The following table sets forth certain information with respect to each of the Company’s television stations:

Regulation of Broadcasting and Related Matters

         The Company’s television broadcasting operations are subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission under the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. Under authority of such Act the FCC, among other things, assigns frequency bands for broadcast and other uses; issues, revokes, modifies and renews broadcasting licenses for particular frequencies; determines the location and power of stations and establishes areas to be served; regulates equipment used by stations; and adopts and implements regulations and policies which directly or indirectly affect the ownership, operations and profitability of broadcasting stations.

         Each of the Company’s television stations holds an FCC license which is renewable upon application for an eight-year period.

         In December 1996 the FCC formally approved technical standards for digital advanced television (“DTV”). DTV is a flexible system that permits broadcasters to utilize a single digital

4

channel in various ways, including providing one channel of high-definition television programming with greatly enhanced image and sound quality or several channels of lower-definition television programming (“multicasting”), and also is capable of accommodating subscription video and data services. Broadcasters may offer a combination of services, so long as they transmit at least one stream of free video programming on the DTV channel. The FCC has assigned to each existing full-power television station (including each station owned by the Company) a second channel to implement DTV while present television operations are continued on that station’s existing channel. Although in some cases a station’s DTV channel may only permit operation over a smaller geographic service area than that available using its existing channel, the FCC’s stated goal in assigning channels was to provide stations with DTV service areas that are generally consistent with their existing service areas. The FCC’s DTV rules also permit stations to request modifications to their assigned DTV facilities, allowing them to expand their DTV service areas if certain interference criteria are met. Under FCC rules and the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, station owners will be required to surrender one channel in 2006 and thereafter provide service solely in the DTV format if specified DTV household penetration levels are met.

         The Company’s Detroit, Houston and Miami stations each commenced DTV broadcast operations during 1999, while the Company’s Orlando station commenced such operations in 2001. The deadline established by the FCC for the Company’s two other stations (San Antonio and Jacksonville) to begin DTV broadcast operations is May 1, 2002.

         In November 1998 the FCC issued a decision implementing the requirement of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that it charge broadcasters a fee for offering certain “ancillary and supplementary” services on the DTV channel. These services include data, video or other services that are offered on a subscription basis or for which broadcasters receive compensation other than from advertising revenue. In its decision, the FCC imposed a fee of 5% of the gross revenues generated by such services. In rules adopted in April 2000, the FCC also implemented the Community Broadcasters Act of 1999, which provides interference protection to certain low-power television stations. These rules provide several hundred low-power stations with the same protection from interference enjoyed by full-power stations, with the result that it may be more difficult for some existing full-power stations to alter their analog or DTV transmission facilities. Separately, in January 2001 the FCC issued an order governing the mandatory carriage of DTV signals by cable television operators. The FCC decided that, pending further inquiry, only stations that broadcast in a DTV-only mode would be entitled to mandatory carriage of their DTV signals. In defining how a DTV signal should be carried, the FCC ruled that only a single stream of video (that is, a single channel of programming) together with any additional “program-related” material is eligible for mandatory carriage. The determination of what constitutes “program-related” material has not yet been made. Cable operators will be required to carry the DTV signal of any DTV station eligible for mandatory carriage in the same definition in which the signal was originally broadcast. However, until this order is clarified it is unclear whether cable operators will be responsible for ensuring that their set-top boxes are capable of passing DTV signals in their full definition to the consumer’s DTV receiver. The FCC also has issued a Notice of Inquiry addressing the question of whether special public interest obligations should be imposed on DTV operations. Specifically, the FCC asked whether it should require broadcasters to provide free time for political candidates, increase the amount of programming intended to meet the needs of minorities and women, and increase communication with the public regarding programming decisions.

         The FCC also is conducting proceedings dealing with such matters as regulations pertaining to cable television (discussed below under “Cable Television Division – Regulation of Cable Television and Related Matters”), and various proposals affecting the development of alternative video delivery systems that would compete in varying degrees with both cable television and television broadcasting operations. In August 1999 the FCC amended its local ownership rule to permit one company to own

5

two television stations in the same market if there are at least eight independently owned full-power television stations in that market (including non-commercial stations and counting the co-owned stations as one), and if at least one of the co-owned stations is not among the top four ranked television stations in that market. The FCC also decided to permit common ownership of stations in a single market if their signals do not overlap, and to permit common ownership of certain failing or unbuilt stations. These rule changes are likely to increase the concentration of ownership in local markets. For example, all of the Company’s stations are now competing against two-station combinations in their respective markets. Separately, the rule governing the aggregate number of television stations a single company can own was relaxed by amendments to the Communications Act enacted in 1996, and broadcast companies are now permitted to own an unlimited number of television stations as long as the combined service areas of such stations do not include more than 35% of nationwide television households. The 35% limit was subject to the FCC’s periodic review and the agency subsequently decided to leave the rule unchanged. However in February 2002 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that the reasons given by the FCC for retaining the rule were insufficient as a matter of law and remanded the matter to the FCC for further consideration. This action could eventually result in the FCC’s either raising the limit or eliminating it entirely.

         The Company is unable to determine what impact the various rule changes and other matters described in this section may ultimately have on the Company’s television broadcasting operations.

Cable Television Operations

         At the end of 2001 the Company (through its Cable One subsidiary) provided basic cable service to approximately 752,000 subscribers (representing about 62% of the 1,210,000 homes passed by the systems) and had in force more than 500,000 subscriptions to premium program services and more than 32,000 subscriptions to cable modem service. Digital programming and cable modem services are each currently available in markets serving more than 85% of Cable One’s subscriber base.

         On January 11, 2001, Cable One sold its Greenwood, Indiana cable system to a joint venture in which AT&T has an interest. In a related transaction, on March 1, 2001, Cable One transferred its Modesto and Santa Rosa, California cable systems (which had been its two largest systems), together with a cash payment, to a unit of AT&T in return for AT&T cable systems serving the communities of Boise, Idaho Falls, Twin Falls, Pocatello and Lewistown, Idaho, and the community of Ontario, Oregon. These transactions had the effect of increasing by approximately 34,000 the number of subscribers being served by the Company’s cable systems.

         The Company’s cable systems are located in 19 Midwestern, Southern and Western states and typically serve smaller communities: thus 19 of the Company’s current systems pass fewer than 10,000 dwelling units, 16 pass 10,000-25,000 dwelling units, and 19 pass more than 25,000 dwelling units, of which the largest is Boise, Idaho with 68,000 subscribers. The largest cluster of systems (which together serve about 92,000 subscribers) is located on the Gulf Coast of Mississippi.

Regulation of Cable Television and Related Matters

         The Company’s cable operations are subject to various requirements imposed by local, state and federal governmental authorities. The franchises granted by local governmental authorities are typically nonexclusive and limited in time and generally contain various conditions and limitations relating to payment of fees to the local authority, determined generally as a percentage of revenues. Additionally, franchises often regulate the conditions of service and technical performance, and contain various types of restrictions on transferability. Failure to comply with such conditions and limitations may give rise to rights of termination by the franchising authority.

6

         The Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 (the “1992 Cable Act”) requires or authorizes the imposition of a wide range of regulations on cable television operations. The three major areas of regulation are (i) the rates charged for certain cable television services, (ii) required carriage (“must carry”) of some local broadcast stations, and (iii) retransmission consent rights for commercial broadcast stations.

         Among other things, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 altered the preexisting regulatory environment by expanding the definition of “effective competition” (a condition that precludes any regulation of the rates charged by a cable system), terminating rate regulation for some small cable systems, and sunsetting the FCC’s authority to regulate the rates charged for optional tiers of service (which authority expired on March 31, 1999). For cable systems that do not fall within the effective-competition or small-system exemptions (including all of the cable systems owned by the Company), monthly subscription rates for the basic tier of cable service (i.e., the tier that includes the signals of local over-the-air stations and any public, educational or governmental channels required to be carried under the applicable franchise agreement), as well as rates charged for equipment rentals and service calls, may be regulated by municipalities, subject to procedures and criteria established by the FCC. Rates charged by cable television systems for pay-per-view service, for per-channel premium program services and for advertising are all exempt from regulation.

         In April 1993 the FCC adopted a “freeze” on rate increases for regulated services (i.e., the basic and, prior to March 1999, optional tiers). Later that year the FCC promulgated benchmarks for determining the reasonableness of rates for such services. The benchmarks provided for a percentage reduction in the rates that were in effect when the benchmarks were announced. Pursuant to the FCC’s rules, cable operators can increase their benchmarked rates for regulated services to offset the effects of inflation, equipment upgrades, and higher programming, franchising and regulatory fees. Under the FCC’s approach cable operators may exceed their benchmarked rates if they can show in a cost-of-service proceeding that higher rates are needed to earn a reasonable return on investment, which the Commission established in March 1994 to be 11.25%. The FCC’s rules also permit franchising authorities to regulate equipment rentals and service and installation rates on the basis of a cable operator’s actual costs plus an allowable profit which is calculated from the operator’s net investment, income tax rate and other factors.

         Pursuant to the “must-carry” requirements of the 1992 Cable Act, a commercial television broadcast station may, under certain circumstances, insist on carriage of its signal on cable systems located within the station’s market area, while a noncommercial public station may insist on carriage of its signal on cable systems located within either the station’s predicted Grade B signal contour or 50 miles of the station’s transmitter. As a result of these obligations (the constitutionality of which has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court), certain of the Company’s cable systems have had to carry broadcast stations that they might not otherwise have elected to carry, and the freedom the Company’s systems would otherwise have to drop signals previously carried has been reduced.

         At three-year intervals beginning in October 1993 commercial broadcasters have had the right to forego must-carry rights and insist instead that their signals not be carried without their prior consent. Before October 1993 some of the broadcast stations carried by the Company’s cable television systems opted for retransmission consent and initially took the position that they would not grant consent without commitments by the Company’s systems to make cash payments. As a result of case-by-case negotiations, the Company’s cable systems were able to continue carrying virtually all of the stations insisting on retransmission consent without having to agree to pay any stations for the privilege of carrying their signals. However some commitments were made to carry other program services offered by a station or an affiliated company, to provide advertising availabilities on cable for sale by a station and to distribute promotional announcements with respect to a station. Many of these

7

agreements between broadcast stations and the Company’s cable systems expired at the end of 1999 and the expired agreements were replaced by new agreements having comparable terms.

         As noted in the discussion above under “Television Broadcasting – Regulation of Broadcasting and Related Matters,” in January 2001 the FCC determined that, pending further inquiry, only television stations broadcasting in a DTV-only mode could require local cable systems to carry their DTV signals. The FCC currently is conducting another inquiry to decide whether it should require cable systems to carry both the analog and the DTV signals of local television stations. Such an extension of must-carry requirements could result in the Company’s cable systems being required to delete some existing programming to make room for broadcasters’ DTV channels.

         Various other provisions in current federal law may significantly affect the costs or profits of cable television systems. These matters include a prohibition on exclusive franchises, restrictions on the ownership of competing video delivery services, restrictions on transfers of cable television ownership, a variety of consumer protection measures, and various regulations intended to facilitate the development of competing video delivery services. Other provisions benefit the owners of cable systems by restricting regulation of cable television in many significant respects, requiring that franchises be granted for reasonable periods of time, providing various remedies and safeguards to protect cable operators against arbitrary refusals to renew franchises, and limiting franchise fees to 5% of revenues.

         Apart from its authority under the 1992 Cable Act and the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the FCC regulates various other aspects of cable television operations. Since 1990 cable systems have been required to black out from the distant broadcast stations they carry syndicated programs for which local stations have purchased exclusive rights and requested exclusivity. Other long-standing FCC rules require cable systems to delete under certain circumstances duplicative network programs broadcast by distant stations. The FCC also imposes certain technical standards on cable television operators, exercises the power to license various microwave and other radio facilities frequently used in cable television operations, and regulates the assignment and transfer of control of such licenses. In addition, pursuant to the Pole Attachment Act, the FCC exercises authority to disapprove unreasonable rates charged to cable operators by telephone and power utilities for utilizing space on utility poles or in underground conduits (although states may reclaim exclusive jurisdiction over these matters by certifying to the FCC that they regulate the rates, terms and conditions of pole attachments, and some states in which the Company has cable operations have so certified). A number of cable operators (including the Company’s Cable One subsidiary) are using their cable systems to provide not only television programming but also Internet access. In January 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the FCC’s authority under the Pole Attachment Act extends to all pole attachments by cable operators, including those attachments used to provide Internet access. Thus, except where individual states have assumed regulatory responsibility, the rates charged by utilities for pole or conduit access by cable companies are subject to FCC rate regulation regardless of whether or not the cable companies are providing Internet access as well as the delivery of television programming.

         The Copyright Act of 1976 grants to cable television systems, under certain terms and conditions, the right to retransmit the signals of television stations pursuant to a compulsory copyright license. Those terms and conditions include the payment of certain license fees set forth in the statute or established by subsequent administrative regulations. The compulsory license fees have been increased on several occasions since this Act went into effect. In 1994 the availability of the compulsory copyright license was extended to “wireless cable” and direct broadcast satellite (“DBS”) operators, although in the latter case the license right was limited to stations whose over-the-air signal was not available at the subscriber’s location. However, in November 1999 Congress enacted the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act, which extends the compulsory copyright license to DBS

8

operators who wish to distribute the signals of local television stations to satellite subscribers in the markets served by such stations. This Act continued the other restrictions contained in the original compulsory license for DBS operators, which permit the signal of a distant network-affiliated station to be distributed only in areas where subscribers cannot receive an over-the-air signal of another station affiliated with the same network.

         The general prohibition on telephone companies operating cable systems in areas where they provide local telephone service was eliminated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Telephone companies now can provide video services in their telephone service areas under four different regulatory plans. First, they can provide traditional cable television service and be subject to the same regulations as the Company’s cable television systems (including compliance with local franchise and any other local or state regulatory requirements). Second, they can provide “wireless cable” service, which is described below, and not be subject to either cable regulations or franchise requirements. Third, they can provide video services on a common-carrier basis, under which they would not be required to obtain local franchises but would be subject to common-carrier regulation (including a prohibition against exercising control over programming content). Finally, they can operate so-called “open video systems” without local franchises (although local communities can choose to require a franchise) and be subject to reduced regulatory burdens. The Act contains detailed requirements governing the operation of open video systems, including the nondiscriminatory offering of capacity to third parties and limiting to one-third of total system capacity the number of channels the operator can program when demand exceeds available capacity. In addition, the rates charged by an open video system operator to a third party for the carriage of video programming must be just and reasonable as determined in accordance with standards established by the FCC. (Cable operators and others not affiliated with a telephone company may also become operators of open video systems.) The Act also generally prohibits telephone companies from acquiring or owning an interest in existing cable systems operating in their service areas.

         The Telecommunications Act of 1996 balances this grant of video authority to telephone companies by removing regulatory barriers to the offering of telephone services by cable companies and others. The Act preempts state and local laws that have barred local telephone competition in some states. In addition, the Act requires local telephone companies to permit cable companies and other competitors to connect with the telephone network and requires telephone companies to give competitors access to the essential features and functionalities of the local telephone network (such as switching capability, signal carriage from the subscriber’s residence to the switching center, and directory assistance) on an unbundled basis. As an alternative method of providing local telephone service, the Act permits cable companies and others to purchase telephone service on a wholesale basis and then resell it to their subscribers.

         At various times during the last decade, the FCC adopted rule changes intended to facilitate the development of multichannel multipoint distribution systems, also known as “wireless cable” or “MMDS,” a video and data service that is capable of distributing approximately 30 television channels in a local area by over-the-air microwave transmission using analog technology and a greater number of channels using digital compression technologies. The use of digital technology and a 1998 change in the FCC’s rules to permit reverse path over wireless facilities also make it possible for such systems to deliver additional services, including Internet access. Also, in late 1998 the FCC auctioned a sizeable amount of spectrum in the 31 gigahertz band for use by a new wireless service, which is referred to as the Local Multipoint Distribution Service or “LMDS,” that can deliver more than 100 channels of digital programming directly to subscribers’ homes as well as provide other services such as Internet access and telephony. In November 2000 the FCC approved the use of spectrum in the 12.2-12.7 gigahertz band (the same band used by DBS operators) to provide a new land-based interactive video and data delivery service known as the Multichannel Video Distribution and Data

9

Service (“MVDDS”). MVDDS providers will use “reharvested” DBS spectrum to transmit programming on a non-harmful interference basis using terrestrial microwave transmitters. (While DBS subscribers point their dishes south to pick up their provider’s signal, MVDDS customers will aim their antennas north.) The Commission’s order creating MVDDS did not grant any licenses to operate MVDDS systems. Instead, it requested comments on service, technical and licensing rules for the technology. Comments and reply comments to the FCC’s order have been filed, and the FCC is continuing to analyze the interference issues surrounding the use of this spectrum. MVDDS providers, like providers of other forms of wireless cable, will not be required to obtain franchises from local governmental authorities and generally will operate under fewer regulatory requirements than conventional cable systems.

         In October 1999 the FCC amended its cable ownership rule, which governs the number of subscribers an owner of cable systems may reach on a national basis. Before revision, this rule provided that a single company could not serve more than 30% of potential cable subscribers (or “homes passed” by cable) nationwide. The revised rule allowed a cable operator to provide service to 30% of all actual subscribers to cable, satellite and other competing services nationwide, rather than to 30% of homes passed by cable. This revision had the effect of increasing the number of communities that could be served by a single cable operator and may have resulted in more consolidation in the cable industry. In March 2001 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit voided the FCC’s revised rule on constitutional and procedural grounds and remanded the matter to the FCC for further proceedings. The FCC has since opened a proceeding to determine what the ownership limit should be, if any. If the FCC eliminates the limit or adopts a new rule with a higher percentage of nationwide subscribers a single cable operator is permitted to serve, that action could lead to even greater consolidation in the industry.

         In 1996 Congress repealed the statutory provision which generally prohibited a party from owning an interest in both a television broadcast station and a cable television system within that station’s Grade B contour. However Congress left the FCC’s parallel rule in place, subject to a Congressionally mandated periodic review by the agency. The FCC, in its subsequent review, decided to retain the prohibition for various competitive and diversity reasons. However in February 2002 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit struck down the rule, holding that the FCC’s decision to retain the rule was arbitrary and capricious.

         On March 14, 2002, the FCC issued a declaratory ruling classifying cable modem service as an “interstate information service.” Concurrently the FCC issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to consider the regulatory implications of this classification. Among the issues to be decided are whether local authorities can require cable operators to provide competing Internet service providers with access to the cable operators’ facilities, the extent to which local authorities can regulate cable modem service, and whether local authorities can impose fees on the provision of cable modem service. The Company’s Cable One subsidiary currently offers Internet access on most of its cable systems and is the sole Internet service provider on those systems. Thus, depending on the outcome, this proceeding has the potential to interfere with the Company’s ability to deliver Internet access on a profitable basis.

         Litigation also is pending in various courts in which various franchise requirements are being challenged as unlawful under the First Amendment, the Communications Act, the antitrust laws and on other grounds. One of the issues raised in these cases is whether local franchising authorities have the power to regulate the provision of Internet access by cable systems. Depending on the outcomes, such litigation could facilitate the development of duplicative cable facilities that would compete with existing cable systems, enable cable operators to offer certain services outside of cable regulation or otherwise materially affect cable television operations.

10

         The regulation of certain cable television rates pursuant to the authority granted to the FCC has negatively impacted the revenues of the Company’s cable systems. The Company is unable to predict what effect the other matters discussed above may ultimately have on its cable television business.

Magazine Publishing

Newsweek

         Newsweek is a weekly news magazine published both domestically and internationally by Newsweek, Inc., a subsidiary of the Company. In gathering, reporting and writing news and other material for publication, Newsweek maintains news bureaus in 9 U.S. and 11 foreign cities.

         The domestic edition of Newsweek includes more than 100 different geographic or demographic editions which carry substantially identical news and feature material but enable advertisers to direct messages to specific market areas or demographic groups. Domestically, Newsweek ranks second in circulation among the three leading weekly news magazines (Newsweek, Time and U.S. News & World Report). For each of the last five years Newsweek’s average weekly domestic circulation rate base has been 3,100,000 copies. From 1997 through 1999 Newsweek’s percentage of the total weekly domestic circulation rate base of the three leading weekly news magazines was 33.5%. In both 2000 and 2001 that percentage was 34.0%.

         Newsweek is sold on newsstands and through subscription mail order sales derived from a number of sources, principally direct mail promotion. The basic one-year subscription price is $41.08. Most subscriptions are sold at a discount from the basic price. In May 2001, Newsweek’s newsstand cover price was increased from $3.50 per copy (which price had been in effect since April 1999) to $3.95 per copy.

         The total number of Newsweek’s domestic advertising pages and gross domestic advertising revenues as reported by Publishers’ Information Bureau, Inc., together with Newsweek’s percentages of the total number of advertising pages and total advertising revenues of the three leading weekly news magazines, for the past five years have been as follows:

         Newsweek’s advertising rates are based on its average weekly circulation rate base and are competitive with the other weekly news magazines. Effective with the January 8, 2001 issue, national advertising rates were increased by an average of 4.0%. Beginning with the issue dated January 14, 2002, national advertising rates were increased again, by an average of 5.0%.

11

         Newsweek Business Plus, which is published 39 times a year, is a demographic edition of Newsweek distributed to high-income professional and managerial subscribers and subscribers in zip-code-defined areas. Advertising rates for this edition were increased an average of 4.0% in January 2001 and by an additional 5.0% in January 2002. The circulation rate base for this edition is 1,200,000 copies.

         Newsweek’s other demographic edition, Newsweek Woman, which was published 13 times during 2001, has a circulation rate base of 800,000 selected female subscribers. At the beginning of 2001 advertising rates for this edition were increased by an average of 4.0%, with an additional average increase of 5.0% instituted early in 2002.

         Internationally, Newsweek is published in an Atlantic edition covering Europe, the Middle East and Africa, a Pacific edition covering Japan, Korea and south Asia, and a Latin American edition, all of which are in the English language. Editorial copy solely of domestic interest is eliminated in the international editions and is replaced by other international, business or national coverage primarily of interest abroad.

         Since 1984 a section of Newsweek articles has been included in The Bulletin, an Australian weekly news magazine which also circulates in New Zealand. A Japanese-language edition of Newsweek, Newsweek Nihon Ban, has been published in Tokyo since 1986 pursuant to an arrangement with a Japanese publishing company which translates editorial copy, sells advertising in Japan and prints and distributes the edition. Newsweek Hankuk Pan, a Korean-language edition of Newsweek, began publication in 1991 pursuant to a similar arrangement with a Korean publishing company. Since 1996 Newsweek en Español, a Spanish-language edition of Newsweek distributed in Latin America, has been published under an agreement with a Miami-based publishing company which translates editorial copy, prints and distributes the edition and jointly sells advertising with Newsweek. In June 2000, Newsweek Bil Logha Al-Arabia, an Arabic-language edition of Newsweek, was launched under a similar arrangement with a Kuwaiti publishing company. Also, Newsweek Polska, a Polish-language newsweekly, was launched in September 2001 under a licensing agreement with a Polish publishing company which, in addition to translating selected stories from Newsweek’s various U.S. and foreign editions, has established a staff of Polish reporters and editors for the magazine. In April 2001, Newsweek terminated its relationship with Itogi, a Russian-language news magazine, due to a change in the control of the magazine.

         The average weekly circulation rate base, advertising pages and gross advertising revenues of Newsweek’s international editions (not including The Bulletin insertions or the foreign-language editions of Newsweek) for the past five years have been as follows:

12

         For 2002 the average weekly circulation rate base for Newsweek’s English-language international editions (not including The Bulletin insertions) will be 646,000 copies. Newsweek’s rate card estimates the average weekly circulation in 2001 for The Bulletin insertions will be 80,000 copies and for the Japanese-, Korean-, Arabic- and Spanish- and Polish-language editions will be 130,000, 90,000, 30,000, 54,000 and 280,000 copies, respectively.

         The online version of Newsweek, which includes stories from Newsweek’s print edition as well as other material, became a co-branded feature on the MSNBC.com Web site in 2000. This feature is being produced by Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive Company, another subsidiary of the Company.

         Arthur Frommer’s Budget Travel magazine, another Newsweek publication, was published six times during 2001 and had a circulation of 400,000 copies. Budget Travel is headquartered in New York City and has its own editorial staff.

         During recent years Congress has considered a range of proposals intended to restrict the marketing of tobacco products. The Company cannot now predict what actions may eventually be taken to limit or restrict tobacco advertising. However such advertising accounts for less than 1% of Newsweek’s operating revenues and negligible revenues at The Washington Post and the Company’s other publications. Moreover, federal law has prohibited the carrying of advertisements for cigarettes and smokeless tobacco by commercial radio and television stations for many years. Thus the Company believes that any restrictions on tobacco advertising which may eventually be put into effect would not have a material adverse effect on Newsweek or on any of the Company’s other business operations.

PostNewsweek Tech Media

         This division of Post-Newsweek Media, Inc. publishes controlled-circulation trade periodicals and produces trade shows and conferences for the information technology industry.

         Specifically, PostNewsweek Tech Media publishes Washington Technology, a biweekly tabloid newspaper for government information technology systems integrators, Government Computer News, a tabloid newspaper published 30 times per year serving government managers who buy information technology products and services, and GCN Shopper, a tabloid newspaper published four times per year providing information technology product reviews and other buying information for government managers. Washington Technology, Computer Government News, and GCN Shopper have circulations of about 40,000, 87,000, and 120,000 copies, respectively.

         The other publications of PostNewsweek Tech Media are Washington Techway, a biweekly news magazine with a circulation of 30,000 copies that addresses the needs of the private-sector technology business community in the Washington region, and the Technology Almanac, an annual directory of technology industry executives. Washington Techway also coproduces the annual Greater Washington High Technology Awards Banquet, which is held each spring in Washington, D.C. for more than 1,000 technology executives. Together with The Washington Post and WPNI, PostNewsweek Tech Media contributes to the washtech.com Web site which serves the Washington Techway community online.

         This division also produces the FOSE trade show, which is held each spring in Washington, D.C. for information technology decision makers in government and industry.

Education

         Kaplan, Inc., a subsidiary of the Company, provides an extensive range of educational services for children, students and professionals. Kaplan’s historical focus on test preparation has been

13

expanded as new educational and career services businesses have been acquired or initiated.

         Through its Test Preparation and Admissions Division, Kaplan prepares students for a broad range of admissions and licensing examinations including the SAT’s, LSAT’s, GMAT’s, MCAT’s, GRE’s, and nursing and medical boards. This business can be subdivided into four categories: K-12 (serving primarily high school students preparing for the SAT’s and ACT’s); Graduate (serving college students and professionals, primarily with preparation for admission tests to graduate, medical and law schools); Medical (serving medical professionals preparing for licensing exams); and English Language Training (serving foreign students and professionals wishing to study or work in the U.S.). Many of this division’s test preparation courses have been available to students via the Internet since 1999. During 2001 the Test Preparation and Admissions Divisions enrolled over 195,000 students (including almost 28,000 enrolled in online programs) and provided courses at 157 permanent centers located throughout the United States and in Canada, Puerto Rico, London and Paris. In addition, Kaplan licenses material for certain of these courses to third parties who during 2001 offered such courses at 40 centers located in 15 countries.

         The Test Preparation and Admissions Division also includes Kaplan’s publishing activities. Kaplan currently co-publishes more than 150 book titles, predominately in the areas of test preparation, admissions, career guidance and life skills, through a joint venture with Simon & Schuster, and also develops educational software for the K through 12 and graduate markets which is sold through arrangements with a third party who is responsible for production and distribution. Kaplan also produces a college newsstand guide in conjunction with Newsweek.

         Kaplan’s Professional Division offers licensing, continuing education, certification and professional development services for corporations and for individuals seeking to advance their careers. This division includes Dearborn Publishing, a provider of pre-licensing training and continuing education for securities, insurance and real estate professionals; Perfect Access Speer, a provider of software education and consulting services to law firms and businesses; Schweser’s Study Program, a provider of materials aimed at preparing individuals for the Chartered Financial Analyst examination; Self Test Software, a provider of preparation services for software proficiency certification examinations; and Call Center Solutions, a provider of assessment and training services for the call-center industry.

         Kaplan’s Score Learning Division offers computer-based learning and individualized tutoring for children. In 2001, this business, which provides educational after-school enrichment services through 147 Score centers located in various areas of the United States, served nearly 60,000 students, up from 50,000 students in 2000. Score’s services are provided in facilities separate from Kaplan’s test preparation centers due to differing configuration and equipment requirements. eScore.com, which began operations in early 2000 offering parenting and educational resources online to help parents provide learning opportunities for their children, now operates as a software development division of Kaplan.

         The Higher Education Division of Kaplan consists of 41 schools in 14 states which provide classroom-based instruction and three institutions which specialize in distance education. The schools providing classroom-based instruction (most of which were acquired on August 1, 2000, as part of Kaplan’s acquisition of Quest Education Corporation) offer a variety of bachelor degree, associate degree and diploma programs in the fields of healthcare, business, information technology, and fashion and design. These schools were serving more than 14,600 students at year-end 2001 (which total includes the classroom-based programs of Kaplan College), with approximately 52% of such students enrolled in accredited bachelor or associate degree programs. Each of these schools has its own accreditation from one of several regional or national accrediting agencies recognized by the U.S. Department of Education. The institutions which specialize in distance education are Kaplan College,

14

The College for Professional Studies, and Concord University School of Law. Kaplan College offers various bachelor degree, associate degree and certificate programs, principally in the fields of business and information technology, and is accredited by the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools. Some of Kaplan College’s courses are offered online while others are offered in a traditional classroom format at the school’s Davenport, Iowa campus. The College for Professional Studies offers bachelor and associate degree and diploma correspondence programs in the fields of legal nurse consulting, paralegal studies and criminal justice, and is accredited by the Accrediting Commission of the Distance Education and Training Council (“DETC”). The College for Professional Studies had over 7,400 students enrolled at year-end 2001. Concord University School of Law, the nation’s first online law school, offers Juris Doctor and LLM degrees wholly online. At year-end 2001, approximately 900 students were enrolled at Concord. Concord is accredited by DETC and has received operating approval from the California Bureau of Private Post-Secondary and Vocational Education. Concord also has complied with the registration requirements of the State Bar of California; graduates are, therefore, able to apply for admission to the California Bar.

Title IV Student Financial Assistance Programs

         Prior to the acquisition of Quest Education Corporation in August 2000, none of Kaplan’s educational offerings were eligible to participate in any of the student financial assistance programs that have been created under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended. However funds provided under Title IV programs historically have been responsible for a majority of the net revenues of the schools in Kaplan’s Higher Education Division which provide classroom-based instruction (including Kaplan College), accounting, for example, for slightly more than $100 million of the net revenues of such schools for the 12-month period ended December 31, 2001, and the significant role of Title IV funding in the operations of these schools is expected to continue.

         To maintain Title IV eligibility a school must comply with extensive statutory and regulatory requirements relating to its financial aid management, educational programs, financial strength, recruiting practices and various other matters. Among other things, the school must be authorized to offer its educational programs by the appropriate governmental body in the state in which it is located, be accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education (the “Department of Education”), and enter into a program participation agreement with the Department of Education.

         A school may lose its eligibility to participate in Title IV programs if student defaults on the repayment of Title IV loans exceed specified default rates (referred to as “cohort default rates”). A school whose cohort default rate exceeds 40% for any single year may have its eligibility to participate in Title IV programs limited, suspended or terminated at the discretion of the Department of Education. A school whose cohort default rate equals or exceeds 25% for three consecutive years will automatically lose its Title IV eligibility for at least two years unless the school can demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying its continued eligibility. Moreover, a for-profit postsecondary institution, like each of these Kaplan schools, will lose its Title IV eligibility for at least one year if more than 90% of the institution’s cash receipts for any fiscal year are derived from Title IV programs.

         The Title IV program regulations also provide that not more than 50% of an eligible institution’s courses can be provided online and that, in some cases, not more than 50% of an eligible institution’s students can be enrolled in online courses, and impose certain other requirements intended to insure that individual programs (including online programs) eligible for Title IV funding include minimum amounts of instructional activity. However, Kaplan College currently is a participant in the distance education demonstration program of the Department of Education and as a result is exempt from the foregoing requirements until at least June 30, 2004. Legislation currently is pending in Congress which, if enacted, would exempt online courses from those requirements under certain

15

circumstances, including the maintenance by the institution offering such courses of a cohort default rate of less than 10%.

         No proceeding is pending to fine any Kaplan school for a failure to comply with any Title IV requirement, or to limit, suspend or terminate the Title IV eligibility of any Kaplan school. However no assurance can be given that the Kaplan schools which currently participate in Title IV programs will maintain their Title IV eligibility in the future or that the Department of Education might not successfully assert that one or more of such schools have previously failed to comply with Title IV requirements. Most schools within Kaplan’s Higher Education Division are considered separately for the purpose of determining compliance with Title IV requirements. Thus if the Department of Education were to find that one or more of such schools had failed to comply with any applicable Title IV requirement and as a result suspended or terminated the Title IV eligibility of those schools, that action normally would not affect the Title IV eligibility of other Kaplan schools that had continued to comply with Title IV requirements.

         As a general matter, schools participating in Title IV programs are not financially responsible for the failure of their students to repay Title IV loans. However the Department of Education may fine a school for a failure to comply with Title IV requirements and may require a school to repay Title IV program funds if it finds that such funds have been improperly disbursed.

         Pursuant to Title IV program regulations, a school that undergoes a change in control must be reviewed and recertified by the Department of Education. Certifications obtained following a change in control are granted on a provisional basis which permits the school to continue participating in Title IV programs but provides fewer procedural protections if the Department of Education asserts a material violation of Title IV requirements. As a result of Kaplan’s acquisition of Quest, all of the schools owned by Quest at that time were provisionally certified by the Department of Education for a term expiring in June 2004; Kaplan will be eligible to apply for full certification for such schools in the spring of 2004. The schools acquired by Kaplan’s Higher Education Division subsequent to the Quest acquisition have also been provisionally certified by the Department of Education, generally for terms expiring approximately three years after the date of the acquisition.

         Several Title IV programs are subject to periodic legislative review and reauthorization. In addition, the availability of funding for each Title IV program is wholly contingent upon the outcome of the annual federal appropriations process.

         Whether as a result of changes in the laws and regulations governing Title IV programs, a reduction in Title IV program funding levels, or a failure of schools included in Kaplan’s Higher Education Division to maintain eligibility to participate in Title IV programs, a material reduction in the amount of Title IV financial assistance available to the students of these schools would have a significant negative impact on Kaplan’s operating results.

Other Activities

International Herald Tribune

         The Company beneficially owns 50% of the outstanding common stock of the International Herald Tribune, S.A.S., a French company which publishes the International Herald Tribune in Paris, France. This English-language newspaper has an average daily paid circulation of over 250,000 copies and is distributed in over 180 countries.

16

BrassRing

         The Company also beneficially owns a 49.5% equity interest in BrassRing LLC, an Internet-based career-assistance and hiring management company. The other principal members of BrassRing are the Tribune Company with a 26.9% interest, Gannett Co., Inc. with a 12.4% interest, and the venture capital firm Accel Partners with a 10.5% interest.

Production and Raw Materials

         The Washington Post is produced at the Company’s printing plants in Fairfax County, Virginia and Prince George’s County, Maryland. The Herald and The Enterprise Newspapers are produced at The Daily Herald Company’s plant in Everett, Washington, while The Gazette Newspapers and the Southern Maryland Newspapers are all printed at the commercial printing facilities owned by Post-Newsweek Media, Inc. Greater Washington Publishing’s periodicals are produced by independent contract printers with the exception of one periodical which is printed at one of the commercial printing facilities owned by Post-Newsweek Media, Inc. All PostNewsweek Tech Media publications are produced by independent contract printers.

         Newsweek’s domestic edition is produced by three independent contract printers at five separate plants in the United States; advertising inserts and photo-offset films for the domestic edition are also produced by independent contractors. The international editions of Newsweek are printed in England, Hong Kong, Singapore, Switzerland, the Netherlands, South Africa and Hollywood, Florida; insertions for The Bulletin are printed in Australia. Since 1997 Newsweek and a subsidiary of AOL Time Warner have used a jointly owned company based in England to provide production and distribution services for the Atlantic editions of both Newsweek and Time. Budget Travel is produced by one of the independent contract printers that also prints Newsweek’s domestic edition.

         In 2001 The Washington Post consumed about 199,000* tons of newsprint purchased from a number of suppliers, including Bowater Incorporated, which supplied approximately 27% of The Post’s 2001 newsprint requirements. Although in prior years some of the newsprint The Post purchased from Bowater Incorporated typically was provided by Bowater Mersey Paper Company Limited, 49% of the common stock of which is owned by the Company (the majority interest being held by a subsidiary of Bowater Incorporated), during 2001 none of the newsprint consumed by The Post came from that source. Bowater Mersey owns and operates a newsprint mill near Halifax, Nova Scotia, and owns extensive woodlands that provide part of the mill’s wood requirements. In 2001 Bowater Mersey produced about 246,000 tons of newsprint.

         The announced price of newsprint (excluding discounts) was approximately $750 per ton throughout 2001. Discounts from the announced price of newsprint can be substantial and prevailing discounts increased during the second half of the year. The Post believes it has adequate newsprint available through contracts with its various suppliers. Over 90% of the newsprint used by The Post includes some recycled content. The Company owns 80% of the stock of Capitol Fiber Inc., which handles and sells to recycling industries old newspapers and other paper collected in Washington, D.C., Maryland and northern Virginia.

         In 2001 the operations of The Daily Herald Company and Post-Newsweek Media, Inc. consumed approximately 6,900 and 19,600 tons of newsprint, respectively, which was obtained in each

17

case from various suppliers. Approximately 80% of the newsprint used by The Daily Herald Company and 45% of the newsprint used by Post-Newsweek Media, Inc. includes some recycled content.

         The domestic edition of Newsweek consumed about 31,600 tons of paper in 2001, the bulk of which was purchased from six major suppliers. The current cost of body paper (the principal paper component of the magazine) is approximately $985 per ton.

         Over 90% of the aggregate domestic circulation of Newsweek is delivered by periodical (formerly second-class) mail, most Newsweek subscriptions are solicited by either first-class or standard A (formerly third-class) mail, and all PostNewsweek Tech Media publications are delivered by periodical mail. Thus, substantial increases in postal rates for these classes of mail could have a significant negative impact on the operating income of these business units. Rate increases of 3.0% for first-class mail, 9.9% for periodical mail, and 6.0% for standard A mail, went into effect on January 7, 2001, and additional increases of 2.6% for periodical mail and 1.7% for standard A mail went into effect on July 1, 2001. These actions increased annual postage costs by approximately $3.1 million at Newsweek and by nominal amounts at PostNewsweek Tech Media. Additionally, in January 2002 the U.S. Postal Service submitted to the Postal Rate Commission a proposed rate increase of approximately 8% for both periodical and standard A mail and 9% for first-class mail, each to be effective June 30, 2002. The Board of Governors of the U.S. Postal Service is expected to vote on this proposal sometime in March 2002. If this proposal is approved, Newsweek’s 2002 postage costs will be increased by about $1.7 million. On the other hand, since advertising distributed by standard A mail competes to some degree with newspaper advertising, the Company believes increases in standard A rates could have a positive impact on the advertising revenues of The Washington Post, The Herald, The Gazette Newspapers and Southern Maryland Newspapers, although the Company is unable to quantify the amount of such impact.

Competition

         The Washington Post competes in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area with The Washington Times, a newspaper which has published weekday editions since 1982 and Saturday and Sunday editions since 1991. The Post also encounters competition in varying degrees from newspapers published in suburban and outlying areas, other nationally circulated newspapers, and from television, radio, magazines and other advertising media, including direct mail advertising. Since 1997 The New York Times has produced a Washington Edition which is printed locally and includes television channel listings and weather for the Washington, D.C. area.

         Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive faces competition from many other Internet services as well as from alternative methods of delivering news and information. In addition, Internet-based services are carrying increasing amounts of advertising and over time such services could adversely affect the Company’s print publications and television broadcasting operations, all of which rely on advertising for the majority of their revenues. Several companies are offering online services containing information and advertising tailored for specific metropolitan areas, including the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. Digital City (a subsidiary of AOL Time Warner) produces DigitalCity Washington, which is part of AOL’s nationwide network of local online sites. Other popular Internet sites, such as those of Yahoo! and Netscape Netcenter, offer their own version of a local, D.C.-area guide. National online classified advertising is becoming a particularly crowded field, with competitors such as Yahoo! and eBay aggregating large volumes of content into a national classified database covering a broad range of product lines. Other competitors are focusing on vertical niches in specific content areas: CarPoint, AutoTrader.com and Autobytel.com, for example, aggregate national car listings; Realtor.com aggregates national real estate listings; and Monster.com, HotJobs

18

(which was acquired by Yahoo! early in 2002) and CareerBuilder (which acquired Headhunter.net in 2001) aggregate employment listings.

         The Herald circulates principally in Snohomish County, Washington; its chief competitors are the Seattle Times and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, which are daily and Sunday newspapers published in Seattle and whose Snohomish County circulation is principally in the southwest portion of the county. Since 1983 the two Seattle newspapers have consolidated their business and production operations and combined their Sunday editions pursuant to a joint operating agreement, although they continue to publish separate daily newspapers. The Enterprise Newspapers are distributed in south Snohomish and north King Counties where their principal competitors are the Seattle Times and The Journal Newspapers, a group of weekly controlled-circulation newspapers. Numerous other weekly and semi-weekly newspapers and shoppers are distributed in The Herald’s and The Enterprise Newspapers’ principal circulation areas.

         The circulation of The Gazette Newspapers is limited to Montgomery and Frederick Counties and parts of Prince George’s, Carroll, Anne Arundel and Howard Counties, Maryland. The Gazette Newspapers compete with many other advertising vehicles available in their service areas, including The Potomac and Bethesda/Chevy Chase Almanacs, The Western Montgomery Bulletin, The Bowie Blade-News, The West County News and The Laurel Leader, weekly controlled-circulation community newspapers, The Montgomery Sentinel, a weekly paid-circulation community newspaper, The Prince George’s Sentinel, a weekly controlled-circulation community newspaper (which also has a weekly paid-circulation edition), The Montgomery and Prince George’s Journals, daily paid-circulation community newspapers, and The Frederick News-Post, a daily paid-circulation community newspaper. The Southern Maryland Newspapers circulate in southern Prince George’s County and in Charles, Calvert and St. Mary’s Counties, Maryland, where they also compete with many other advertising vehicles available in their service areas, including the Calvert County Independent and St. Mary’s Today, weekly controlled-circulation community newspapers.

         The advertising periodicals published by Greater Washington Publishing compete both with many other forms of advertising available in their distribution area as well as with various other free-circulation advertising periodicals.

         The Company’s television stations compete for audiences and advertising revenues with television and radio stations and cable television systems serving the same or nearby areas, with direct broadcast satellite services and to a lesser degree with other video programming providers and with other media such as newspapers and magazines. Cable television systems operate in substantial portions of the Company’s broadcast markets where they compete for television viewers by importing out-of-market television signals and by distributing pay-cable, advertiser-supported and other programming that is originated for cable systems. In addition, direct broadcast satellite (“DBS”) services provide nationwide distribution of television programming (including in some cases pay-per-view programming and programming packages unique to DBS) using small receiving dishes and digital transmission technologies. In November 1999, Congress passed the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act, which gives DBS operators the ability to distribute the signals of local television stations to subscribers in the stations’ local market area (“local-into-local” service), although since April 2000 the DBS operator has been required to obtain the consent of each local television station included in such a service. The Company’s television stations in Miami, Detroit, Houston, Orlando and San Antonio currently are being distributed locally by satellite. Under an FCC rule implementing provisions of this Act, since January 2002 DBS operators that offer local-into-local service have been required to carry all full-power television stations that request such carriage in the markets in which the DBS operators have chosen to offer local-into-local service. A judicial challenge to this rule has been unsuccessful thus far. The FCC has also adopted rules that require certain program-exclusivity rules

19

applicable to cable television to be applied to DBS operators, although certain of these rules, primarily relating to sports blackouts, are subject to reconsideration by the FCC. The Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act also continues restrictions on the transmission of distant network stations by DBS operators. Under these restrictions, DBS operators are prohibited from distributing in a local market the signals of any distant network-affiliated television station except in areas where the over-the-air signal of the same network’s local affiliate is not available or where the local affiliate grants a waiver. Several lawsuits were filed beginning in 1996 in which plaintiffs (including all four major broadcast networks and network-affiliated stations including one of the Company’s Florida stations) alleged that certain DBS operators had not been complying with this restriction. The plaintiffs have entered into a settlement with DBS operator DirecTV, under which it will discontinue distant-network service to certain subscribers and alter the method by which it determines eligibility for this service. Litigation against DBS operator EchoStar is continuing. The Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act also provides that certain distant-network subscribers whose service would have been discontinued as a result of this litigation will continue to have access to distant-network service through 2004. In addition to the matters discussed above, the Company’s television stations may also become subject to increased competition from low-power television stations, wireless cable services, satellite master antenna systems (which can carry pay-cable and similar program material) and prerecorded video programming. Further, the deployment of digital and other improved television technologies may enhance the ability of some of these other video providers to compete more effectively for viewers with the local television broadcasting stations owned by the Company.

         Cable television systems operate in a highly competitive environment. In addition to competing with the direct reception of television broadcast signals by the viewer’s own antenna, such systems (like existing television stations) are subject to competition from various other forms of television program delivery. In particular, DBS services (which are discussed in more detail in the preceding paragraph) have been growing rapidly and are now a significant competitive factor. The ability of DBS operators to provide local-into-local service (as described above) has increased competition between cable and DBS operators in markets where local-into-local service is provided. DBS operators are not required to provide local-into-local service, and some smaller markets may not receive this service for several years. However, in December 2000 Congress passed and the President signed legislation to provide $1.25 billion in federal loan guarantees to help satellite carriers (and cable operators) provide local TV signals to rural areas, and DBS operators have stated that they intend to provide local-into-local service in a greater number of markets in the future. In addition, if the Department of Justice and the FCC approve the proposed merger of EchoStar and Direct TV, the combined entity would be able to expand local-into-local service into many more markets by using satellite transmission capacity currently taken up by duplicative national and local channels. Local-into-local service is not yet offered in most markets in which the Company provides cable television service, but such services could be launched by DBS operators at any time. The Company’s cable television systems also compete with wireless cable services in several of their markets and may face additional competition from such services in the future. Moreover, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 permits telephone companies to own and operate cable television systems in the same areas where they provide telephone services and thus may lead to the provision of competing program delivery services by local telephone companies.

         According to figures compiled by Publishers’ Information Bureau, Inc., of the 263 magazines reported on by the Bureau, Newsweek ranked seventh in total advertising revenues in 2001, when it received approximately 2.1% of all advertising revenues of the magazines included in the report. The magazine industry is highly competitive both within itself and with other advertising media which compete for audience and advertising revenue.

20

         PostNewsweek Tech Media’s publications and trade show compete with many other advertising vehicles and sources of similar information.

         Kaplan competes in each of its test preparation product lines with a variety of regional and national test preparation businesses, as well as with individual tutors and in-school preparation for standardized tests. Kaplan’s Score Learning subsidiary competes with other regional and national learning centers, individual tutors and other educational businesses that target parents and students. Kaplan’s Professional Division competes with other companies which provide alternative or similar professional training, test-preparation and consulting services. Kaplan’s Higher Education Division competes with both facilities-based and other distance learning providers of similar educational services, including not-for-profit colleges and universities and for-profit businesses.

         The Company’s publications and television broadcasting and cable operations also compete for readers’ and viewers’ time with various other leisure-time activities.

         The future of the Company’s various business activities depends on a number of factors, including the general strength of the economy, population growth and the level of economic activity in the particular geographic and other markets it serves, the impact of technological innovations on entertainment, news and information dissemination systems, overall advertising revenues, the relative efficiency of publishing and broadcasting compared to other forms of advertising and, particularly in the case of television broadcasting and cable operations, the extent and nature of government regulations.

Executive Officers

         The executive officers of the Company, each of whom is elected for a one-year term at the meeting of the Board of Directors immediately following the Annual Meeting of Stockholders held in May of each year, are as follows:

         Donald E. Graham, age 56, has been Chairman of the Board of the Company since September 1993 and Chief Executive Officer of the Company since May 1991. Mr. Graham served as President of the Company from May 1991 until September 1993 and prior to that had been a Vice President of the Company for more than five years. Mr. Graham also served as Publisher of The Washington Post from 1979 until September 2000.

         Diana M. Daniels, age 52, has been Vice President and General Counsel of the Company since November 1988 and Secretary of the Company since September 1991. Ms. Daniels served as General Counsel of the Company from January 1988 to November 1988 and prior to that had been Vice President and General Counsel of Newsweek, Inc. since 1979.

         Ann L. McDaniel, age 46, became Vice President-Human Resources of the Company in September 2001. Ms. McDaniel had previously served as Senior Director of Human Resources of the Company since January 2001, and prior to that held various editorial positions at Newsweek for more than five years, most recently as Managing Editor, a position she assumed in November 1998.

         John B. Morse, Jr., age 55, has been Vice President-Finance of the Company since November 1989. He joined the Company as Vice President and Controller in July 1989, and prior to that had been a partner of Price Waterhouse.

         Gerald M. Rosberg, age 55, was named Vice President-Planning and Development of the Company in February 1999. Mr. Rosberg had previously served as Vice President-Affiliates at The Washington Post, a position he assumed in November 1997. Mr. Rosberg joined the Company in January 1996 as The Post’s Director of Affiliate Relations.

21

Employees

         The Company and its subsidiaries employ approximately 12,300 persons on a full-time basis.

         The Washington Post has approximately 2,680 full-time employees. About 1,615 of The Post’s full-time employees and about 500 part-time employees are represented by one or another of seven unions. Collective bargaining agreements are currently in effect with locals of the following unions covering the full-time and part-time employees and expiring on the dates indicated: 1,489 editorial, newsroom and commercial department employees represented by the Communications Workers of America (May 18, 2002); 76 paperhandlers and general workers represented by the Graphic Communications International Union (November 20, 2004); 43 machinists represented by the International Association of Machinists (January 10, 2004); 33 photoengravers-platemakers represented by the Graphic Communications International Union (February 14, 2004); 28 electricians represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (June 17, 2004); 36 engineers, carpenters and painters represented by the International Union of Operating Engineers (March 31, 2002); and 297 mailers and 111 mailroom helpers represented by the Communications Workers of America (May 18, 2003).

         Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive has approximately 240 full-time and 35 part-time employees, none of whom is represented by a union.

         Of the approximately 280 full-time and 105 part-time employees at The Daily Herald Company, about 65 full-time and 25 part-time employees are represented by one or another of three unions. The newspaper’s collective bargaining agreement with the Graphic Communications International Union, which represents press operators, expires on March 15, 2005 and its agreement with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, which represents bundle haulers, will expire on September 22, 2003. The Newspaper’s agreement with the Communications Workers of America, which represents printers and mailers, expired on October 31, 2001, and a new agreement is currently being negotiated.

         Newsweek has approximately 750 full-time employees (including about 155 editorial employees represented by the Communications Workers of America under a collective bargaining agreement which will expire in December 2003).

         The Company’s broadcasting operations have approximately 965 full-time employees, of whom about 240 are union-represented. Of the eight collective bargaining agreements covering union-represented employees, two have expired and are being renegotiated. Two other collective bargaining agreements will expire in 2002.

         The Company’s Cable Television Division has approximately 1,600 full-time employees. Kaplan and its subsidiary companies together employ approximately 4,990 persons on a full-time basis (which number does not include substantial numbers of part-time employees who serve in instructional and clerical capacities). Post-Newsweek Media, Inc. has approximately 675 full-time and 130 part-time employees. Robinson Terminal Warehouse Corporation (the Company’s newsprint warehousing and distribution subsidiary) and Greater Washington Publishing each employ fewer than 100 persons. None of these units’ employees is represented by a union.

Forward-Looking Statements

         All public statements made by the Company and its representatives which are not statements of historical fact, including certain statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and in the Company’s 2001 Annual Report to Stockholders, are “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the

22

Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements include comments about the Company’s business strategies and objectives, the prospects for growth in the Company’s various business operations, and the Company’s future financial performance. As with any projection or forecast, forward-looking statements are subject to various risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results or events to differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. In addition to the various matters discussed elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K (including the financial statements and other items filed herewith), specific factors identified by the Company that might cause such a difference include the following: changes in prevailing economic conditions, particularly in the specific geographic and other markets served by the Company; actions of competitors, including price changes and the introduction of competitive service offerings; changes in the preferences of readers, viewers and advertisers, particularly in response to the growth of Internet-based media; changes in communications and broadcast technologies; the effects of changing cost or availability of raw materials, including changes in the cost or availability of newsprint and magazine body paper; changes in the extent to which standardized tests are used in the admissions process by colleges and graduate schools; changes in the extent to which licensing or proficiency examinations are used to qualify individuals to pursue certain careers; changes in laws or regulations, including changes that affect the way business entities are taxed; and changes in accounting principles or in the way such principles are applied.

Item 2. Properties.

         The Company owns the principal offices of The Washington Post in downtown Washington, D.C., including both a seven-story building in use since 1950 and a connected nine-story office building on contiguous property completed in 1972 in which the Company’s principal executive offices are located. Additionally, the Company owns land on the corner of 15th and L Streets, N.W., in Washington, D.C., adjacent to The Washington Post office building. This land is leased on a long-term basis to the owner of a multi-story office building which was constructed on the site in 1982. The Company rents a number of floors in this building. The Company also owns and occupies a small office building on L Street which is next to The Post’s downtown office building.

         In 1980 the Company built a printing plant on 13 acres of land owned by the Company in Fairfax County, Virginia, and in 1998 completed an expansion of that facility. Also in 1998 the Company completed construction of a new printing plant and distribution facility for The Post on a 17-acre tract of land in Prince George’s County, Maryland which was purchased by the Company in 1996. In addition, the Company owns undeveloped land near Dulles Airport in Fairfax County, Virginia (39 acres) and in Prince George’s County, Maryland (34 acres).

         The Herald owns its plant and office building in Everett, Washington; it also owns two warehouses adjacent to its plant and a small office building in Lynnwood, Washington.

         Post-Newsweek Media, Inc. owns a two-story brick building that serves as its headquarters and as headquarters for The Gazette Newspapers and a separate two-story brick building that houses its Montgomery County commercial printing business. All of these properties are located in Gaithersburg, Maryland. In addition, Post-Newsweek Media, Inc. owns a one-story brick building in Waldorf, Maryland that houses its Charles County commercial printing business and also serves as the headquarters for two of the Southern Maryland Newspapers. The other editorial and sales offices for The Gazette Newspapers and the Southern Maryland Newspapers are located in leased premises. The PostNewsweek Tech Media Division leases office space in Washington, D.C., Silver Spring, Maryland, Fairfax, Virginia and San Francisco, California.

23

         The principal offices of Newsweek are located at 251 West 57th Street in New York City, where Newsweek rents space on nine floors. The lease on this space will expire in 2009 but is renewable for a 15-year period at Newsweek’s option at rentals to be negotiated or arbitrated. Budget Travel’s offices are also located in New York City where they occupy premises under a lease which expires in 2010. In 1997 Newsweek sold its Mountain Lakes, N.J. facility to a third party and leased back a portion of this building to house its accounting, production and distribution departments. The lease on this space will expire in 2007 but is renewable for two 5-year periods at Newsweek’s option.

         The headquarters offices of the Company’s broadcasting operations are located in Detroit, Michigan in the same facilities that house the offices and studios of WDIV. That facility and those that house the operations of each of the Company’s other television stations are all owned by subsidiaries of the Company, as are the related tower sites (except in Houston, Orlando and Jacksonville where the tower sites are 50% owned).

         The headquarters offices of the Cable Television Division are located in a three-story office building in Phoenix, Arizona which was purchased by Cable One in 1998. The majority of the offices and head-end facilities of the Division’s individual cable systems are located in buildings owned by Cable One. Substantially all the tower sites used by the Division are leased.

         Robinson Terminal Warehouse Corporation owns two wharves and several warehouses in Alexandria, Virginia. These facilities are adjacent to the business district and occupy approximately seven acres of land. Robinson also owns two partially developed tracts of land in Fairfax County, Virginia, aggregating about 22 acres. These tracts are near The Washington Post’s Virginia printing plant and include several warehouses. In 1992 Robinson purchased approximately 23 acres of undeveloped land on the Potomac River in Charles County, Maryland, for the possible construction of additional warehouse capacity.

         Kaplan owns a total of eight buildings including a six-story building located at 131 West 56th Street in New York City, which serves as an educational center primarily for foreign students, and a 2,300 square foot office condominium in Chapel Hill, North Carolina which it utilizes for its Test Prep business. Kaplan also owns a 15,000 square foot three-story building in Berkeley, California utilized for its foreign and Test Prep businesses. Kaplan’s Quest subsidiary owns a 39,000 square foot four-story brick building and a 19,000 square foot two-story brick building in Lincoln, Nebraska which are used by the Lincoln School of Commerce, a 25,000 square foot one-story building in Omaha, Nebraska used by the Nebraska College of Business, a 131,000 square foot five-story brick building in Manchester, New Hampshire used by Hesser College, and an 18,000 square foot one-story brick building in Dayton, Ohio used by the Ohio Institute of Photography and Technology. Kaplan’s principal educational center in New York City for other than international students is located at 16 Cooper Square, where Kaplan rents two floors under a lease expiring in 2013. Kaplan’s distribution facilities are located in a 169,000 square foot warehouse in Aurora, Illinois which has been rented under a lease which expires in 2010. Kaplan’s headquarters offices are located at 888 Seventh Avenue in New York City, where Kaplan rents space on three floors under a lease which expires in 2007. All other Kaplan facilities (including administrative offices and instructional locations) occupy leased premises.

         The offices of Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive are located in Arlington, Virginia, and the offices of Greater Washington Publishing are located in Fairfax, Virginia. The office space for each of these units is leased.

24

Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

         The Company, its wholly owned subsidiary The Gazette Newspapers, Inc. (now Post-Newsweek Media, Inc.), and the Washington Suburban Press Network, Inc. (a corporation jointly owned by the Gazette and another media investor), are parties to an antitrust lawsuit filed on February 28, 2001, by the owners of several local Maryland newspapers in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. This suit, which followed the Gazette’s acquisition of the Southern Maryland Newspapers, alleges that the Company, the Gazette, and the Washington Suburban Press Network, Inc. have combined to restrain trade in the community newspaper market in Montgomery, Prince George’s, and several other counties in Maryland in violation of federal and state antitrust statutes. The suit also includes state law claims against the Company and the Gazette of unfair competition, tortious interference with contract, and tortious interference with advantageous economic relations. The suit seeks unspecified damages (which in certain instances may be trebled by statute) and attorneys’ fees, as well as injunctive relief (including the divestiture of the Gazette by the Company). On August 9, 2001, the Court dismissed several of plaintiffs’ claims. On August 17, 2001, plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint alleging substantially similar violations of law and seeking similar relief. On September 10, 2001, the Company and the Gazette filed an answer denying all allegations of illegal conduct. The Court set a discovery deadline of April 9, 2002, and a motions deadline of May 15, 2002; a trial date has not been set. In addition, the Company has learned that both the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice and the Antitrust Division of the Maryland Attorney General’s Office were asked in early 2001 to review the Gazette’s acquisition of the Southern Maryland Newspapers, and later in 2001 the Maryland Attorney General’s Office requested certain information from the Company concerning the commercial printing business in suburban Maryland. However to date neither agency has challenged the acquisition of the Southern Maryland Newspapers. The Company and its subsidiaries are also defendants in various other civil lawsuits that have arisen in the ordinary course of their businesses, including actions for libel and invasion of privacy. While it is not possible to predict the outcome of these lawsuits and other matters, in the opinion of management their ultimate dispositions should not have a material adverse effect on the financial position, liquidity or results of operations of the Company.

Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.

         Not applicable.

PART II

Item 5. Market for the Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters.

         The Company’s Class B Common Stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “WPO.” The Company’s Class A Common Stock is not publicly traded.

         The high and low sales prices of the Company’s Class B Common Stock during the last two years were:

25