So he was one of the biggest male boosters for this section. Figures - his articles always did tend towards the shallow kneejerk end of the tripe specturm.

Total # of blogs to date: 50

Total # of blogs that like Broadsheet: 8 (or 16%)

(not counting "Finally!" and "I love it" satires)

Total # of blogs on editor's pick: 15

Total # of blogs on editor's pick that like Broadsheet: 3 (or 20%)

just some interesting data....

I'm a little dismayed at the humorlessness of many responses here. I need to laugh amid the bad news--I can't eat oatmeal all day, no matter how good it is for me. According to the formidable standards of some readers, you'd better get rid of that trivial King Kaufman. A sports column? With the world in such turmoil? Besides, you're ghetto-izing men!

Actually, I propose a much better alternative. Start a men's blog, too. Maybe you can call it Talk o' Fellas (sorry). Then we can hear about their catfights--or maybe the better term is dogfights. (You think that only women bicker and snarl over silly things? Ah, the innocence... )

Look--I really appreciate the serious news on Salon. I don't see that being phased out till the fascists declare martial law, so I think we're OK for now. But... variety, people. There's nothing wrong with a little intelligently snarky humor along with the tough stuff. If that's all you want, please go read all the good stuff on the home page today and just ignore Broadsheet.

(Oh, and thanks, designers, for toning down the pink.)

Seven pages about how misogynistic and offensive this crap is, and still you're not apologizing or budging? that's not the way the free markets work, dears. you have to actually listen to your customers or you'll go out of business.

oh, and i think it's totally sexist and offensive, just like everyone else does.

I don't know about you other ladies, but this gal is looking forward to Salon's upcoming men's blog; I'm certain it will debut any day now. I wonder, will they title it Broads Between The Sheets?

You've got over 200 posts against this blog in your Salon Central thread, in one day!

Apparently, you don't care that paying members really hate this drivel.

I'm embarassed to say that I subscribe. Why would anyone who reads your redesigned front page choose to become a new member?

Or is that the point.

Word fail me after reading these comments.

No, they don't.

Here are a few:

"Humorless"

"Angry"

"Knee-jerk"

"Sophomoric"

"Paranoid"

"Control freaks"

"Manipulative, self-centered, juvenile Thought Police"

Where do these women live? Is there some kind of penal colony (oops, sorry, phallic synonym revealing my unconscious intractable misogyny) they are all stranded on, with T-1 lines and laptops? How can a COLOR be offensive? It honestly never occured to me that graphic design could be a tool of that Nasty Ol' Patriarchy. These comments are beyond nuts.

Really, everyone, grow up. And get a grip. And finally, trustingly, allow the Ideology Uber Alles thing to slip from your grasp. Go ahead. It's going to be okay.

if you disagree with somebody's opinion, instead of expressing your opinion, call them "thought police" when they express themselves. it's a little less obvious than "feminazi" and it has the same effect of showing exactly where you are coming from.

putting aside whether insults are good argument, it's tiresome.

seriously, are there designated community standards here for attacks on one another?

It's been sad to watch Salon circle the drain for some time now, but this Broadsheet abomination is the final straw. Now I'm just angry. And it wouldn't matter if the graphics were navy blue or burnt siena or plaid, the content -- and, more importantly, the tone -- would still be deserving of all the scorn already noted on this page and on Table Talk.

Table Talk is indispensable to me so I'll grudgingly remain a subscriber, but "Ask the Pilot" is about all that's still worth reading on Salon.

When i first saw the new Broadstreet section, i was not amused. Here we go again. As a male reader, I figure that a few Traister articles every now and then about how men are wimps, dont measure up, women are superior, etc, etc are par for the course, but that this was a little much. However, after seeing the reader response, i have changed my mind. And there is clearly no need for a baby-blue male counterpoint to this section, as some have suggested, since women have attacked it so effectively on their own. Catfight, indeed! Reminds me a little of the Harriet Miers bruhaha. I think i'll make another bag of popcorn.

If I can permit myself to answer for centerbeth:

Your confusion at her complaint is the same sort disingenuous, market driven drivel that has led us to "Broadsheet". You know as well as we do that your choice of the Rockettes as a subject comes not from their plight - which is shared by so many American women - but from a particular combination of sexiness and oddity - tinged perhaps with a little ironic shadenfreude. The end result is a trivilalisation of womens issues and a growing conviction in your audience that at SALON content is merely a pawn - it's the window dressing that's King. Apparently someone in marketing thinks that's what reader's and particularly women - want.

And don't you dare right me off as prudish, too serious or politically correct - My favorite read on Salon these days is Heather Havrilevsky - I just think this entire misguided adventure into Women's bloging is hopelessly old hat, retrograde and misplaced in a publication that hoped to set itself apart from the usual rubbish. You're already trying to be TV Guide and Cosmo - what's next, Tiger Beat?

Since we're being sexist...

Kudos to you Farhad for actually having the balls to show up and respond here to the overwhelmingingly ignored outcry against Broadsheet -- which is more than we can say for your boss.

at SALON content is merely a pawn - it's the window dressing that's King.

And, oddly, King is window dressing.