From a longtime (as in from the 1990s) reader:

One of the reasons I always come to Slate is for the "In Other Magazines" roundup.

I've been giving the new format a try before whining, but I just don't like it as much.

The value added of the roundup was to know that somebody had been through all (or most) of the mainstream publications and culled the most noteworthy articles; or at least observed what the magazine editors thought would capture the imagination of the public.

The new format leaves me with the impression that you're trying to be funny with the categories or straining to make the articles fit them. And I don't have any confidence that the review is thorough.

So in sum I prefer the old procrustean model to the new one; save your wit for the review.

Sincerely,

Toby Sterling

ps The old format was nicely complementary to Arts & Letters Daily, which looks at some less mainstream/more academic publications as well.