It's not entirely fair to compare a website in 2012 to a magazine that lived in the 1930s (and yes, I do mean to use the word "live"). If I had to make a comparison...
They both have satirical writers who are not afraid of stepping on people's feelings. I think the satire that Thurber made in the magazine was better than what one can find in The New Yorker. Everyone and their brother has lampooned politicians and celebrities, some more than others. It's come to the point where I just shrug and move on instead of taking the time to think about it, as opposed to the satire that was present in Ross' magazine.
Availability is also an issue. Magazines cost money back then and not everyone could afford to buy one, especially when the Great Depression hit. While one could subscribe to The New Yorker, the website is available to anyone who has access to a computer. The audience for The New Yorker is much broader, and it knows it. Ross had the blessing of having a limited audience.
No comments:
Post a Comment