Or does he work for free like the other Huffington Post writers?

No doubt the vast majority of commenters who are upset about the tabloid aspects of HuffPo, are among the elders and not the young. HuffPo wants to appeal to a wide variety of ages and interests. Unlike the TV media who become obsessed with events like the one totally enveloping them today, Michael Jackson, HuffPo offers something for everyone which is what printed newspapers do. But, HuffPo doesn't overpower in any of the areas they cover as TV does. The TV media are the tabloid media, not HuffPo.

Most commenters here are interested in the POLITICS or MEDIA sections. So go there and ignore the other areas. Complaining about the other coverage for other readers isn't valid. If your criticism is about the political or media sections, then tell me how HuffPo's approach is so tabloid that you didn't want to go there until Froomkin was hired.

I remember quite well when Huffington launched her web magazine. It was as if she rifled through her Rolodex and asked all of her celebrity friends and a few good writers to blog for her. At first, there was this flavor of 'elevated' gossip rag about it, but it improved a lot over the years. Basically, web mags/web newspapers are an evolving and dynamic medium and we can expect constant change. This will make an interesting PhD dissertation some day, or at least some very good books about how the web changed news reporting forever.

Back not so long ago, say 2002, 2003, 2004, "blogs" and "bloggers" were marginalized, criticized and not taken very seriously by the MSM, and there were far fewer webizens that read blogs regularly at that time. Now, that's changed a lot, and the MSM was never equipped to deal with it. Oh, they hired a stable of "bloggers" or asked some of their columnists to host blogs, but the intimacy, immediacy and editorial freedom of real blogs could not be duplicated on MSM sites.

I suspect that Dead Tree newspapers will disappear in our time, like dinosaurs. Their extinction will be for the same reasons that are theorized about the poor beasts: inability to adapt. The Web has changed journalism forever, as we witness the learning curve and rapid evolution of online news. No longer is "blogging" a Bush-league sport, nor "bloggers" dismissed as being "unserious" by a majority of readers. The upstart bloggers have finally made the Big Leagues. Let's hope they use their powers for good long enough to make a difference.

"First, there was the moment of silence on the House floor in honor of the King of Pop, thanks to Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr., the Illinois Democrat. So the House literally ground to a halt, if only for a moment. This didn’t go over well with Rep. Peter King, a Republican from New York, who laid into Jackson and his eulogizers in a speech outside a Long Island fire station. Said King, “This low-life Michael Jackson. ... Let's knock out the psychobabble. He was a pervert; he was a child molester; he was a pedophile, and to be giving this much attention to him, day in and day ... what does this say about our country?”

Help! Glenn?!

major mass media in this country (especially, but not exclusively, newspapers):

They are being sucked dry by demands for profits. BIG profits.

Big Newspapers used to amount to a license to print money, in vast quantities, mostly to enrich already obscenely rich families and other shareholders. Ever increasing profit margins -- into stratospheric levels -- led to all kinds of internal transformations, first toward tabloidization of the "news", then toward the fashion of Post-Modernism (which is part of where we get the "no objective truth" canard so common in the press), then toward sucking up to the right wing (at least, so the consultants said, right-wingers are loyal readers!. Grab them, and you have readers for life!), then to cutting newsroom staff again and again and again, then to dumping columnists, then to selling off properties, then to cutting more staff, then to tightening the wagon circle, then to selling everything in sight including soirees with the owners.

It's been all about squeezing the maximum amount of dollars from the now nearly empty husks of the major mass media before it's too late.

Even as they crash and burn, it's still about squeezing the money. As much as possible as fast as possible.

Froomkin cost too much.

And not just in dollars.

Arianna likes money, too, I hear...

I will once again tune-in to read Dan Froomkin. I left their site for a number of reasons, not the least of which was the marginalization of the prescient Dennis Kucinich, giving him little more recognition than his admission regarding UFO's. If Froomkin is truly given editorial freedom, he will keep the pressure on the Obama administration and this will invite others to do the same.

eventually, anyway. b/c the Establishment can rarely stand the mirror people like Froomkin holds up them.

let's face it, most people are cowards. most of the people you work with are afraid of their own shadows, and speaking out is not done for fear of being ostracized by The Powers That Be. this goes for any field, any job.

the Outsider is always necessarily punished. but The Outsider survives and is rewarded by Truth-Seekers b/c they have an incorruptible truthful voice that is desperately needed as a cut-through of the cultural garbage we otherwise wade in.

Though I look at HuffPo every day, I spend less and less time there -- too many worthwhile stories are hidden in the depths in favor of tabloid stories (too many tabloid stories), too many misleading headlines, too much censorship of comments.

I only went to WaPo for Froomkin. HuffPo likes sensationalizing. Passion is OK (says an artist, who is real myopic, not the slur). Accuracy is what counts.

The hiring of Froomkin is a big credibility booster for HuffPo, and one hopes this high profile "bounce" will help turn the worm a bit faster back toward more honest, adversarial journalism on a widespread scale. Glenn's (and a select few others') efforts to expose the MSM for the rotting, corrupt organ that it is is absolutely paramount to getting our country back. Doing so not only helps turn citizens away from these 'old guard' establishment water-carriers, but also opens their eyes to other sources of news which present more debate and often a more honest critique of events and their meanings. And it encourages active participation as well, which is easily the most critical element of all in the media shift we're seeing now.

But.....don't for a second believe the SQMs (Status Quo Maintainers) like the WaPo, WSJ, FoxNews, Rush Limpbaugh, Brian "What Military Analyst Scandal?" Williams, et al, will allow this to go on unabated. They will fight as ugly, as unfair, and as unethically as necessary to keep things pretty much the way they are now, and their corporate masters will see to it they have all of the financing they need to do so. And with the active assistance of Congress Criminals in their pockets as well, the fight will be several magnitudes above that of "David v Goliath."

That is why I cannot stress enough how hard we must prepare to fight to keep Net Neutrality in place, and without compromise. It is the lifeblood of the media shift we are beginning to see here. If you think that all is well on that front just because it hasn't been in the news lately, fahgettabautit. There are (and will be) constant attacks on it by large corporations like AT&T, Time Warner, and others who are pouring millions upon millions into getting laws passed which will limit the flow of information across the net. Many of you here already know much about this issue, but we can't let it fall through the cracks.

As we increasingly see critical voices such as Glenn's, Dan Froomkin's, and others gaining widespread support, more air-time, and more followers, corporations and lobbyists will pour ever-more money into the pockets of Congress to "do something about it." Diluting or destroying net neutrality will be a crushing defeat for those of us who hope for a restoration of adversarial journalism, substantial political debate, and reasonable, fair answers to the issues we citizens face.

This administration has already proven they cannot be trusted to do the right thing. We thought there was no way Obama would or could cave on FISA. We thought there was no way Obama would ever be in favor of such abhorrent policies as preventive detention, or turning his back so completely on the torture issue.

Breaking the matrix, indeed. Net neutrality is a huge part of it. Don't forget it as we take a moment or two to cheer the good things like Froomkin joining HuffPo.

Link at sig.