The blogosphere exploded today at the news that .net magazine, the publication that many of us began our careers reading, has pulled the plug on its online offering.

The print magazine will continue to publish, but netmagazine.com is no more.

From now on, much of .net’s news will be published via Creativebloq.com, a site just a year old (and owned by the publishers of .net, Computer Arts and 3D World).

Established in 1994, .net has been running online since 2010 and it’s unclear exactly what has prompted this move. We know that a variety of newspapers have declared online publishing unviable and moved their content behind paywalls. Whilst we have no way of confirming, it seems highly likely that .net was losing paper sales to its online offering.

Whether .net can be successful in its new home remains to be seen. And it seems strange, given their relative brand values, that creativebloq should absorb .net, rather than the other way around.

According to .net’s twitter account, it was simply no longer viable to keep running:

Reality check: @netmag is run by 5 people and @creativebloq has 6. We are moving over as much as we can, but also do print, digital, confs..

500 .net articles have been transplanted to their new home, but that is less than 5% of the articles netmagazine.com was previously hosting.

So what does this mean? Well, for readers, you’ll no longer have access to 95% of the archive of .net articles; for anyone who has ever linked to a .net article, your link is now broken, unless you were linking to one of the lucky 5%; and for anyone who ever wrote for .net, your article is probably gone — hopefully you kept a print copy.

The ultimate irony is that in the end, a magazine that has spent twenty years devoted to the web, was unable to make it work.

Do magazine’s have a place online or is print best? Will .net prosper, or fade away? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

Featured image/thumbnail uses plug image and desk image via Shutterstock.

500 Stock Photos with No Background – only $29!

If you haven’t heard the news, Nina Davuluri, the recent winner of the 2014 Miss America Pageant, is:

a) an Arab

b) a foreigner 

c) an al-Qaeda affiliate

d) a terrorist

- all according to irate Miss America fans on twitter who were quick to denounce a woman of color for being crowned Miss America.  

Some were quite blunt in their disapproval: 

How the f*** does a foreigner win miss America?  She is a Arab! #idiots

(Apparently, anger impede’s one’s ability to use correct grammar)

And others were appalled that our nation could crown an American of Indian descent, so soon after the 12th anniversary of 9/11:

nice slap in the face to the people of 9-11 how pathetic #missamerica

Upon further investigation, it appears that more accepting Americans gave the above user a lesson in virtue of tolerance, causing her to deactivate her twitter.

*BuzzFeed has compiled some of the most appalling tweets here.

Stephen Colbert’s response to the onslaught of ignorance was particularly priceless:

“That’s right. Seven hundred and five people saw a woman in a bikini and thought: Muslim Extremist.”

 Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/stephen-colbert-reacts-to-indian-miss-america-2013-9#ixzz2fNBTOkHP

Ms. Davuluri is the first contestant of Indian descent to be crowned Miss America, but not the first minority.  Unfortunately, in the post-9/11 era, Indians who have immigrated to America, as well as Americans of Indian descent, have suffered as a result of both the geographical and cultural ignorance of self-proclaimed “patriots.”  

Acts of revenge aimed at Arabs and Muslims have increasingly burdened members of the Sikh faith, a religion that was founded in the 15th century in the Punjab region of the Indian subcontinent, which is in no way connected to the Muslim faith.

Sikh men adhere to an article of faith, “Kesh,” which is the practice of allowing one’s hair to grow naturally as a symbol of respect for the perfection of God’s creation.  The dastar (turban) they were is also an article faith that embodies honor, piety, and self-respect.

The unfortunate reality remains that because of crude stereotypes of Muslims, Arabs, and in a broader sense, those responsible for 9/11- Sikhs have been assaulted and murdered.  They have had their property vandalized, and their temples burned.  

While there are those of us who congratulate Nina Davuluri and accept her for who she is, there will always be those who do not.  We cannot, however, simply overlook the racist, hateful, prejudiced rhetoric expressed by those who do not.  

As we have been so tragically reminded by the deaths of innocent Arabs, Indians, Pakistanis, and Afghans from 9/11 revenge attacks- thoughts become one’s words, and one’s words become one’s actions.  

 In case you haven’t heard through the grapevine, there’s talk of five counties in Maryland seceding and forming their own state.

It was started this summer by a few fed-up individuals on a Facebook page called “Western Maryland: A New State Initiative”.  The page now has over six thousands likes.

Don’t worry, we’re confused too.

So we here at USDemocrazy, have assembled a little guide to the “Great Secession Poppycock”.

1. What constitutes “Western Maryland”?

It’s that little skinny land area in the left part of the state. Traditionally, Western Maryland consists of Garrett, Allegany and Washington Counties, but many include Frederick County as well. Carroll County is also listed in the plan – though it’s very obviously part of Central Maryland, it’s also home to conservative activist and the “Founding Father” of Western Maryland, Scott Strzelczyk.

2. Why do these counties want to secede?

Many residents of conservative-leaning Western Maryland feel underrepresented in Annapolis, where the state is run by a Democratic governor and a Democrat-controlled General Assembly. Taxes are too high, gun restrictions are too strict and state and federal funds rarely go to improving infrastructure in Western Maryland.

Republicans are also still salty about the redrawing of Congressional District 6, which was approved on the 2012 election referendum. Long-time Republican Representative Roscoe Bartlett was voted out of office when liberal voters from Montgomery County were suddenly added to the same district as Cumberland, Oakland and Hagerstown. (Disclaimer: Roscoe Bartlett, a slowing octengenarian probably needed to leave Congress… after sixteen years, anyways).

Here’s a statement from their… erm… Bill of Rights or something:

We, the people of Garrett, Allegheny, Washington, Frederick, and Carroll County intend to separate from the State of Maryland and form the new state of Western Maryland.

We intend to exercise our right of self-determination and self-governance to better secure our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Annapolis has repeatedly injured us and abridged or denied our fundamental rights and violated numerous articles in the Maryland Declaration of Rights. Our pleas for redress of grievances to the General Assembly and the Governor are ignored or rebuffed.

3. Who organized this movement?

Scott Strzelczyk is a self-declared “constitutionalist concerned with the legitimate role of the federal government and the infringement of our unalienable rights to life, liberty, and property.” While we’re not entirely sure what he does for a living, he writes his own blog called “A Citizen’s View.” As the movement gained national attention, Strzelczyk was interviewed by The Washington Post, Kojo Nnamdi on NPR and even Russia Today. Here’s his most recent television appearance on Fox News.

4. Is this even possible?

Er… well… Not in a million years. However, possibly in two million.

The right to bear arms applies to everyone, right?

Even if you’re completely blind? Apparently so…

A new report by the Des Moines Register revealed that Iowa grants permits and the right to carry firearms in public to blind citizens. Understandably the law has raised eyebrows and ire among citizens. Even Stevie Wonder had something to say. “Imagine me with a gun. It’s just crazy.”

Iowa, however, is not the only state to have such controversial laws. Legally blind people in Texas were helped when a measure was passed in 2007 to help them hunt. Steve Hopler, a blind New Jersey man, fought and won the right to have firearms even after he shot himself in the leg in 2008. Hopler’s response to the judge’s decision? “It’s freedom.”

Is denying the blind firearms an infringement on their rights? What do you think?