hey anonymous ...

here's an example of a low-resource, blog-style, no-cost website that is covering this breaking news quite well. they don't have a pakistan correspondent either.

http://firedoglake.com/

i don't agree with your assessment of holier-than-thou commentary. it seems to me that this website is selling (literally, since they ask for money) multiple products. one of the products i "buy" is the political coverage product. since this forum tends to attract left-leaning, activist, outspoken types it makes sense to me that those people (like me) would want to say ... hey salon, your investing resources in ways that are silly and fluffy and detract from one of the products that you sell, and the constituency that you seek to attract. what they do with that feedback is up to them, but the website has struggled to break even for years. so, consider these messages, at least from me, as consumer feedback. i hope "they" get it.

i haven't even read this article ... mainly because i don't care about this subject matter. i like rebecca's writing. it's nothing personal about her.

salon might consider adding channels here ... like "bullshit fluff" and "not bullshit fluff."

also ... i wonder if salon's authors or editors post in this forum as "anonymous" ... i and really mean that ... i wonder if they do. if that ever does happen, i would feel sad that people here don't feel brave enough to state their case and attach their name to it.

for your edification, queer national:

Salon was founded in 1995 by David Talbot and a group of seasoned journalists from the San Francisco Examiner who felt that the World Wide Web offered an unprecedented opportunity to provide intelligent, independent journalism covering politics, culture and society in innovative ways.

Salon believes that its original, award-winning content allows Salon to attract and retain users who are younger, more affluent, better educated and more likely to make online purchases than typical Internet users. Salon believes its user profile makes its network of websites and online communities a valuable media property for advertisers and retailers who are allocating marketing resources to target consumers online.

http://www.salon.com/ir/mission/

nearly every time i read one of your posts covering politics i think "wow, she really likes clinton." an yet, you claim not to support her. you wrote in a response to a question about this on 11/27:

I'm not supporting Hillary Clinton, much to the chagrin of friends and family who are. (Don't worry, I have plenty of friends and family who aren't!) I truly haven't made up my mind. I will say, though, that when MSM folks who were so wrong on impeachment, including my friend Chris Matthews and now, the next generation of Beltway smirkers, like my friend Ana Marie Cox, go after Hillary Clinton, well, I can imagine myself going into the voting booth and thinking about the way the media gangs up on her, and, yes, voting for her. Right now, that's not my plan. But I don't know.

in finding this quote, i reviewed your posts over the last few months and found (in my assessment) lots of praise for HRC. a often the opposite for others: Obama, Edwards, Biden, etc.

i'll simply say that i find myself mistrusting you, and since you are editor, mistrusting this website. this mistrust stems not from your support of a candidate i don't support ... but rather that your actions and words seem to be quite differnt ... one might go as far as saying your words seem misleading. not suprisingly, this is also why i don't support clinton.

... is choking us all. while part of this problem, this website is just one small drop in the bucket. what's more repugnant to me are shows like the bachelor, or just about anything about wedding planning. i feel an enormous amount of sadness when i think about the women AND men who blindly follow the BIG PRESCRIPTIONS ... get married, be happy. own a house, be happy. have 3 kids, be happy. make a lot of money and buy that car, be happy. it's cultural marketing and waayyyy too many buy into it without any question at all.

the solution is a simple one, and i respectfully disagree with anonymous earlier ... it's not wholly about "the decision to be happy." who in the world wouldn't decide to be happy if it were that simple ... and reducing it to blaming the unhappy only perpetuates the unhappiness. so ... what i think is unbelievable important in all this is developing a critical mind to discern possible cultural marketing/manipulation for what it is, working out one's emotional baggage (we all have it) to feel open to happiness and joy in whatever form it presents itself (ie, learning to let go and relax), and taking risks and being ok with mistakes in the process. it's often very hard ... and most folks would rather take a pill to fix their woes. so, even though this website is terrible ... if it moves a person from a place a helpless victimhood (or unquestioning malaise) into 0.00001% self-awareness ... that is a good thing.