I was a strange and charmless teenager. One of the signs of this strangeness and charmlessness was that at the age of 15 I took out an annual subscription to the New Statesman. I kept it going until I left home, whereupon I blossomed into the sociable, gregarious, witty sex-god that you know and adore today.
So perhaps my longstanding dislike of the Staggers relates to the youthful association I built up between reading the New Statesman, not having a girlfriend and wearing unfashionable clothes.
Yet I suspect that the reason the New Statesman irritates me, sells poorly and doesn’t influence the political scene much is because it’s a bit cr*p. It’s lines are predictable, self righteous and pompous. Pretty much any issue you care to name, you’ll know in advance what the Statesman thinks.
Also, the writings not that good. Random sample: “Nick Gibb, shadow minister for schools, has spent the past year visiting schools.”
Now, John Kampfner set out to change that. Did he succeed? I’ve no idea because I can’t think of anything I’ve wanted to read in the magazine for ages. I have a vague recollection of a really stupid article about Global warming, but that’s about it. Maybe the magazine is full of interesting, witty, well written stuff and I’ve just missed it (Actually, I’ve just been reading a selection of stuff from the website and I don’t think I have).
Compared to the Spectator it’s just a much worse magazine. I might not like Fraser Nelson’s politics and think that Matthew D’Ancona is a typical London media tart, but at least they can write. Oh, and break stories. Plus, while Taki is loathesome and Clemency Burton Hill a national embarrassment, most of their other columnists are pretty good. The same can’t really be said for the Statesman.
Which is why the New Statesman doesn’t sell as well and the Editor quit this week. Geoffrey Robinson has been keeping the thing afloat for years, and the thanks he gets from the leftish media is questions about editorial interference.
Well, If I owned a boring magazine that no-one wanted to read, I’d want to interefere with the editor on a regular basis, I can tell you.
Partly at least, I can see the dilemma for the New Statesman. They won’t be able to afford good writers and long research while they’re only selling 25k, but they won’t sell more than 25k unless they have better (read: more expensive) features and columns.
All I can suggest is that they go back to basics and focus on Content, content, content. Screw smart design, screw marketing. We live in a world where the only thing that really matters is stuff people want and need to read. Maybe then I’ll start subscribing again. As long as my girlfriend promises not to leave me.
11 Comments
February 15, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Shape the Party of European Socialists Manifesto in London!
Every major issue (and solution) has global reach and every global issue has local impact. Only by making it more relevant to people’s everyday lives can we develop a more social and democratic Europe. That’s why PES Activists and Compass Youth want to make connections that will keep the PES in touch with the most dynamic and innovative thinking of local activists. You are the eyes and ears of your communities so come and join the debate with our amazing line-up of speakers and feed in your ideas and opinions. We will also launch our EU Citizens for London campaign as part of this series of debates.
Check out the full series of events http://www.lme-lse.org.uk/blog/?p=51
February 15, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Quite agree Hopi – I’ll offer the consolation that had you subscribed to the Spectator or, like me, the Economist, your adolescent physical needs would’ve been no better served (in fact, if the former than probably worse served).
I’ve always thought the Spectator was far superior, regardless of politics. And strangely the Spectator’s awful in terms of design & layout and looks like a mag from 40 years ago – just shows that content trumps design every time.
Anyway, I’m off to refresh my blog template….
February 16, 2008 at 9:52 pm
I think this is unfair, Hopi. Geoffrey Robinson may be a rich feller, but he is not David or Aidan Barclay, and any comparison between the Statesman and the Spectator has to be seen in that light.
If political content is the issue, while the Spectator’s Fraser Nelson is admittedly a first-class operator, the Statesman’s Martin Bright can at least hold his own against him.
February 17, 2008 at 12:55 am
Paul, my suspicion is that the NS is an excellent magazine if you agree with it’s prejudices, but almost pointless if you don’t. The same can’t be said of the spectator. Besides who needs the new statesman when the indpependent has all the same views and comes out every day!
February 17, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Content is indeed what they need to sort out.
One of the reasons for the recent acceleration of The Statesman’s marginalisation is its seemingly increasing pre-occupation with religion . The resultant material is really nonsense articles that amount to nothing other than proselytism. The recent ‘Keep The Faith’ article written by someone (or something?) called Sholto Byrnes for their ongoing ‘religion feature’ was like something out of your local religious zealot nutters’ club.
February 17, 2008 at 2:49 pm
I disagree I like the New Statesman which at least is a political magazine The Spectator is mostly the sort of guff you get free with flights and generally has little of interest ( although I do always read it ). It (NS) has had some great stuff in it over the last few months dealing with ., for example , how blacks are drifting away from Labour and the corruption of Ken Livingstone . Some interesting things on the BNP I remember and in general always a good read.
I suspect what you , Cassilis and other New Labour managerialists don`t like is the Old Labour connection which gives the mag its flavour but will not add many readers .It stands , if you like , for those who do not read political magazines Furthermore it at least attempts to deal with moral issues rather than tedious tittle tattle which is beloved of the Spec.
I was a cool as a teenager , in a band and got endless poon tang . Hoo ha
February 18, 2008 at 10:55 am
newmqania- I think the new Labour connection might be a fair point, were it not for the fact that at least I feel I need to read tribune every so often so I know what the debates on the left of the party are – the new Statesman isn’t so much old labour as it is middle class, progressive labour.
February 19, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Interesting piece by former editor Peter Wilby in Guardian yesterday. He suggested the Staggers’ poor circulation was because the causes it championed have mostly been won; i.e.The ‘Hampstead Liberal’ is an anachronism. Seems any new editor has just received what in rugby is called a ‘hospital pass’.
February 20, 2008 at 8:44 pm
You can always guarantee the Statesman to be wrong on any given subject……
February 22, 2008 at 2:17 pm
I mainly read the NS for Martin Brights blogs, Mark Thomas’ occasional columns as well as Darcus Howe…
February 22, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Maybe Sunny Hundal should take it over and rename it Liberal Conspiracy (and take on Iain Dales new mag)?! LOL!