What Was Quartz?

Quartz wasn't "destroyed" by cynicism; it collapsed due to its own financial unsustainability.

Investors didn’t kill Quartz—they stopped subsidizing losses once it was clear Quartz couldn't become self-sufficient.

The "cynical" narrative obscures Quartz’s fundamental flaw: lack of a viable business model.

Calling Quartz a victim overlooks that it repeatedly failed commercially, despite many chances and significant investment.

Ultimately, Quartz’s fate wasn't about cynicism, but about investors deciding to stop throwing money into a losing bet.

> Ultimately, Quartz’s fate wasn't about cynicism, but about investors deciding to stop throwing money into a losing bet.

So would you say that the investors… became cynical?

They say an optimist is just a cynic lacking experience

Skeptical and cynical are not the same thing.

Lack of a viable business model is precisely what Zach points to in the article, which doesn't preclude him from feeling a bit sad about how it was stripped for parts.

Reporting news accurately is a very difficult business model in a world full of oligarch-backed papers that constantly lose money to further their own agenda, plus social media which is increasingly indifferent as to whether the links they circulate have any truth in them or not.

It's tempting to blame oligarchs and social media, but I'll argue that readers' own tastes are the most daunting challenge that mainstream journalism has faced for the past 20 years.

People will spend a lot more time (and money!) reinforcing their existing beliefs/prejudices than learning about something new.