Weekly newsmagazine in freefall


And once again, it’s not us.

Mind you, if the guy’s main article of indictment is that there’s a Joel Stein column, one shudders to think what he’d make of us, since Feschuk is about six times as funny as Stein.

Filed under:

Weekly newsmagazine in freefall

  1. Because that’s relevant.

  2. feschuck is about as funny as a drunk uncle telling racist jokes.

  3. Feschuck is the funniest writer in the Canadian media I know right now, and he continues to amaze me with his ability to mock the unmockable. I have lost several cups of coffee over his articles and blog entries.

    As for Time, maybe this is an opportunity for Maclean’s to start a US copy…

  4. WOuldn’t it be more accurate to say that Stein is 1/6th as funny as Feschuk? Actually from what little I’ve read of Stein, I think that’s charitable.

  5. Feschuck is fantastic. Hard to believe he wrote for the unfunniest politician in Canadian memory. Maybe he was into irony then.

  6. Well, Feschuck IS the reason I read Maclean’s, although I don’t think he’s made me laugh quite so hard as he did in one of his National Post parliamentary sketch columns, way back in ’98 or ’99, in which he penned a NFB script for Guy Parent.


    Sorry to say, I find most of the Maclean’s columnist roster pretty weak, although, yes Paul Wells, you’re right behind Feschuk on the must-read list.

  7. I don’t want to direct the conversation toooo much, and obviously I’m a wildly biased observer, but does anyone have any thoughts on Time over the last couple of years? Understanding that not everyone reads it. Any semi-regular readers? Do you like the changes? Personally (as a proud former contributor to the now-essentially-extinct Canadian edition) I think the latest design is fantastic but the content is woeful. Feel free to disagree.

  8. Anyone that actually had an IQ over 70 and was exposed to any other media source (or anyone else who was so exposed) felt that Time has been an atrocious piece of trash since about 87. I was eight and already found it underwritten, underinformed, and oddly focused on things that happened weeks and weeks ago (like 2-3 weeks behind what should be in the magazine given publication dates and logistic issues).

    All of the redesings and reimaginings since then have just been more shuffling of the Titanic’s deck chairs. Seriously the Post feels like a dead, old publication thanks to its use of several days old Slate, WSJ, and other material, nevermind many weeks old stuff. But then I take advantage of many online newssources and I’m not bound to only use one country’s, or one language’s, media. I prefer US, UK, Canada, and Australia as news sources, but South Africa, New Zealand, Japan, and the Philipines are up there for English sources, while France provides lots of interesting stuff.

    Macleans has gotten the weekly game right – focusing on topical but not immediate long form articles, pulling you away from straight up Time, Newsweek, Economist coverage and more into New York and Spectator land. The Economist and The Week do what the other weeklies used to do, but far better and with a much better vocabulary. The Economist has been infiltrated by far too many Trotskyites, but still is better than Time. It’s an unfortunate truism that anyone who understands politics or business can make far more money and have far more of an effect on the world by doing something rather than by writing about those who do something, so a true picture of the world will never come out as the writers almost always come from the disaffected intellectual class and are inherently poorly paid (pretty much anyone with some literacy wants to speak to everyone) and entry barriers are rather low (grade 6 English standards aren’t hard).

    Feschuk was great in the Post, but I can never forgive working for Martin. Scott obviously has horrible politics and horrible political sense. I mean Martin! Seriously?? To throw away a career for that shmuck? Should at least parlay a dismissal into WK’s career, rather than bagging groceries.

Sign in to comment.