[rsingel]

Conde Nast has never bought specialty mags, and doesn't own Outdoors or Bicycling.

It bought Wired mag (but not the online site) in like 1998.

The closest Conde Nast has now to a specialist site is Ars Technica, which it bought almost 20 years ago

[postmodest]

Condé Nast turned Wired and Ars from being magazines for tech workers interested in long-form articles, into magazines for VC bros who want to read about Porsches and Burning Man. They became catalogues for Silicon Valley Money to keep in a rack next to the toilet.

[whynotminot]

And Ars is still great!

[dlivingston]

I read Ars multiple times a week. It's not Pulitzer-winning stuff, but certainly more thoughtful than The Verge. Can someone help me understand why it's being panned as losing quality?

[rsingel]

It has monthly page view quotas for writers, which changes what gets covered.

It laid off or lost most of its best tech policy writers, including Joe Mullin, Cyrus Farivar, David Kravets, and Timothy B Lee.

[ledauphin]

it really isn't. but to be fair, it got a lot worse many years after the acquisition (2008), so it's hard to be certain whose fault it was.

[Ghos3t]

Press X for doubt

[teh_infallible]

Ars used to have interesting articles about novel intersections between technology and the law. Now it’s like a Sharper Image catalogue.

[sybercecurity]

You are correct, it's a Hearst publication. Thought it was CN. Still, Hearst could be said to be doing the same thing: watering down niche publications in the name of synergy.