Math Error Skews ‘Nation’ Ad Numbers In Monday’s ‘New York Times’ Profile

Math Error Skews ‘Nation’ Ad Numbers In Monday’s ‘New York Times’ Profile

Math Error Skews ‘Nation’ Ad Numbers In Monday’s ‘New York Times’ Profile

The profile of The Nation in this week’s New York Times was a great read, but they botched our ad numbers: not only has The Nation‘s advertising not gone down more than any other magazine’s, many of our ad sales are up from last year.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

The Nation was excited to see that we’d been profiled in Monday’s New York Times, in a business section feature, "Bad News for Liberals May Be Good News for A Liberal Magazine." But we were surprised to read this:

No weekly magazine tracked by the Media Industry Newsletter has lost more pages of advertising this year than The Nation. As of Nov. 8, ad pages were down 30 percent compared with last year’s figures.

We had good reason to be shocked: It wasn’t true. The numbers provided to the Times by Media Industry Newsletter (MIN)—the industry’s arbiter of advertising statistics—were wrong, the result of a botched spreadsheet that added extra pages sold to our 2009 numbers and made it look like our ad sales this year were dramatically worse than they are.

The Nation, of course, has a non-traditional business model where the bulk of our income comes from you—subscribers and Nation Associates—not from ads. But any article reporting that we’re the worst in the industry in any category is pretty bad, and the article leaned quite heavily on our "ad troubles" as a sign of difficult times at The Nation. In reality, our highest selling ads—large display—are up 6 percent, and web ad sales are up almost 15 percent. In total we’re down only 5.7 percent from 2009, well in line with the rest of the industry.

When I saw the Times article on Sunday night, which includes some great quotes about the "fiery" Nation and our role as "a leading institution on the left," I’d tweeted that perhaps it was best read from the bottom up. I still hope you’ll give it a read (from either end now) as a profile of a magazine looking towards the future and charting its bold course in this tumultuous political moment.

Expect retractions from MIN Online and the New York Times shortly.

Like this Blog Post? Read it on get the Nation’s free iPhone App, NationNow.
NationNow iPhone App

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read, just one of the many incisive, deeply-reported articles we publish daily. Now more than ever, we need fearless journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media.

Throughout this critical election year and a time of media austerity and renewed campus activism and rising labor organizing, independent journalism that gets to the heart of the matter is more critical than ever before. Donate right now and help us hold the powerful accountable, shine a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug, and build a more just and equitable future.

For nearly 160 years, The Nation has stood for truth, justice, and moral clarity. As a reader-supported publication, we are not beholden to the whims of advertisers or a corporate owner. But it does take financial resources to report on stories that may take weeks or months to properly investigate, thoroughly edit and fact-check articles, and get our stories into the hands of readers.

Donate today and stand with us for a better future. Thank you for being a supporter of independent journalism.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x