I thought civil liberties were for everyone, not just women. BS is only for women issues - you know, pink stuff.

I dunno, on the one hand we have Salon generally and BroadSheet in particular going into vapid video land, and on the other, a commenter community that was nasty to begin with and is getting increasingly toxic, disturbed, and almost, no, clearly, racist, on top of being misogynistic and trollish.

I'm not sure I want to hang around here any more. I get enough racist type bashing of single moms, and idiots opining about poverty from the perspective of Ayn Rand, in my real life, I don't need it here too. Tired of kicking against the pricks, I guess.

I pretty much stopped watching actal tv at all about 4 years ago, don't know why I would want to watch a pale laggy shadow of the Discovery Channel on the internet. Go on, lay some one-to-many civics 101 on me, I'll do the same thing I did in high school and read a book instead while I sit in the back row. Except I am a grown up now, and don't have to sit in anybody's back row. Show your educational videos to yourselves, thanks.

That's the thing about a business move, you lose your old customers in the hope of something better, and lately, I can see how that might look like a good idea. I hope the vapid video thing works out for Salon. I don't think it will, but what do I know? As Barnum once said, nobody ever broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.

There is probably some Web2.0 cool business synergy thang going on that is above my pointy little head anyway. But me, I have no desire at all to dig BigThink or CurrentDotCom, they both blow, really, all old media warmed over like last night's pizza.

Yeah, I will continue to support the ACLU, I always have put my money where my mouth is. Though this video kinda shook the faith a little, I don't like being talked down to. And I will probably keep on reading Salon and BroadSheet time to time. You go girls, you'll be on tv one day! (But I won't be watching.)

Bye

is that the deaf and those who cannot hear very well are excluded from both the message of the video and the ability to participate in any subsequent discussion. The same, of course goes for anyone who either doesn't use any of the audio features on his or her computer or who don't have speakers.

Please consider adding a transciption of video-soured material.

Thank you.

I've not seen ONE response where people say they like them better than the written articles, and PLENTY of negative response.

PROVIDE A TRANSCRIPT. I'm guessing you don't just make this up as you go along, so how long would it take to cut-and-paste what you're reading onto the website? As it is, deaf/hard-of-hearing people are automatically excluded from the discussion on these video-only posts.

... just because she's a "broad" (apologies to Ms. Strossen for that usage). It would be like covering Barack Obama and John McCain on the front page of a newspaper, and putting Hillary Clinton in the Style section (or some other pink ghetto).

She's not talking about gender issues, or about concerns that uniquely face women. There aren't any stories that Salon is covering that matter more.

Also, she deserves an interview that's actually written up, not a YouTube-style clip that can't be quoted, provides no information to the hearing-impaired, and reduces her to sound bites.