How Newhouse Dynasty Obtained Its Wealth Historically--Part 1

(The following article first appeared in the 11/18/92 issue of the now-defunct Lower East Side alternative newspaper Downtown)

Ever since Samuel Newhouse I started working as an office-boy, bookkeeper and rent-collector in Jersey Democratic machine politician, Bayonne Times owner and Judge Hyman Lazarus’s law office in 1908, the Newhouse family has shown a remarkable ability to accumulate more money, more swiftly, than most families who get involved in the U.S. media world.

By the time Samuel Newhouse I was 21 in 1916, he was earning around $30,000 per year and had been given 25 percent ownership of the Bayonne Times by his boss, Judge Lazarus, for his loyal service. By 1922, Newhouse had saved up enough money to purchase the Staten Island Advance in partnership with Judge Lazarus. And a few years later, when his original partner, Judge Lazarus, died in 1924, Newhouse also had enough money to buy up the Lazarus family’s share of Staten Island Advance stock.

During the 1920s, the Newhouse family also had enough money to loan the money to Henry Grafinkle which enabled him to open newsstands that were quite good at selling the Newhouse family’s Staten Island Advance at the St. George’s Ferry Terminal on Staten Island, as well as to open newsstands throughout Manhattan, at LaGuardia Airport, at Newark Airport and at the Port Authority Bus Terminal (the world’s largest and most lucrative newsstand)—which also sold other Newhouse publications quite well throughout the years.

During the 1930s Depression, the Newhouse family still had enough money to buy the Long Island Press in Jamaica and the previously competing Long Island Star, North Shore Journal and Nassau Journal, as well as the Newark Ledger, the Newark Star and newspapers in Syracuse. At the Long Island Press during the 1930s—where the Newhouse family was paying its non-unionized newsroom employees only 33 percent of what unionized New York Times and New York Daily News employees were earning for similar work—Samuel Newhouse I’s salary was more than the total of all the salaries paid to the Newhouse family’s 65 newsroom employees there. (end of part 1)

(Downtown 11/18/92)

Newhouse Dynasty Power And Wealth In The 1990s

(The following article first appeared in the 11/18/92 issue of the now-defunct Lower East Side alternative newspaper Downtown)

In the 1990s, the sons of Samuel Newhouse I continued to hold a lot of U.S. Big Media power. As the Magazine In America: 1741-1990 book by John Tebbel and Mary Zuckerman then observed:

“…S.I. Newhouse, Jr., could be considered the most powerful man in the publishing business, controlling what Fortune called the greatest concentration of wealth in private hands. He shared responsibility only with his brother Donald, a year younger, who directed the company’s newspapers and cable-television interests, while he concentrated on the magazines…Since Advance Publications, the umbrella covering all the family interests, is owned exclusively by the Newhouse brothers, there are no shareholders (and therefore not even the S.E.C.) to interfere in the administration of a communications empire worth between $8 to $10 billion.”

(Downtown 11/18/92)

`Parade''s Cable-TV Connection Historically

(The following article first appeared in the 11/18/92 issue of the now-defunct Lower East Side alternative newspaper Downtown)

Perhaps one reason why many U.S. cable TV shows haven’t, historically, talked too much about either the amount of money and Big Media power that the Newhouse Dynasty possessed in the 1990s or the literary quality of its Parade, Vogue and other Newhouse media conglomerate magazines, was that Newhouse also owned many U.S. cable television systems in the 1980s and 1990s. As the book Newspaperman by Richard Meeker observed:

“By early 1981, the Newhouse family owned and operated dozens of cable systems throughout the Northeast, South and Midwest, with a total of 500,000 subscribers—making theirs the 8th largest cable-TV operation in the United States.”

In the early 1990s, the cable-TV operation of the Newhouse media conglomerate was the 14th-largest one in the USA. Among the cable-TV companies owned by its Newhouse Broadcasting Corporation in the early 1990s were Metrovision Inc., News-Channels Corporation and Vision Cable Communications. Coincidentally, S.I. Newhouse III was the assistant secretary of the Metrovision Inc. subsidiary and Jo Newhouse was the personnel director of the Vision Cable Communications Inc. subsidiary of the Newhouse media conglomerate in the early 1990s.

Newhouse’s Metrovision operated 21 cable systems in states like Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Nebraska, Ohio, Texas, Wisconsin and Wyoming in the early 1990s; and over 450,000 households subscribed to cable-TV systems which it owned in the early 1990s.

Newhouse’s Vision Cable Communications operated 15 cable-TV systems in states like Florida, Louisiana, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and South Carolina in the early 1990s; and over 470,000 households subscribed to cable systems which it owned in the early 1990s.

Newhouse’s NewsChannels Corp. operated 31 cable systems in Alabama, Pennsylvania and upstate New York in the early 1990s; and over 380,000 households subscribed to this subsidiary’s cable systems in the early 1990s. Coincidentally, Newhouse’s NewsChannels Corp. operated a cable-TV system in Syracuse—where Newhouse also markets Syracuse’s daily newspaper—in the early 1990s.

(Downtown 11/18/92)

African-American Male Worker Jobless Rate Under Obama Regime: 17.2 Percent

The official “seasonally adjusted” unemployment rate for African-American male workers over 20 years-of-age in the United States increased from 15.4 percent to 17.2 percent between March 2009 and April 2009 under the Democratic Obama Regime, according to the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

The official “seasonally adjusted” jobless rate for African-American female workers over 20 years-of-age also increased from 9.9 percent to 11.5 percent between March 2009 and April 2009; and the official “seasonally adjusted” jobless rate for all African-American workers under the Democratic Obama Regime increased from 13.3 percent to 15 percent during this same period.

The “seasonally adjusted” unemployment rate for white male workers also increased from 8 percent to 8.5 percent between March 2009 and April 2009.

The “seasonally adjusted” rate for all Hispanic or Latino workers in April 2009 was 11.3 percent.

For all U.S. workers over 20 years-of-age, the “seasonally adjusted” jobless rate increased from 8.5 percent to 8.9 percent between March 2009 and April 2009.

The “seasonally adjusted” jobless rate for African-American youth between 16 and 19 years-of-age increased from 32.5 percent to 34.7 percent between March 2009 and April 2009 under the Democratic Obama Regime, while the unemployment rate for Hispanic or Latino youth increased from 24.9 percent to 26.5 percent during this same period.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ May 8, 2009 press release:

“…In April, job losses were large and widespread across nearly all major private-sector industries. Overall, private-sector employment fell by 611,000.

“The number of unemployed persons increased by 563,000 to 13.7 million in April…

“Among the unemployed, the number of job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs rose by 571,000 in April to 8.8 million….

“The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) increased by 498,000 to 3.7 million over the month…

“About 2.1 million persons…were marginally attached to the labor force in April…These individuals wanted and were available for work…They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. Among the marginally attached, there were 740,000 discouraged workers in April…

“Nonfarm payroll employment fell by 539,000 in April to 132.4 million; private-sector employment declined by 611,000…In April, job losses continued in most major private-sector industries…

“Employment in manufacturing fell by 149,000 over the month…

“Construction employment declined by 110,000 in April…

“The professional and business services industry lost 122,000 jobs in April….Half of the April decline occurred in temporary help services.

“Employment in retail trade fell by 47,000 in April…. Wholesale trade employment was down by 41,000 over the month…

“Employment in transportation and warehousing declined by 38,000 in April…Employment in financial activities declined by 40,000 over the month…The leisure and hospitality industry lost 44,000 jobs in April…”

`Parade' Magazine's Newhouse Newspaper/Advance Publications Connection Historically

(The following article first appeared in the 11/18/92 issue of the now-defunct Lower East Side alternative newspaper Downtown)

In 1962, Oregon Senator Wayne Morse argued that “The American people need to be warned before it is too late about the threat which is arising as a result of the monopolistic practices of the Newhouse interests.” But, 30 years later, many U.S. newspapers were still owned by the Newhouse interests in the early 1990s.

One reason why neither Parade nor the Vogue/Conde’ Nast magazines nor the Newhouse Dynasty need to worry about being satirized too much in many U.S. daily newspapers is that many U.S. daily newspapers are owned by the Newhouse Dynasty’s Advance Publications holding company. In the early 1990s, the fourth-largest newspaper chain in the U.S. was owned by Newhouse. Over $1.7 billion per year was taken in by the Newhouse family company from its 26 newspapers during the early 1990s. And the daily circulation of Newhouse’s newspapers exceeded 3 million in the early 1990s. The following U.S. newspapers are still all owned by the same media conglomerate which owns Parade and the Vogue/Conde’ Nast magazines: Newark Star-Ledger; Jersey City Journal; Trenton Times; Staten Island Advance; Syracuse Post-Standard; Portland Oregonian; Harrisburg Patriot/Patriot-News; Cleveland Plain-Dealer; Birmingham News; Huntsville Times/Huntsville News; New Orleans Times-Picayune; Springfield Union News/Republican; Ann Arbor News; Flint Journal; Grand Rapids Press; Kalamazoo Gazette; Bay City Times; Saginaw News; Jackson Citizen-Patriot; Muskegon Chronicle; and the Mississippi Press-Register.

During the 1950s, Newhouse’s Newark Star-Ledger (whose circulation exceeded 400,000 in the early 1990s) apparently agreed “to be used as a conduit for charges [Joe] McCarthy himself didn’t dare make public,” and “when certain of its syndicated columnists, Drew Pearson among them, began to attack McCarthy, the Ledger refused to print the revelations,” according to Newspaperman: S.I. Newhouse And The Business Of News by Richard Meeker.

Coincidentally, when a book critical of the Newhouse media conglomerate’s seemingly monopolistic practices, Newhouse, Newspapers, Nuisances: Highlights In The Growth Of A Communications Empire by John Lent, was published in the early 1960s, none of the newspapers which were part of the Newhouse newspaper chain printed a review of the book.

Newhouse newspapers are not particularly known for being examples of quality journalism. Indeed, in 1964, Newspaper Guild Vice-President William Farson made in reference to Samuel Newhouse I the following comment:

“More people jump on Newhouse than other monopolists because he has a history of putting out poor newspapers. He wants no competition because if he had to compete, he couldn’t afford to put out a poor paper, and in the process he wouldn’t make as much money.”

When More magazine—a magazine not owned by the Newhouse Dynasty—“compiled a list of the 10 worst big-circulation daily newspapers in America” in the 1970s “three of Newhouse’s newspapers were on it,” according to the Newspaperman book.

(Downtown 11/18/92)

`Parade'/`Vogue''s `GQ', `Vanity Fair', `New Yorker Magazine', `Details' Connection Historically

(The following article first appeared in the 11/18/92 issue of the now-defunct Lower East Side alternative newspaper Downtown)

Although Vogue, Glamour, Self and Allure pose as magazines which present editorially a competing “women’s point of view” to the primarily male-oriented GQ/Gentleman’s Quarterly magazine, the same Newhouse Dynasty media conglomerate which owns Vogue, Glamour, Self and Allure has also owned GQ since 1979. And GQ’s editorial director in the early 1990s, Alexander Liberman, was the same man who was the editorial director of Vogue, Glamour, Self and Allure. After the previously competing Gentleman’s Quarterly/GQ was purchased by Newhouse, its circulation increased from 180,000 to around 700,000 each month in the early 1990s.

The Newhouse Dynasty’s media conglomerate also owns and markets Vanity Fair and the New Yorker Magazine. Vanity Fair and the New Yorker Magazine were each read by over 600,000 people in the early 1990s.

Vanity Fair was re-launched in 1983—using the same name of Conde’ Nast’s defunct pre-World War II publication—by Newhouse. The British wife of an editor named Harold Evans—former British magazine Tatler editor Tina Brown—was soon named to be Vanity Fair’s editor by Newhouse. At the time it was started, according to The Last Days Of The New Yorker by Gig Mahon, “Vanity Fair made it blatantly clear that it wanted New Yorker readers and advertisers.”

The New Yorker was among the top U.S. magazines in terms of the number of pages sold to retail advertisers in the early 1980s. With a circulation of around 500,000 in the early 1980s, it was taking in about $70 million from its ad sales, newsstand sales and subscriptions.

Coincidentally, after Newhouse decided that The New Yorker was the magazine that competed with Vanity Fair, Newhouse spent $200 million in 1985 to buy The New Yorker—and thus bring the previously competing New Yorker into the Newhouse stable of magazines. In November 1984, Samuel Newhouse I’s son, S.I. “Si” Newhouse Jr., had first promised “that he would limit his investment in The New Yorker to 25 percent of the stock,” according to The Last Days Of The New Yorker. But by 1985, Newhouse decided it wanted complete control of The New Yorker magazine operation.

After Newhouse fired the editor of The New Yorker in January 1987, the magazine’s staff drafted a letter in which it protested that “a new editor has been imposed on us.” In the early 1990s, ironically, Newhouse’s newest editor at The New Yorker was Tina Brown—the former editor of the previously competing Vanity Fair magazine.

Although Details sometimes liked to pose for its 250,000 readers in the early 1990s as an alternative Downtown magazine, it, too, was owned by Parade magazine’s parent company. Newhouse purchased Details for around $3 million in the late 1980s and, coincidentally, Details wasn’t too quick to print too many details about either Parade magazine or Newhouse in the early 1990s. A young member of the Newhouse Dynasty—Jonathan Newhouse—was, coincidentally, named to be the publisher at Details for awhile in the late 1980s.

Asked by Downtown in a Fall 1992 telephone interview if Details magazine had been affected much by the Newhouse family’s purchase of it, then-Details editor James Truman replied (in a heavy British accent): “It’s a nonsensical question. It’s a completely different magazine. Absolutely different.”

(Downtown 11/18/92)

Corporate Male Supremacy At Newhouse/`Vogue'/Conde' Nast In 1990s

(The following article first appeared in the 11/18/92 issue of the now-defunct Lower East Side alternative newspaper Downtown)

Patterns of Corporate Male Supremacy within the Newhouse/Vogue/Conde’ Nast operation in the early 1990s were manifested in ways other than in the Newhouse media conglomerate’s practice of then allowing just one man to be the editorial director of all of its women-oriented magazines. At Vogue in the early 1990s, its creative director was a corporate man named Andre’ Leon Talley, its art director was a corporate man named Raul Martinez and its feature editor was a corporate man named Michael Boodro. Vogue’s travel editor, its editor-at-large, its associate art director, its editorial/art production manager and its editorial business manager in the early 1990s were also corporate men. At least one senior editor and six contributing editors at Vogue in the early 1990s were also still corporate men. In addition, a corporate man named Norman Waterman was also Vogue’s associate publisher and a corporate man named Edward Meniecheschi was Vogue’s director of merchandising in the early 1990s.

At Glamour in the early 1990s, its senior associate art director was a corporate man named Neil Phiefer, its publisher was a corporate man named Jack Kliger and its advertising director was a corporate man named William Abbott. Self’s articles editor in the early 1990s was also a corporate man named John Stickney and its publisher was a corporate man named Lawrence Burstein. Three of Self’s contributing editors were also corporate men in the early 1990s.

At the higher levels of the Newhouse media conglomerate’s Conde’ Nast Publications subsidiary, the top executive positions at its then-350 Madison Avenue offices in Midtown Manhattan were also monopolized by corporate men in the early 1990s. The chairman, the deputy chairman, the president, three of the four executive vice-presidents, the five vice-presidents and the director of advertising production of the Newhouse subsidiary which markets Vogue, Glamour, Self and Allure to women readers were all still corporate men as late as the early 1990s. And a corporate man named Leo Lerman was an editorial adviser at Vogue, Glamour and Self, simultaneously, in the early 1990s.

(Downtown 11/18/92)