Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 69 Editor's Choice: 4
-
To Ms. Walsh and the publishers of Salon
[Read the article: Big weekend news]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Despite my disappointment at Joan Walsh's conduct over the last several months and my conviction that it is unworthy of her position, I, in contrast to some of the commenters here, have no intention of quitting my Premium membership to Salon. I'd like to tell you why.
A number of years ago, when Salon announced the institution of the pay-for-Premium model, I got heatedly upset and dashed off a polite but angry email to David Talbot, Salon's editor at the time. At a time when almost everything on the Internet was free, I railed against what I characterized as an anti-democratic move on Salon's part. (The fact that I was dirt-poor at the time and truly couldn't afford the thirty buck entry fee was the primary burr under my saddle; I turned my anger at my own economic situation on Mr. Talbot, rather unbecomingly, I fully admit.) I told him that Salon was too important, too valuable an antidote to MSM dogma, to justify shutting out readers like me. In short, I went way over the top, if in a polite and respectful way.
David Talbot utterly disarmed me by doing something I never, ever expected: he wrote me back. Personally. He told me he heard all my complaints and sympathized with where I was coming from, and reminded me that in fact all Salon content would still be accessible by everyone, either via the Premium membership or after watching an ad. He assured me that, unlike the NY Times and other MSM publications, no one at Salon had any intention of putting their content behind a wall -- and, just as he said, the model he was introducing has remained to this day. In short, he talked me down and persuaded me to see it his way and, in doing so, reminded me why I loved Salon. He also made me a Salon reader for life, and a Premium subscriber as soon as I could afford it.
I tell you this to contextualize my personal dismay at Ms. Walsh's behavior this year. While Mr. Talbot took positions on issues, he never crusaded, and he certainly didn't actively impugn, demean and insult when discussing matters on which he knew a sizable portion of Salon's readership might disagree with him. He presented his side while acknowledging the legitimacy of others' points of view, even when those points of view, like mine regarding the Premium issue, were rather indefensible. He was patient, tolerant, and generous -- a model of restraint and, frankly, someone to be admired.
Ms. Walsh, sadly, has not followed his example. In the matter of the race for this year's Democratic presidential nomination, she did not simply express her preference; she began over time to disparage in intellectually dishonest terms the candidate whom she did not prefer. She implicitly, and sometimes almost explicitly, insulted those Democrats, and thus those Salon readers, who preferred a different candidate.
In other words, where David Talbot went to extraordinary lengths to be inclusive and keep old readers while garnering new ones, Ms. Walsh apparently thinks nothing of alienating at minimum half of Salon's most loyal readership, and possibly many more.
Now, as I said above, I'm a Salon subscriber for life, at least until such time as Salon no longer resembles the publication I fell in love with. And I know Salon's readership has gone up significantly since Mr. Talbot departed and Ms. Walsh took over the editor post (she trumpeted that fact a few months ago, apparently happy to make it the sole metric by which success in her job should be evaluated). But I can only assume that, in looking over the debris field that now comprises the relationship between Ms. Walsh and many of Salon's most loyal readers, her publishers cannot be thrilled.
In the words of the bumper sticker, O mighty publishers of Salon, if you're not appalled, you're not paying attention. No matter whom you support for president.
To be completely clear, I'm not calling for Ms. Walsh to exit her position. I don't think she deserves that, and, aside from her befuddling conduct regarding the Democratic race, she has done a decent job of maintaining and growing what Mr. Talbot left her. (Her pride at having tripled her readership is not unwarranted; given the huge growth in global internet readership over that same period, however, I don't find it quite the Herculean feat she seems to.) I am simply calling for her to exercise some self-restraint and stop tossing up screeds on her blog every time Barack Obama looks at Hillary Clinton sideways. And if she can't do that, then I think her employers would be remiss if they didn't take a hard look at what might be happening to those recently arrived readers right now.
Not everyone, you see, is as hardcore a Salon junkie as I.
-
The Princess Bride
[Read the article: I'm on vacation. But you can help out!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Need I say more?
-
Get used to it.
[Read the article: Vanity Fair piece about Bill Clinton sparks controversy]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If there's one thing professional journalists should be catching on to about now, it's that their rules simply don't apply anymore; they no longer own their own world. And if there's one thing professional politicians should be catching on to, it's that they're always on the record. (Somebody send the memo to the enthralled press pool on McCain's bus.)
It's a brave new world, kids, and like it or not, it's speeding on around the sun, with you or without you. Not saying that's better or worse, just saying that's how it is.