Dan Wakeford has stepped down as editor-in-chief of Us Weekly, as revealed in a memo circulating among staff. The departure was confirmed in an email Wakeford sent Friday, where he expressed his intention to leave the position to pursue his own creative endeavors in film and writing. His final day at Us Weekly is scheduled for January 9, 2026.
Wakeford indicated a desire to continue contributing to the magazine through special projects in the future. In his message, he mentioned, “In 2026, I look forward to contributing to Us Weekly on special projects,” suggesting that he may maintain some connection to the publication.
Sources within Us Weekly claim that Wakeford’s exit was not entirely voluntary, citing a failure to secure exclusive interviews with prominent celebrities. According to insiders, he had promised high-profile figures like Julia Roberts and Jennifer Aniston but instead featured lesser-known individuals. It was noted that recent magazine covers lacked the star power they once held, reminiscent of times following major events like the marriage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.
Additionally, concerns were raised regarding Wakeford’s presence in the office, with reports indicating he frequently chose to work remotely. This situation mirrored his previous role at the now-defunct media start-up, the Messenger, where he was criticized for a similar lack of engagement.
Us Weekly, founded in 1977 and based in New York City, has undergone numerous ownership changes, most recently becoming part of the McClatchy Media Company in 2024. The Post has reached out to a McClatchy representative for further comment.
Why this story matters
- The leadership changes at Us Weekly may signal shifts in the publication’s strategy and celebrity coverage.
Key takeaway
- Wakeford’s departure highlights the challenges of maintaining reader interest and securing top-tier content in competitive celebrity journalism.
Opposing viewpoint
- Some may argue that Wakeford’s creative vision deserves more time to develop, suggesting management’s pressure for immediate results is unreasonable.
