 | |
 Cover of the issue from February 11, 2013, featuringBarack Obama | |
| Editor-in-chief | Win McCormack[1] |
|---|---|
| Editor | Michael Tomasky |
| Categories | Editorial magazine |
| Frequency | 10 per year |
| Publisher | Michael Caruso |
| First issue | November 7, 1914; 110 years ago (1914-11-07) |
| Country | United States |
| Based in | Washington, D.C. (editorial), New York City (operations) |
| Language | English |
| Website | newrepublic |
| ISSN | 0028-6583 (print) 2169-2416 (web) |
| OCLC | 1759945 |
The New Republic (often abbreviated asTNR) is an American magazine focused on domestic politics, news, culture, and the arts. It publishes ten print magazines per year and a daily online platform.The New York Times described the magazine as partially founded inTeddy Roosevelt's living room and known for its "intellectual rigor and left-leaning political views."[2]
Founded in 1914 by several leaders of theprogressive movement, it attempted to find a balance between "aliberalism centered in humanitarian and moral passion and one based in an ethos of scientific analysis".[3]
The New Republic was founded byHerbert Croly,Walter Lippmann, andWalter Weyl. They gained the financial backing of heiressDorothy Payne Whitney and of her husband,Willard Straight, who eventually became the majority owner. The magazine's first issue was published on November 7, 1914. The magazine's politics wereliberal andprogressive, and as such concerned with coping with the great changes brought about by middle-class reform efforts designed to remedy perceived weaknesses in America's changing economy and society. The magazine is widely considered important in changing the character of liberalism in the direction ofgovernmental interventionism, both foreign and domestic. The most important of the perceived changes was the emergence of the U.S. as agreat power on the international scene. In 1917,TNR urged America's entry intoWorld War I on the side of theAllies.[This paragraph needs citation(s)]
Even before the U.S. entered the war, theRussian Revolution had started in March 1917. During theinterwar years, the magazine was generally positive in its assessment of theSoviet Union (founded in 1922) and ofJoseph Stalin.TNR changed its position after theCold War began in 1947, and in 1948, its leftist editor, the formerVice President of the United StatesHenry A. Wallace, departed to run for president on theProgressive ticket. After Wallace, the magazine moved toward positions more typical of mainstream American liberalism. Throughout the 1950s, the publication was critical both of Soviet foreign policy and of domesticanticommunism, particularlyMcCarthyism. During the 1960s, the magazine opposed theVietnam War, but also often criticized theNew Left.[This paragraph needs citation(s)]
Until the late 1960s, the magazine had a certain "cachet as the voice of re-invigorated liberalism", in the opinion of the commentatorEric Alterman, who has criticized the magazine's politics from the left. That cachet, Alterman wrote, "was perhaps best illustrated when the dashing, youngPresident Kennedy had been photographed boardingAir Force One holding a copy".[4]
In March 1974, the magazine was purchased for $380,000[4] byMartin Peretz, a lecturer atHarvard University,[5] fromGilbert A. Harrison.[4] Peretz was a veteran of theNew Left, but had broken with the movement over its support of variousThird World liberationist movements, particularly thePalestine Liberation Organization. Harrison continued editing the magazine and expected Peretz to let him continue running the magazine for three years. However, by 1975, when Peretz became annoyed at having his own articles rejected for publication while he was pouring money into the magazine to cover its losses, he fired Harrison. Much of the staff, includingWalter Pincus,Stanley Karnow, andDoris Grumbach, were fired or quit and were replaced largely by recent Harvard graduates, who lacked journalistic experience. Peretz became the editor and served in that post until 1979. In 1980, the magazine endorsed the moderate RepublicanJohn B. Anderson, who ran as an independent, rather than the Democratic incumbentJimmy Carter. As other editors were appointed, Peretz remained editor-in-chief until 2012.[4]
Michael Kinsley was editor (1979–1981, 1985–1989), alternating twice with the more leftleaningHendrik Hertzberg (1981–1985, 1989–1991). Kinsley was only 28 years old when he first became editor and was still attending law school.[4]
Writers for the magazine during this era included neoliberalsMickey Kaus andJacob Weisberg, along withCharles Krauthammer,Fred Barnes,Morton Kondracke,Sidney Blumenthal,Robert Kuttner,Ronald Steel,Michael Walzer, andIrving Howe.[4]
It was widely considered a "must read" across the political spectrum. An article inVanity Fair called it "the smartest, most impudent weekly in the country" and the "most entertaining and intellectually agile magazine in the country." According to Alterman, the magazine's prose could sparkle and the contrasting views in its pages were "genuinely exciting." He added, "The magazine unarguably set the terms of debate for insider political elites during the Reagan era."[4]
The magazine won the respect of many conservative opinion leaders. Twenty copies were sent by messenger to the ReaganWhite House each Thursday afternoon.Norman Podhoretz called the magazine "indispensable, " andGeorge Will called it "currently the nation's most interesting and most important political journal."National Review described it as "one of the most interesting magazines in the United States."[4]
Credit for its influence was often attributed to Kinsley, whose wit and critical sensibility were seen as enlivening, and Hertzberg, a writer forThe New Yorker and speechwriter forJimmy Carter.
Hertzberg and Kinsley alternated as editor and as the author of the magazine's lead column, "TRB from Washington." Its perspective was described as center-left in 1988.[6]
A final ingredient that led to the magazine's increased stature in the 1980s was its "back of the book" or literary, cultural and arts pages, which were edited byLeon Wieseltier. Peretz discovered Wieseltier, then working at Harvard'sSociety of Fellows, and put him in charge of the section. Wieseltier reinvented the section along the lines ofThe New York Review of Books and allowed his critics, many of them academics, to write longer, critical essays instead of simple book reviews. Alterman calls the selection of Wieseltier "probably... Peretz's single most significant positive achievement" in running the magazine. Despite changes of other editors, Wieseltier remained as cultural editor. Under him the section was "simultaneously erudite and zestful," according to Alterman."[4]
After becoming editor in 1991,Andrew Sullivan took the magazine in a somewhat more conservative direction, but the majority of writers remained liberal or neoliberal.[citation needed] Hertzberg soon left the magazine to return toThe New Yorker. Kinsley left the magazine in 1996 to found the online magazineSlate.[4]
In 1994, Sullivan invitedCharles Murray to contribute a 10,000-word article excerpted from his coauthored bookThe Bell Curve. The article, which contended that "African Americans score differently from whites on standardized tests of cognitive ability," proved to be very controversial and was published in a special issue together with many responses and critiques.[7] The magazine also published a very critical article byElizabeth McCaughey about theClinton administration's1993 health care plan. Alterman described the article as "dishonest, misinformed," and "the single most influential article published in the magazine during the entire Clinton presidency.[4]James Fallows ofThe Atlantic noted the article's inaccuracies and said, "The White House issued a point-by-point rebuttal, whichThe New Republic did not run. Instead it published a long piece by McCaughey attacking the White House statement."[8] Sullivan also published a number of pieces byCamille Paglia.[4]
Ruth Shalit, a young writer for the magazine in the Sullivan years, was repeatedly criticized for plagiarism. Afterwards, the magazine began using fact-checkers during Sullivan's time as editor, such asStephen Glass. When later working as a reporter, Glass was later found to have fabricated quotes, anecdotes, and facts in his own articles.[4]
After Sullivan stepped down in 1996, David Greenberg andPeter Beinart served jointly as acting editors. After the1996 presidential election,Michael Kelly served as editor for a year. During his tenure as editor and afterward, Kelly, who also wrote theTRB column, was intensely critical of Clinton.[4]
Chuck Lane held the editor's position between 1997 and 1999. During Lane's tenure, theStephen Glassscandal occurred. Glass, who had been a major contributing writer under Kelly's editorship, was later shown to have falsified and fabricated numerous stories, which was admitted byThe New Republic after an investigation by Kelly's successor,Charles Lane. Kelly had consistently supported Glass during his tenure, including sending scathing letters to those challenging the veracity of Glass's stories.[9] The events were later dramatized in the feature filmShattered Glass, adapted from a 1998 report byH.G. Bissinger. Peretz has written that Lane ultimately "put the ship back on its course," for which Peretz said he was "immensely grateful."[4] Lane resigned after he learned that Peretz intended to replace him.[10]
Peter Beinart, a third editor who took over when he was 28 years old,[4] followed Lane. He served as editor from 1999 to 2006.
In the early 2000s, theTNR added Buzz weblogs&c.,Iraq'd, andEasterblogg, replaced in 2005 with the sole blogThe Plank.The Stump was added in 2007 and covered the2008 presidential election.
The magazine remained well known, with references to it occasionally appearing in popular culture.Lisa Simpson was once portrayed as a subscriber toThe New Republic for Kids.Matt Groening, the creator ofThe Simpsons', once drew a cover forThe New Republic. In thepilot episode of theHBO seriesEntourage,Ari Gold asksEric Murphy, "Do you readThe New Republic? Well, I do, and it says that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about."
Franklin Foer took over from Beinart in March 2006. The magazine's first editorial under Foer said, "We've become more liberal.... We've been encouraging Democrats to dream big again on the environment and economics...."[4]Other prominent writers who edited or wrote for the magazine in those years include senior editor and columnistJonathan Chait,Lawrence F. Kaplan,John Judis andSpencer Ackerman.[4]
In 2006, longtime contributor, critic, and senior editorLee Siegel, who had maintained a blog on theTNR site dedicated primarily to art and culture, was revealed by an investigation to have collaborated in posting comments to his own blog under an alias aggressively praising Siegel, attacking his critics and claiming not to be Siegel when challenged by an anonymous detractor on his blog.[11][12] The blog was removed from the website and Siegel was suspended from writing for the print magazine.[13] He resumed writing forTNR in April 2007.[14]
The New Republic gradually became much less left-wing under Peretz,[15] which culminated in the editorship of the conservativeAndrew Sullivan. The magazine was associated with theDemocratic Leadership Council (DLC) and "New Democrats", such asBill Clinton andJoseph Lieberman, who received the magazine's endorsement in the2004 Democratic primary.
In the 21st century, the magazine gradually shifted left but was still more moderate and hawkish than conventional liberal periodicals. Policies supported by bothThe New Republic and the DLC in the 1990s were increased funding for theEarned Income Tax Credit program, the reform of the federal welfare system, andsupply-side economics, especially the idea of reducing highermarginal income tax rates, which in the later Peretz years received heavy criticism from senior editorJonathan Chait.[16]
The New Republic's support for Israel, including conservative right-wing orLikud stances of the state, was a strong theme of the magazine from the beginning: "Support for Israel is deep down an expression of America's best view of itself."[4] According to journalism professorEric Alterman:
Nothing has been as consistent about the past 34 years ofThe New Republic as the magazine's devotion to Peretz's own understanding of what is good for Israel.... It is really not too much to say that almost all of Peretz's political beliefs are subordinate to his commitment to Israel's best interests, and these interests as Peretz defines them almost always involve more war.[4]
Unsigned editorials prior to the2003 invasion of Iraq expressed strong support for military action and cited the threat of facilities forweapons of mass destruction, as well as humanitarian concerns. In the first years of theIraq War, editorials were critical of the handling of the war but continued to justify the invasion on humanitarian grounds, although they no longer maintained that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction posed any threat to the United States. In the issue from November 27, 2006, the editors wrote:
At this point, it seems almost beside the point to say this:The New Republic deeply regrets its early support for this war. The past three years have complicated our idealism and reminded us of the limits of American power and our own wisdom.[17]
Until February 2007,The New Republic was owned by Martin Peretz, New York financiersRoger Hertog andMichael Steinhardt, and Canadian media conglomerateCanWest.[18] In late February 2007, Peretz sold his share of the magazine to CanWest, which announced that its subsidiary CanWest Media Works International had acquired a full interest in the publication. Peretz retained his position as editor-in-chief.[19]
Starting on March 19, 2007, the magazine went to publishing twice a month, or 24 times a year. This replaced the old plan of publishing 44 issues a year. The magazine described its publication schedule as "biweekly," with specified "skipped publication dates." There were ten of these in 2010. Issues became bigger, contained more pages, and featured more visuals, new art and other "reader-friendly" content. The use of theWarnock typeface throughout was accented by woodcut-style illustrations. Although the subscription prices did not change, the newsstand price increased from $3.95 to $4.95. The website was also redesigned, and offered more daily content and new features.[20][21]
In March 2009, Peretz and a group of investors, led by former Lazard executive Laurence Grafstein and includingMichael Alter,[22] bought the magazine back from CanWest, which was on the edge of bankruptcy. Frank Foer continued as editor and was responsible for the day-to-day management of the magazine, and Peretz remained editor-in-chief.[23] Richard Just took over as editor of the magazine on December 8, 2010.
On March 9, 2012,Facebook co-founderChris Hughes was introduced as theNew Republic's majority owner and editor-in-chief.[24] Under Hughes, the magazine became less focused on "The Beltway," with more cultural coverage and attention to visuals. It stopped running an editorial in every issue. Media observers noted a less uniformly pro-Israel tone in the magazine's coverage than its editorial stance during Peretz's ownership.[25]In December 4, 2014, Gabriel Snyder, previously ofGawker and Bloomberg, replaced Franklin Foer as editor. The magazine was reduced from twenty issues per year to ten and the editorial offices moved fromPenn Quarter, Washington DC, to New York, where it was reinvented as a "vertically integrated digital-media company."[26] The changes provoked a major crisis among the publication's editorial staff and contributing editors. The magazine's literary editor,Leon Wieseltier, resigned in protest. Subsequent days brought many more resignations, including those of executive editors Rachel Morris and Greg Veis; nine of the magazine's eleven active senior writers; legal-affairs editorJeffrey Rosen; the digital-media editor; six culture writers and editors; and thirty-six out of thirty-eight contributing editors (includingPaul Berman, Jonathan Chait, William Deresiewicz, Ruth Franklin, Anthony Grafton, Enrique Krauze, Ryan Lizza, Sacha Z. Scoblic, Helen Vendler, Sean Wilentz). In all, two-thirds of the names on the editorial masthead were gone.[26]
The mass resignations forced the magazine to suspend its December 2014 edition. Previously a weekly for most of its history, it was immediately before suspension published ten times per year[27] with a circulation of approximately 50,000.[28] The company went back to publishing twenty issues a year, and editor Gabriel Snyder worked with staff to reshape it.[citation needed]
In the wake of the editorial crisis, Hughes indicated that he intended to stay withThe New Republic over the long term, tellingNPR of his desire to make sure the magazine could produce quality journalism "hopefully for decades to come."[29] He published an open letter about his "commitment" to give the magazine "a new mandate for a new century."[30] However, on January 11, 2016, Hughes putThe New Republic up for sale.[31] In another open letter, he said, "After investing a great deal of time, energy, and over $20 million, I have come to the conclusion that it is time for new leadership and vision at The New Republic."[30]
In February 2016,Win McCormack bought the magazine from Hughes,[32] and named Eric Bates, the former executive editor ofRolling Stone, as editor. In September 2017, Bates was demoted from his leadership role to a masthead title of "editor at large."J.J. Gould, coming fromThe Atlantic, then served as editor for just over a year,[33] before resigning in December 2018. In November 2017,Hamilton Fish V, the publisher since McCormack's acquisition of the magazine, resigned amid allegations of workplace misconduct.[34] Kerrie Gillis was named publisher in February 2019,[35] and Chris Lehmann, formerly the editor in chief ofThe Baffler,[36] was named editor April 9, 2019.[37] Within months his management style faced public criticism[38][39] for his hiring process of an Inequality Editor, posted on June 28. Within weeks, another scandal erupted, with Lehmann facing even harsher criticism from the public and the media for his decision to publish a controversial op-ed byDale Peck called "My Mayor Pete Problem." The op-ed was retracted, with Lehmann commenting in a separate statement: "The New Republic recognizes that this post crossed a line, and while it was largely intended as satire, it was inappropriate and invasive."[40] In March 2021, it was announced that Lehmann would be departing his role as editor and would be replaced byMichael Tomasky.[41]
The New Republic's average paid circulation for 2009 was 53,485 copies per issue.
| Year | Avg. Paid Circ. | % Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2000[42] | 101,651 | |
| 2001[42] | 88,409 | −13.0 |
| 2002[43] | 85,069 | −3.8 |
| 2003[44] | 63,139 | −25.8 |
| 2004[45] | 61,675 | −2.3 |
| 2005[46] | 61,771 | +0.2 |
| 2006[47] | 61,024 | −1.2 |
| 2007[48] | 59,779 | −2.0 |
| 2008[49] | 65,162 | +9.0 |
| 2009[49] | 53,485 | −18.0 |
| 2010[50] | NR | NR |
The New Republic's last reported circulation numbers to media auditor BPA Worldwide were for the six months ending on June 30, 2009.
According toQuantcast, theTNR website received roughly 120,000 visitors in April 2008, and 962,000 visitors in April 2012. By June 9, 2012, theTNR website's monthly page visits dropped to 421,000 in the U.S. and 521,000 globally.[51] As of April 16, 2014, theTNR website's Quantcast webpage contains the following messages: "This publisher has not implemented Quantcast Measurement. Data is estimated and not verified by Quantcast...," and "We do not have enough information to provide a traffic estimate...," and "Traffic data unavailable until this site becomes quantified."[52] Demographically, data show that visitors tend to be welleducated (76% being college graduates, with 33% having a graduate degree), relativelyaffluent (55% having a household income of over $60,000 and 31% having a six figure income),white (83%), and more likely to be male (61%). Eighty two percent were at least 35 years old with 38% being over the age of 50.[53]
New Republic editorMichael Whitney Straight (1948 to 1956) was later discovered to be a spy for theKGB, recruited into the same network asDonald Maclean,Guy Burgess,Kim Philby, andAnthony Blunt.[54] Straight's espionage activities began at Cambridge during the 1930s; he later claimed that they ceased duringWorld War II. Later, shortly before serving in theKennedy administration, he revealed his past ties and turned in fellow spy Anthony Blunt. In return for his cooperation, his own involvement was kept secret and he continued to serve in various capacities for the U.S. government until he retired. Straight admitted his involvement in his memoirs; however, subsequent documents obtained from the former KGB after the fall of the Soviet Union indicated that he drastically understated the extent of his espionage activities.[55][56]
In 2006, associate editorSpencer Ackerman was fired by editor Franklin Foer. Describing it as a "painful" decision, Foer attributed the firing to Ackerman's "insubordination": disparaging the magazine on his personal blog,[57] saying that he would "skullfuck" a terrorist's corpse at an editorial meeting if that was required to "establish his anti-terroristbona fides" and sending Foer an e-mail where he said—in what according to Ackerman was intended to be a joke—he would "make a niche in your skull" with a baseball bat. Ackerman, by contrast, argued that the dismissal was due to "irreconcilable ideological differences." He believed that his leftward drift as a result of the Iraq War and the actions of theBush administration was not appreciated by the senior editorial staff.[58] Within 24 hours of being fired byThe New Republic, Ackerman was hired as a senior correspondent for the rival magazineThe American Prospect.
In July 2007, afterThe New Republic published an article by an American soldier in Iraq titled "Shock Troops", allegations of inadequatefact-checking were leveled against the magazine. Critics alleged that the piece contained inconsistent details indicative of fabrication. The identity of the anonymous soldier,Scott Thomas Beauchamp, was revealed. Beauchamp was married toElspeth Reeve, one of the magazine's three fact-checkers. As a result of the controversy,The New Republic and theUnited States Army launched investigations, reaching different conclusions.[59][60][61] In an article titled "The Fog of War", published on December 1, 2007, Franklin Foer wrote that the magazine could no longer stand behind the stories written by Beauchamp.[62][63]
On July 12, 2019, gay writerDale Peck wrote an article forThe New Republic critical ofPete Buttigieg, a2020 Democratic Party presidential primary candidate. Peck repeatedly referred to Buttigieg as "Mary Pete", which he described as the "gay equivalent ofUncle Tom", saying, "Pete and I are just not the same kind of gay." He went on to describe the candidate as a "fifteen-year-old boy in a Chicago bus station wondering if it's a good idea to go home with a fifty-year-old man so that he'll finally understand what he is."[64] The piece was harshly received by several media figures.[65][66]
In January 2015,The New Republic, after having been purchased byChris Hughes, published a long, detailed report on the magazine's history of alleged racism. The article, by staff reporterJeet Heer, also alleged that during Marty Peretz's tenure as owner, women were rarely, if ever, given opportunities to write or edit for the magazine:
One may also ask if a staff dominated by privileged white males might not have benefited from greater diversity, and not just along racial lines. "Marty [Peretz] doesn't take women seriously for positions of responsibility," staff writer Henry Fairlie toldEsquire magazine in 1985. "He's really most comfortable with a room full of Harvard males." In a 1988 article forVanity Fair, occasional contributor James Wolcott concurred, noting, "The New Republic has a history of shunting women to the sidelines and today injects itself with fresh blood drawn largely from male interns down from Harvard." When Robert Wright succeeded Michael Kinsley in 1988, he joked he was hired as part of an 'affirmative action program' since he went to Princeton, not Harvard."[67]
Before Wallace's appointment in 1946, the masthead listed no single editor in charge, but gave an editorial board of four to eight members.Walter Lippmann,Edmund Wilson, andRobert Morss Lovett, among others, served on this board at various times. The names given above are the first editor listed in each issue, always the senior editor of the team.
