News on News

Austin-based Texas Monthly faces backlash after series of blunders

An alternate version of Texas Monthly's February cover is now being used on its social media.

It's rarely a good thing when a news outlet goes from making the news to being the news, but that's exactly what is happening to Texas Monthly. Over the past week, a series of articles published mainly for journalism insiders and news junkies have taken aim at the stalwart magazine, specifically its embattled editor in chief.

Since its founding in 1973, Austin-based Texas Monthly has been a beacon for narrative nonfiction and journalistic integrity. Considered one of the best magazines in the country alongside such institutions as The New Yorker and The Atlantic, Texas Monthly has won more than a dozen national magazine awards, developed a reputation for dogged political reporting, and managed to produce some very fine writing along the way.

If we're going back to the very beginning, it seems the trouble first started in February 2017 when the Columbia Journalism Review published a report that Texas Monthly's new editor in chief, Tim Taliaferro, would be taking a magazine most famous for political writing and crime reporting in a lifestyle direction. Having recently been purchased by a Paul Hobby-led private equity firm from media conglomerate Emmis Communications, the magazine was in the midst of a rebuilding moment, having lost editor Brian Sweany alongside about a dozen other notable names in the takeover.

While news of a shift towards lifestyle coverage wasn't exactly surprising — media outlets across the country have frantically tried to retool their editorial plans in accordance with the appetites of digitally savvy millennials — it was a quote from Taliaferro that garnered the most buzz. "Texans don’t care about politics," he told CJR in an interview.

Reaction from readers was swift, forcing Taliaferro to backpedal and issue a statement saying that CJR had taken his words out of context. CJR countered by releasing the reporter's notes from the interview; Taliaferro re-countered the counter by issuing a statement that he had given the reporter the wrong impression.

If anything, the blunder seemed like inexperience on the part of Taliaferro, and perhaps a lack of judgment on the part of TM's public relations team for letting him go on the record with CJR so soon into his tenure.

But, as the old adage goes, where there's smoke, there's fire, and over the past 10 days, the story's gotten even hotter. (Also, we understand the irony of using a cliche that would likely never appear in Texas Monthly to describe the turmoil.)

On January 26, 2018, CJR published yet another piece criticizing Taliaferro, this time for boasting during an editorial meeting that the magazine had entered into a paid agreement with Austin-based Bumble to feature the dating site's CEO, Whitney Wolfe Herd, on the February 2018 cover in exchange for a $25,000-$30,000 push on Bumble's social media. If true, this sort of agreement isn't just a gray zone, it's a clear violation of journalistic ethics.

Once again, Taliaferro countered, telling CJR that it was merely a discussion about Bumble's dedicated social media campaign to support the story — a discussion that began after Herd was selected for the cover. While CJR cited undated emails and quotes from unnamed sources present at the editorial meeting as evidence that some paid agreement may exist, it isn't quite a slam dunk in terms of a takedown.

But it was enough to get people talking — and Texas Monthly on the defensive.

In reaction to CJR's piece, D Magazine published its own story, entitled "Texas Monthly’s Tim Taliaferro: The Most Misunderstood Magazine Man," which makes the point that perhaps the most disturbing thing is this current editorial team's lack of communication.

"The CJR reports that when Taliaferro communicated poorly with his staff, misleading them to believe that he’d struck a deal with Bumble, they sat in 'stunned silence.' A media organization can’t operate (for long) that way," writes Tim Rogers.

"When the people at the top have really bad, unethical ideas, or when they simply get misunderstood, the mood in the room needs to be such that everyone feels comfortable raising a hand and saying, 'Let me see if I understand what you’re saying. Because it sounds to me like you just said something that worries me.'"

Perhaps to improve this culture of miscommunication, Hobby, now chairman and CEO of Texas Monthly, announced on February 2 that he was hiring formerAustin American-Statesman editor Rich Oppel as the magazine's new ombudsman. In a statement, Hobby said Oppel would be asked to "review our processes and organizational structure," and also called out Taliaferro for his "misstep."

"Editor in chief Tim Taliaferro’s communications with Bumble publicists may have incorrectly appeared to be a blurred line between the editorial and business sides of the magazine. When it comes to Texas Monthly’s journalism, even the appearance of impropriety can be damaging and is not acceptable," Hobby said in the statement. "Taliaferro has acknowledged his misstep and regret to our staff, who care deeply about upholding the highest standards of journalism."

While Texas Monthly's statement seemed to place blame directly at Taliaferro's feet, the Daily Beast wasn't so quick to let Hobby off the hook. According to the Daily Beast: "'Tim is a symptom,' said one former staffer who requested anonymity out of fear of professional retaliation. 'The person who set that situation up is ... Paul Hobby.'"

The Daily Beast goes on to posit that when Hobby tapped the 33-year-old Taliaferro to lead one of the nation's preeminent magazines, he was setting him up for failure. What they don't note, however, is that Jake Silverstein, Texas Monthly's highly regarded fourth editor, was also 33 years old when he took over the helm in 2008. Silverstein is now the editor of the New York Times Magazine.

We may never know the whole truth behind the Bumble cover controversy or who, if anyone, is solely to blame. As an institution, Texas Monthly's decision to hire Oppel and categorically condemn the exchange of money for editorial coverage is exactly what fans, subscribers, and fellow journalists should expect — and deserve — from the magazine.

As for Taliaferro, taking over a magazine is always a tenuous affair; taking over a magazine where leadership doesn't fully support its editor is almost impossible. For the sake of Texas Monthly as an institution, let's hope the new masthead figures that out quickly so the magazine can stop being the story and get back to writing them.

media

Red Light

San Antonio leads Texas on ending horse-drawn carriage rides by 2030

Getty Images

Horses will no longer pull carriages on the streets of downtown San Antonio.

San Antonio has pulled off something that the rest of Texas has yet to do, but it didn't come without some contentious conversations. City Council has unanimously voted (with one abstention) to phase out the use of horse-drawn carriages over the next five years. That means by January 1, 2030, there will be none on the streets at all; instead, there will be electric carriages.

These plans have been in the making since 2022 — if not always at the same level of intensity — when District 2 Councilmember Jalen McKee-Rodriguez and District 3 Councilmember Phyllis Viagran wrote up some concerns about the horses' wellbeing. A special session at the end of October 2024 hinted to San Antonians that the end for this practice was neigh — sorry, nigh — and the final vote was made on December 12. In addition to accepting the plan, it extended its timeframe by two years.

The initial proposal included worries about the horses' exposure to traffic and pollution, as well how their presence might exacerbate those issues for the environment at large by slowing traffic. It also raised concerns about the effects of standing or walking on hard surfaces for too long, or spending time in extreme weather.

At the December 12 meeting, San Antonians gave impassioned speeches about animal welfare — both to call attention to the need for better conditions and to defend the reputations and jobs of current horse drivers — but it wasn't the first time the council heard from the public about the issue.

In a prior city survey, 50,476 respondents weighed in. Of those respondents, 51.98 percent said they liked the idea to "Transition horse-drawn carriages to electric carriages and pedicabs and ban horse drawn carriages completely." There were alternative solutions listed, but respondents were less drawn to them.

A cultural divide emerged in the data and continued in the December meeting: some people avoided the carriages because they worried about the treatment of the horses, while others enjoyed them because of their historical echoes and living legacy. Many speakers in favor of the plan used this to form their argument, raising questions about history versus progress.

More tangible objections to the plan hinged on the businesses — specifically five companies — and jobs that would be lost, which was the main factor behind extending the adjustment period.

Discussions about the particulars of the electric vehicles are still to come, as confirmed in the discussion near the end of the meeting. Councilmember Jalen McKee-Rodriguez addressed concerns about what would happen to the horses, mentioning the Brady Hunter Foundation as a future partner in finding them rescue homes.

Some council members also brought up rhetorical questions about animal exploitation by groups like Sea World, the San Antonio Stock Show & Rodeo, military and police forces, and even various groups in the Fiesta parade, although these did not come with a formal motion to pick the issues up.

This decision could have a ripple effect on other Texas cities. Dallas has recently considered a similar ban, but it appears to have stalled; Austin's attempts at a ban have been unsuccessful, but according to the Austin-American Statesman, only one operator is permitted to bring horses downtown. She declines to do so because the long hours are unfair to her and the horses. Houston does have horse-drawn carriages, and there seems to be little conversation about banning them.

Cities like Chicago and Salt Lake City have led the charge in the United States with some of the most prominent successful bans. Other cities around the world with bans include Brussels and Guadalajara, which both switched to electric models. Bans that have been around for years, like Guadalajara's and Prague's, still aren't out of the woods — people are still pushing back on the decision, so it sounds like San Antonio still has much work cut out for it.

animals downtown civic issues