National Geographic Lays Off Its Last Remaining Staff Writers; Copies To Go Off Stand Next Year

National Geographic magazine has reportedly laid off the last of its staff writers on Wednesday. The magazine over a century after it first published in 1888 will go off news stands next year, reported the Washington Post.

According to media reports and multiple tweets by several editorial members a total of 19 writers were fired.

Craig A. Welch, senior writer at National Geographic in a tweet said, "My new National Geographic just arrived, which includes my latest feature-my 16th, and my last as a senior writer. NatGeo is laying off all of its staff writers. I've been so lucky. I got to work w/incredible journalists and tell important, global stories. It's been an honor."

Another writer and editor, Nina Strochlic wrote, "It's been an epic run, @NatGeo. My Colleagues and I were unbelievably lucky to be the last-ever class of staff writers."

These layoffs are the second round of job cuts that are a part of cost-cutting measures taken by Disney, the parent company of National Geographic. The publication has gone through a series of editorial changes because of several ownership changes over the years. This also includes the removal of six top editors in September, reported The Guardian.

The layoffs have also impacted the magazine's contract with several photographers that have contributed to the best of science and natural world to readers in its iconic yellow-bordered monthly publication. According to media reports the magazine is now going to employ freelance reporters to piece together its issues with the help of its remaining editors.

However, the company while talking to CNN said, the editorial shake-up will not impact the quality of the monthly publication. The company said, "Staffing changes will not change our ability to do this work, but rather give us more flexibility to tell different stories and meet our audiences where they are across our many platforms. Any insinuation that the recent changes will negatively impact the magazine, or the quality of our storytelling, is simply incorrect."