StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Colleagues at my former outlet, PC World magazine, have told me that Editor-in-Chief Harry McCracken quit abruptly today because the company's new CEO, Colin Crawford, tried to kill a story about Apple and Steve Jobs.

The piece, a whimsical article titled "Ten Things We Hate About Apple," was still in draft form when Crawford killed it. McCracken said no way and walked after Crawford refused to compromise. Apparently Crawford also told editors that product reviews in the magazine were too critical of vendors, especially ones who advertise in the magazine, and that they had to start being nicer to advertisers.

Crawford was former CEO of MacWorld and only started at PC World about a month ago. According to the PC World source, when Crawford was working for the Mac magazine, Steve Jobs would call him up any time he had a problem with a story the magazine was running about Apple.

"Everybody is so proud of Harry but we're devastated that he's gone," said the source. "This is no way to run a magazine. But unfortunately, this looks like an indication of what we've got in store (from the new boss)."

He added that everyone at the magazine was upset by the news. "There's supposed to be a party with the MacWorld people going on right now, but no one's going," he said.

The source didn't know the specifics of what was in the story Crawford wanted to kill but said it was nothing new. "It was supposed to be light fare, just really innocuous stuff. The same kinds of things people have said about Apple before -- things that teased Steve Jobs," he said.

I reached McCracken on his cell who, from the sound of the background noise, seemed to be leaving the MacWorld party as we talked.

[Full Disclosure: Harry's my former boss at PC World and someone I greatly respect. He's a top-notch writer and one of the smartest editors I've worked with.]

He didn't want to discuss the details of why he resigned but said he quit "because of some fundamental disagreements with Colin." He emphasized that he wasn't fired or forced out and holds no ill feelings toward the company.

"I've worked at IDG (parent company of PC World and MacWorld) for 16 years. It's been unbelievably good to me, and I have ten-thousand great memories so I'm not leaving an unhappy person."

He said he actually resigned yesterday, but workers found out only about an hour ago. When asked what he'll do now he said, "I'm going to blog and freelance at least for a while. I'll probably write for PC World by the way. I want to make clear that I'm a huge admirer of what PC World does and I'm not leaving hoping that PC World will collapse with out me. I'm sure it won't collapse without me."

PC World's loss is a gain for other publications. Wordsmithing, by the way, runs in McCracken's family. His sister is novelist Elizabeth McCracken.

I said I wasn't going to write any more about this unless Colin Crawford (left) or Harry McCracken (right) came forward to explain what happened during their meeting, but another PC World employee has written a comment to my previous post about this issue and it's worth reading for the additional details the person provides. It's the one posted by "PC Worldly" toward the bottom of this page. To save you from having to sift through the comments to find it, I've excerpted here:

I was at the meeting where McCracken announced his resignation to the staff, and the point he made most strongly had to do with the EIC/publisher relationship. Had Crawford come to him and said "I have a problem with this article, let's put it on hold and talk," this thread wouldn't exist.

Apparently the article had not been fully edited and a rough draft only got to Crawford through the PR department, which had planned to promote it. McCracken said the piece definitely needed editing and he certainly would have listened to Crawford's concerns. But McCracken said there was no dialog--just the order to kill the piece.

Crawford has since said he tried to broker an agreement, but it's safe to say the staff at this point believes their award-winning EIC. Crawford has also said that he objected to the "emotive" tone of the word hate--PC World shouldn't be in the business of "hating" Apple. But the headline wasn't "Why we hate Apple." It was "10 Things We Hate About Apple." It was to be followed by a companion piece, "10 Things We Love About Apple." And a similar package was being planned for Microsoft.

It's worth noting that these pieces were produced for the web site only. We're under a lot of pressure to attract more traffic, and these list stories can be blockbusters. We do view them as an opportunity to be less serious--fluff is as good a word as any--but why that should be such a problem is beyond me. If the New Yorker ran the headline, nobody would flinch.

The CEO of a publication certainly has the right (and the duty) to define strategy and positioning. But an EIC is supposed to have the authority to create appropriate editorial content. If you don't think your guy can do the job, you don't start doing it for him--you get another guy.

By the same token, no EIC with an iota of talent or vision is going to accept that sort of micromanagement, especially for the reason Crawford apparently gave, which was that the piece would be needlessly upsetting to Apple. McCracken has plenty of talent and vision; PC World's loss will be someone else's gain.

Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:When are people going to realize that censorship on the internet is nearly instantly self-defeating!?

Durandal wrote:Crawford denies that the article was canned out of pressure to please advertisers. He doesn't expand on what the actual reason was.

John Gruber asks a pretty good question. If McCracken was willing to resign over integrity issues, why would he still be willing to write for PC Magazine, like he says he intends to in a freelance capacity?

Xisiqomelir wrote:Well, I'm glad he's able to spring instantly forward with this journalistic integrity thing, but the article sounds like the usual tedious bashfest than actual news. If this were actually some serious misdoing on Apple's part or critical flaw in an Apple product being exposed, I might be more sympathetic, but it really just sounds like bitter tears at no longer being able to push a fanboy agenda as the editor of a published magazine.

Darth Wong wrote:I guess you missed the part where they were planning to do one on Microsoft next.

Darth Wong wrote:I guess you missed the part where they were planning to do one on Microsoft next.

Xisiqomelir wrote:You can now read the piece. It's, umm, not very good.

There is a companion piece, also not very good.

Xisiqomelir wrote:Well, I'm glad he's able to spring instantly forward with this journalistic integrity thing, but the article sounds like the usual tedious bashfest than actual news. If this were actually some serious misdoing on Apple's part or critical flaw in an Apple product being exposed, I might be more sympathetic, but it really just sounds like bitter tears at no longer being able to push a fanboy agenda as the editor of a published magazine.

Flagg wrote:Why would a PC magazine not attack Apple, anyway? If Apple was an advertiser, then why would Apple want to advertise in a PC Magazine? Their entire fucking ad campaign is based on bashing PC's.

The Kernel wrote:

Xisiqomelir wrote:Well, I'm glad he's able to spring instantly forward with this journalistic integrity thing, but the article sounds like the usual tedious bashfest than actual news. If this were actually some serious misdoing on Apple's part or critical flaw in an Apple product being exposed, I might be more sympathetic, but it really just sounds like bitter tears at no longer being able to push a fanboy agenda as the editor of a published magazine.

He quit because executives at publishing companies shouldn't have any sort of editorial control. It's not up to the CEO to decide what constitutes a valid article, that's up to the editorial staff themselves.