FP: now brought to you by the Washington Post Company

Posted By Blake Hounshell Monday, September 29, 2008 - 5:44 PM Share

Big news today: Foreign Policy was acquired by the Washington Post Company. Read all about it here.

What does this mean for Passport?

For now, very little will change. We will still be sending out the Morning Brief each day, tackling serious issues like the financial crisis, posting on not-so-important topics like upside-down houses in Germany, scrutinizing what the U.S. presidential candidates are saying and doing, and generally bringing you interesting tidbits from around the Web.

Down the road, we'll probably be looking to making some tweaks and changes to our editorial approach. And we'll need your help. So, dear readers, start thinking about what you'd like to see more and less of, and feel free to weigh in via the comments section or by e-mail.

EXPLORE:FOREIGN POLICY MAGAZINE

(15)

HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE

CICCIOLINI

6:40 PM ET

September 29, 2008

please don't let them touch Passport

this is easily one of the best blogs on the web (ala TPM, metafilter, boingboing, cuteoverload, etc.)

please don't let them change a thing. it's widely respected and insanely innovative.

DIPLO

6:49 PM ET

September 29, 2008

Aww

That's a major change switching from being published by a progressive think tank to a major corporation. Surely we can expect some noticeable changes to our beloved magazine.

I've never thought of FP being that much of a commercial success, rather that the endowment preserved its content from commercial pressures. I must say I am worried about what is to come.

trying this out Google

Well so that is how you do those links. Sorry for using a post to test that out.

RUFUSJSQUIRREL

7:15 PM ET

September 29, 2008

Bad Moon Rising

Do your best not to change a thing. Good luck guys.

SAM

8:31 PM ET

September 29, 2008

The reader of FP and this

The reader of FP and this blog, I assume, were interested in the Independent views it used to give over the issues, at least in its main area of expertise. I am assuming a smooth divergence from that path will occur in the next few month. One good indicator will be to see if the current writers will stay here or leave. as for me, I will still continue reading FP as I do read "Philadelphia Trumpet" too (no offense).

PAPICEK

9:35 PM ET

September 29, 2008

frankly, this makes me suspicious...

I expect a think tank to publish valuable research, or articles based on that research, and whether I agree with the premises and conclusions, I can usually expect a certain civil tone and standard of quality. What I expect from a media company is an ill-informed, American-centric editorial board running an agenda on me. Or at least, focus-group tuned articles that regurgitate positions already held by the public at large. Or held by the pundits.

FYI here are some, off the top of my head, foreign policy articles I value highly:

Jerry Z. Muller's paper on ethnicity and nationhood, and the reply by Habariyama, Humphrey, et al.
Wojciech Kononczuk's paper on the Yukos affair.
S. Frederick Starr's paper on authoritarian regimes in Central Asia.

All these are examples of articles that are informative and illuminating, and that's what I value most. My feeling is that public diplomacy suffers greatly from a lack of background and context.

So. Things I might wish for the future FP might include in-depth country profiles, historical perspectives on recurring foreign policy themes and situations, a series of articles on how different state power structures actually function (or malfunction) in the real world, and perhaps biographical/political sketches on important international figures and their contributions.

At any rate, your call on Obama's policy on military adventures in Pakistan is the only one I've seen. Another possible article to describe the parallels with the bombing of Cambodia in 1969 (the tactical situation and international ramifications are remarkably similar), and the risk of catastrophic consequences might be something Obama and the public needs to think about.

At any rate, good luck with the transition.

GABE

9:59 PM ET

September 29, 2008

Don't Change Just to Change

Seriously, don't let your new bosses change you just for the sake of change. While I'm sure there's room for improvement, I really like Passport how it is. If you change anything, make sure it's well thought out and not just to differentiate from the past product.

If it helps, tell the WaPo people that I was about to subscribe to FP because I like Passport so much the way it is (I'm a student, if they're interest in demos). Now I'll have to wait to make sure the editorial board isn't compromised.

DIPLO

2:03 AM ET

September 30, 2008

Best Thing

Seriously, the best thing about FP was the academic journal feel/depth but not so technical as to be restrictive or a bore to read.

Don't lose that, don't let them turn you into some peg just above newsweek or something like that.

DNUZUM

2:22 AM ET

September 30, 2008

Very sad to see FP get sold

Very sad to see FP get sold to WP. I really like the current format, variety in honest, witty, sarcastic opinion found in both FP and Passport. I hope the changes mentioned are to the washington post, they could learn a lot from FP. Haha.

TOMSACHS

3:42 AM ET

September 30, 2008

stay true

Just because your bosses sold out, it doesn't mean you guys need to.

HAPPYMOM

5:47 AM ET

September 30, 2008

Change for the Better

I like everything about your site and I don’t think that you still lack any for changes to be done. However, change is sometimes necessary for improvement. It must be for the better.

Here are my suggestions, which you might consider:
1. Navigation links are usually at the left because the human reader reads from left to right. Yours is at the right. Why not give a left-nav a try?

2. Categories would also be great. Posts on politics, government, and the likes can be categorized further.

3. Do you ever consider having podcasts on your site?
happy mom

CIGRAINGER

6:39 AM ET

September 30, 2008

So Arabic and Farsi speakers

So Arabic and Farsi speakers are not human? Try 'Latin script readers', not 'human readers'.

Categorization is one of the biggest impediments to open analysis.

Podcasts would be great.

CIGRAINGER

6:41 AM ET

September 30, 2008

Please don't change -- if

Please don't change -- if anything they Washington Post people should learn from you guys. While I think the above comparing the articles in FP to academic journal articles is a bit silly (and makes it seem like those people don't read academic journals), it is a GREAT middle ground between journals and mass media. I really hope it stays that way.

NAPOLEON

3:05 PM ET

September 30, 2008

Concern

I have always looked upon FP as an extension of foreign affairs and the Counsel on foreign Relations. I will be interested to see what if any changes come about as a result of the acquisition.

JOSHUA KEATING

11:40 PM ET

September 30, 2008

Common mistake

FP was published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, not the Council on Foreign Relations. We have no connection to Foreign Affairs.

KALEBERG

9:01 PM ET

September 30, 2008

RIP

You have my condolences.

Passport, FP’s flagship blog, brings you news and hidden angles on the biggest stories of the day, as well as insights and under-the-radar gems from around the world.