- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
At the end of 2022, it had just under 1.8 million subscribers, according to the authoritative Alliance for Audited Media.
I guess I don’t have context, but that doesn’t sound like a failing, unprofitable magazine in 2022?
dumbass executives. that’s always the answer.
They only care about having the biggest paycheck while they suck the company dry so they can impress fake friends. Most of them could care less about the actual health and success of the business - as long as they can suck it dry and move on to the next company before it tanks.
It’s pathetic and embarrassing. I’m surprised more scientists aren’t studying the executive class and their undying desire to hoard wealth while other’s employed in the companies they manage continue to suffer.
Profit hunting?
Growth hunting
Its sad, but ever since they were bought by Fox in 2016 their magazines stopped being about science, culture, travel and history and instead started pumping out basically bathroom reading for grandparents. Angels, ghosts, jesus, pirates, more jesus, etc etc
I had no idea that happened, what a sad thing to hear. I haven’t read it in a while obviously, but my child is getting close to the age I was when I discovered it and Scientific American. I’m sad I won’t get to share National Geographic with them.
Yep. My family were lifelong subscribers to National Geographic Magazine, and I grew up reading it. And I remember distinctly the change in quality when Fox bought it. The first magazine that was put out under the new management was all about the “facts” of the “real” Jesus, and would have been fit for a History Channel special. It was such a disappointment to see something I loved so much turn into a trash rag.
Depressing.
I gave up on NatGeo when they started focusing on schlocky pseudoscientific garbage shows. Such a shame
The Playboy of the school library.
