David Granger Out At Esquire

[LanceyHoward]

I wonder what happens to Charles Pierce. I always thought his blog at Esquire was to vitriolic and liberal for a magazine trying to appeal to a general audience.

 

[Earthman]

I wonder what happens to Charles Pierce. I always thought his blog at Esquire was to vitriolic and liberal for a magazine trying to appeal to a general audience.

Column has a what doesn't belong and why quality to it in overall context of the magazine. I would bet though that majority of the magazine readers are not even aware of the column.

 

[GBNF]

Damn. I don't know where my dreams are supposed to go now. This was always the goal. Damn.

 

[typefitter]

Time and place, man. What if the janitor had been scrubbing toilets at the very minute Jones' career hung in the balance?

Does Joey Montgomery ever get told?

Trust me, I think about this all the time, because I'm home alone a lot and don't have much else to do right now. I like to think I would have gone back and tried again through more official channels, but Andy left for GQ not long after I started at Esquire, and who knows if anyone else would have agreed to meet me? I mean, we all have moments in our lives, looking back, that changed the course of everything else. I met my wife at a summer job that required candidates to pass a bilingualism test; I got 50 percent on the nose. I get one more question wrong, I don't meet my wife, my kids don't exist [takes another hit from bong, passes it to left], who knows what my life looks like? My time at Esquire always felt like a weird, temporary gift because of how close it came to never happening. That it lasted 14 years is one of the miracles of my life. All I can do now [drinks bong water] is give thanks to the universe and hope something half as great happens to me again, but I can't be mad if it doesn't.

 

[typefitter]

I wonder what happens to Charles Pierce. I always thought his blog at Esquire was to vitriolic and liberal for a magazine trying to appeal to a general audience.

Charlie is the biggest traffic driver for the site by some very large measure.

 

[ringer]

Before everyone genuflects too deeply, remember that when Granger took the top job at Esquire, his primary editorial and economic missions were to destroy the guy he owed his entire career to: Art Cooper at GQ, since the magazines were/are direct competitors. Of course, Granger then proceeded to raid many of the writers that Cooper gave a shot to -- several of whom worked at Frank Deford's failed The National -- Pierce among them.

Since Granger he knew exactly what they were paid at GQ, he likely bought their loyalty.

True colors bared -- for all involved.

 

[typefitter]

Before everyone genuflects too deeply, remember that when Granger took the top job at Esquire, his primary editorial and economic missions were to destroy the guy he owed his entire career to: Art Cooper at GQ, since the magazines were/are direct competitors. Of course, Granger then proceeded to raid many of the writers that Cooper gave a shot to -- several of whom worked at Frank Deford's failed The National -- Pierce among them.

Since Granger he knew exactly what they were paid at GQ, he likely bought their loyalty.

True colors bared -- for all involved.

This post is a classic example of someone speaking with authority on the Internet when he has no actual understanding of or insight into the real-world situation. It's always delightful.

Let's take Tom Junod for an example. Granger pulled a Junod story about oysters out of the GQ slush pile and brought him from Atlanta Magazine—made his national career, including his editing two stories that won ASMEs in back-to-back years. He then took Junod to Esquire, the way magazine editors always take their writers with them when they move, because they're trying to make the best magazine they can and editors and writers both like working with people they can trust. Junod later received an offer from Conde Nast to come back to GQ and also write for the New Yorker for a considerable increase from his Esquire salary. He refused that offer, and I'm not sure he ever matched the dollar amount even after nearly two decades at Esquire. Most of us made less at Esquire than we would have made had we gone to a rival publication. Junod, like Raab and Fussman and Pierce, has been with Granger for something like 25 years. I was still the newest writer at large at Esquire at 14 years in; everyone else had at least 19 years. That's not bought loyalty. There are many reasons writers at large never left Esquire, and I can tell you, as one of them, that the money was way down the forking list.

 

[YankeeFan]

Was listening to Pandora in the hospital the other day, and a Kris Kristofferson song came on.

I was reminded of, and looked up to confirm for my mother-in-law, his "big break" story in which, as a guy looking to break into the Nashville songwriting business, he landed a helicopter in Johnny Cash's yard. (He had flown helicopters in Vietnam.)

Cash ends up recording Sunday Morning Coming Down, and wins the CMA's Song of the Year for it.

That's some big balls.

 

[Mr. Sunshine]

Major advantage over people without access to helicopters, though.

 

[YankeeFan]

Major advantage over people without access to helicopters, though.

Three Bags has no excuse for not landing the job of his dreams.

 

[cjericho]

I always thought he did a terrific job with the magazine when he took it over, and it very likely bought about 20 years with the brand doing pretty well -- in a way it wouldn't have with an EIC without his ability to know that market. When you say Esquire is turning a considerable profit are you talking about the magazine itself, or all of the ancillary things -- including the digital archives, the TV network, the cross promotions, etc. Because if you break out the magazine itself, I wouldn't be completely surprised if it is a loss leader at best and a drain on the bottom line at worst. Or if it earns money. ... earning a fraction of what it used to. I'm not saying that in a snarky way (please don't read it that way). I don't think even a terrific magazine stands much chance anymore the way it did even 10 years ago. Something like the Saturday Evening Post in its hey day. ... there wouldn't be much of a market for it the way things are.

I don't know Esquire well, but I do know the circulation and ad sales numbers and the magazine industry generally. I know Esquire's numbers (the magazine) are down. The magazine is bucking things if it is making any amount of money, at least with what I assumed it cost to produce Granger's way. Which was why I assumed things came to a head. It's just a new reality; not an indictment of Esquire. There are a lot of magazines that were decent enough that have gone by the wayside -- they didn't stand a chance. The fact that Esquire is still as strong as it is, says something about the job he did.

If I am right about the publication itself (and correct me if I am not), you can argue that putting out a top-notch magazine, even at a loss if there is one, keeps the brand strong and that feeds the ancillary things where you can make some money. But I am betting that what they are actually seeing is declining magazine readership, declining ad revenue, and an expensive flagship not being so integral to the actual money makers that it justifies the expense. I am not arguing that -- I don't know. It's just what I guessed the calculation was. My guess also was that that was a problem for Granger. Maybe I made a bunch of assumptions, because I don't know, but it seemed to fit current magazine economics.

If the Esq TV network is turning a profit everyone should leave print and go to TV.

 

[Earthman]

Major advantage over people without access to helicopters, though.

They could buy a drone to easily drop their clips anywhere.