For decades, “innovation” has been touted as the savior of nearly every industry, even if many businesses may not really know exactly what anybody meant by that. It’s a nebulous notion…change requires confidence that where you end up is better than where you are now…but it’s also an inevitable one. There’s barely an industry around that wasn’t altered from the inside out by the Internet in the last decade, and again by the financial collapse in the last year or two.

So when we heard about McKinsey going through the entire portfolio of titles at Condé Nast we were impressed that the media giant was taking proactive steps to get a little leaner and ultimately save themselves from the fate of so many other magazines that have folded in the last few years. Afterall, even during the boom years, we question some of their bloated expense account choices. Imagine they’d been a little more frugal all this time? They probably wouldn’t need McKinsey to come in at all.

But rather than sound like a prudish grandmother, we applaud the choice, which according to an internal memo serves to help them “rethink” how to do business. What a smart choice. What a bold move. What a way to save yourself from the fire…

Hold on…except for one thing, the New Yorker isn’t being included in the makeover. The Observer reports not only David Remnick but the entire editorial staff will be excused from participating. This comes as a shock to us because by not participating, the New Yorker is missing out on a huge opportunity to change and grow. Perhaps Condé Nast thinks the magazine is perfect the way it is. But will it always be so perfect? Perhaps McKinsey is just in there to chop budgets and heads. But won’t there be opportunities to truly rethink business? When starting projects like this there’s always a period of discovery and who knows what might be found out about the New Yorker? The answer to that for now is, nobody.

While it may be painful, the other titles at Condé Nast have the chance to come out of the process as svelte, put-together models of media…the “after” picture that so many of the titles feature in their books. And by not participating, the New Yorker is confined to resembling the “before” picture, a little schlumpy, a little off, and if it just made a few changes it would be a star. So consider this an open call to action. If they aren’t going to bring in McKinsey for the New Yorker, then the people at the New Yorker should take a look at their operations on their own and try to evolve. Sure, running a thought-leading magazine like the New Yorker while always having an eye on the bottom line might be a scary prospect, but running a magazine without even being willing to have a conversation about change and innovation sounds a whole lot scarier.