Previous | Next
802803804805806807808809810811812813814815816817818819820821822823824 of 824
I don't think so. I think I was being driven by the
failure of Life, driven in to trying something else, and I was
disappointed that the development group hadn't come up with anything.
I was sort of determined to do it. I might say, if I hadn't been
CEO, I have a strong suspicion that the magazine would never have
seen the light of day. [laughter] It does help to be able to wander
around and sort of walk in to somebody's office, and say, “How is
that magazine doing now? What are your thoughts?” and so forth. I
have to give credit to Dick Stolley who became the first managing
editor and who really shaped it because I had some pretty lousy
ideas. I wanted typewriter type rather than regular type. I got
bashed down on that. I think I'd have made it fluffier than it
turned out to be. I think Stolley had just the right touch. He was
perfect for it, and his successors have had the right touch.
Let's just talk about one more thing. You've mentioned that the
decision to close Life, to terminate Life was very difficult. Was
that one of the more difficult decisions as CEO?
That was agony. That went on forever. Actually, I could
tell that Life had troubles ten, fifteen years before it was folded.
We tried every trick in the trade, editorially and promotionally to
keep it going. It had a slight positive flurry, I think it was 1966.
Then from 1966 on it went downward. Of course, you have to remember
that Colliers had folded. The Post had folded. Then, finally Look
folded. We were all trying to come up with ideas, when in retrospect
© 2006 Columbia University
Libraries | Oral History
Research Office | Rights and
Permissions | Help