Recently laid off book reviewers of America, rejoice! This represents a big bet by the paper that its rarefied audience will be willing to pay more money for more literary coverage—and that the publishing industry, skittish as it is, will be willing to pour enough ad dollars into the Observer to make the new section viable. The NYO is no exception to every other print media outlet these days, in that it's trying to find a way to make its (vital) print product financially viable in the long term. Given all the papers across the country that have slashed their book review sections in the past year or two, it's not a bad niche to try to fill. This info courtesy of Observer President Bob Sommer. Contacted for reaction, former Gawker chief and current NYO gadfly Choire Sicha said—direct quote— "!!!."
NY Observer Hopes People Still Read
Read More:
9:56 AM on Tue Apr 1 2008
By Hamilton Nolan
1,560 views
18 comments
Comments
April Fool's!
Do the guys who review literature get paid any better than the guys who write it?
Peter Kaplan rocks.
Next they will come out with an Observer Review of Blogs.
Okay, I keep getting tripped up by this April Fool's thing. When you wrote that the observer was "read by the city's liberal elite," I didn't understand how someone could confuse that group with "conservatives who want to appear at least a few IQ points smarter than Bill Kristol."
I think they should do a Web TV show called Book Club, sort of like Fight Club, with people talking about whether or not a book sucks. This whole review thing is way too highbrow. It would be like Ultimate Fighting and Charlie Rose, together at last.
I'm afraid to comment today, as I am not too good at telling the April Fool's items from the real ones. I'm going to read my copy of the Observer instead.
@Koreanish:
I'd pay good money to see that. Hell, I'd pay good money to get in a room with Heidi Julavits and get my snark on.
This is a non-April Fool's item. I hope if we did an April Fool's joke it would be funnier than this.
I handle April Fool's jokes as I would any item: in deadly earnest. Thus, if exposed as a prank, I will lay claim to the most ironically ingenious response of all.
@famousauthor: Quick, copyright that idea!
@famousauthor: I thought the Observer was already a review of blogs? Or maybe reviews by bloggers?
@KarenUhOh: Morally bankrupt, intellectually peerless.
@Aatom: Recently, considering the constant links to Observer content, and the ex-Gawker bylines that show up there regularly, it seems that the traffic is going in one directions: from blogs to print. Interesting. Perhaps they pay a living wage.
@Carol Gardens: that was kind of the point i was making. obviously not very well.
@Mike_Jahn: Two words: James Wood. And the NYO Review of Blogs is just around the corner. Polish up your resume, Ian. The editor's job itself wouldn't be much but it'd be a step to the real prize: editing the New York(er?) Review of Blogs.
So they are trying to stop their dwindling circulation by doubling the news stand price? I am no arithmetician, but something doesn't quite add up about that plan!
They know their core audience really don't care about doubling the cover price, and they're shooting for the advertisers that want to reach them.
Comment on this post
Reply by EmailLogin with your username and password below. Or comment on this post via email.
Forgot your username or password? New User?