‘Sad day for journalism’: National Geographic sacks last of its staff writers
x
The magazine, which is now owned by Disney, is reported to have laid off 19 staff writers. (Photo courtesy: Michael Nichols / @NatGeo / Twitter)

‘Sad day for journalism’: National Geographic sacks last of its staff writers


One hundred and thirty five years after its inception, the iconic National Geographic magazine is reported to have sacked the remaining staff writers on its payroll on Wednesday (June 28).

News reports say that the magazine will not be on the newsstands from next year.

This will be sad news for millions of readers who have enjoyed its brilliant coverage of nature and science over so many decades.

Also read: Zoho freezes hiring in engineering roles, but decides against layoffs

The magazine, which is now owned by Disney, is reported to have laid off 19 staff writers.

“Today is my last day at National Geographic. The magazine is parting ways with its staff writers, including me. I’m so grateful for the opportunities I have had over the past 7 years. To everyone who read my stories, thank you from the bottom of my heart. On to the next!” tweeted one of the affected writers, Michael Greshko.

“Today marks the last day for all of National Geographic’s staff writers and many of their brilliant editors. I’m so proud of all the work I’ve done with these talented people, and know they’ll all land on their feet. But it’s a sad day for journalism…” was another heart-felt tweet from a science writer, Maya Wei Haas.

This is the second round of layoffs carried out by Disney at the magazine. The publication has changed hands several times since 2015, and each new owner imposed editorial changes, including letting go of six top editors last year. Many photographers who enhanced the magazine with their amazing visuals were also affected by the layoffs.

The magazine plans to make use of freelance writers, along with the remaining editors, to put together its future issues.

The company, in a statement to a news channel, said that the “staffing changes” would not affect the quality of its monthly publications, but would give it more flexibility in its storytelling.

(With agency inputs)

Read More
Next Story