Adweek: I recently read that when you worked at Wired the first time, as a senior editor from 2005 to 2010, you actually edited the story that became the movie Argo. Did you get a little piece of an Oscar or anything?
Nick Thompson: No, unfortunately. I didn’t make any money. I didn’t get an Oscar. And I’ve never met Ben Affleck. But I got the glory.
True. And you also co-founded The Atavist, which is pretty cool.
Yes, we came up with the idea in the fall of 2009 and we started making it in 2010 and so it had just launched when I got The New Yorker job [in 2010]… I learned a lot from running The Atavist that was helpful to my job with The New Yorker.
I learned how to hire developers. I learned how to make product roadmaps. I had the experience of helping to run a tech company before I was even in charge of The New Yorker’s website [from 2012 to this past January]. And so at The New Yorker, I also was involved in hiring developers, managing developers, setting the roadmaps, figuring out what the timeframe of a project should be. Having worked at The Atavist gave me a lot of knowledge about that.
So you’ve been running the website for The New Yorker since 2012. Why go to Wired? Apart from the editor in chief gig, obviously.
This was in January, right after Facebook has played a huge role in the election and the sort of destruction of American political discourse. That led to a realization of something I’ve been thinking for a long time, which is that the debates over the way technology platforms work, the way our artificial intelligence works, the way all of technological change works has profound impacts on society and the way we relate to each other and the way we think about everything. It all is influenced in deep ways by technology companies. These are amazing issues, and the chance to be in charge of a publication that’s weighing in on all of them constantly was pretty exciting.
So are you planning on delving deeper into how social media played into the election?
Maybe not that specifically, but for instance, we did three stories [the week of the] Facebook Live murder. Did the existence of Facebook Live possibly motivate that guy in Cleveland? If you are a platform company and you don’t want to encourage this kind of behavior, how do you change your algorithms? How do you even tell the difference between an actual murder versus an eyewitness who’s bearing witness to a shooting? Those are really interesting questions, and they’re questions I don’t think Facebook has thought enough about.
What’s your plan on the digital side?
The first step is to try to figure out what our paid content model will be. We went to a paid content model for The New Yorker and that was hugely successful. One of the reasons The New Yorker got so big was because we started making so much money on our website from our subscription model that we were able to hire more writers who write more good essays, and that makes you more money so you hire more writers and you sort of create this virtual cycle.
How about the print magazine? Any changes there?
My two conflicting goals are to bring back crazy design of early Wired and to make everything more readable. Those are somewhat in tension with each other because old Wired would put the page numbers upside down in the middle, right? I’m working with the restraint that I want everything to be readable. But you’ll notice there are no more jump pages so can read the story to the end… You probably lose a third of your readers every time you have a jump page. But most of the design changes will come when we do a larger redesign.