Linc Caplan has unhappy news about Legal Affairs:

  As many start-ups do, Legal Affairs has run out of time for realizing our dream of creating a self-sustaining print magazine without breaking stride. We've been unable to attract a second round of financing to allow us to continue publishing in print after the March|April issue reaches subscribers in February. We'll maintain our website while we explore opportunities the site provides, so stay tuned for further developments. . . .
  This is a period of challenge for thought-leader magazines, then, in terms of the business models that support them and the forms of journalism they provide. But it's also a moment of opportunity for some visionary American foundation, media organization, or individual. While Legal Affairs has run out of time to receive this kind of support without suspending the print magazine, it won't be hard to find us to support our journalism on this website. Putting aside our parochial interests, a broader-based investment could have a significant payoff in preserving valuable thought-leader magazines and in assuring the staying power of promising new ones.

  I'm a big fan of Legal Affairs. I've written for it twice, and participated in the Debate Club feature, as well. It has targeted an important zone between law review articles and news stories about the law, and is a very interesting read. I hope it stays viable online, even if the print version is no longer available.

  Speaking of Legal Affairs, check out this week's very interesting Debate Club feature: Do Law Schools Need Ideological Diversity?, featuring a discussion between Peter Schuck and Brian Leiter.