This topic of audience feedback is absolutely fascinating. As mentioned in the article there is a very important self-correcting aspect, i.e. the feedback tends to draw out the whole picture instead of potentially a narrow picture as painted by the journalist.

Having said that, why are the other medias not following suit as quickly. As an example, many documentary films are represented as the truth, despite often being very opinionated representations of an issue. With the menu-driven format of DVD why not allow for some sort of video feedback - such as interviews with people with different views? Will this change with the youtube style technology... allowing people to post real-time 'counter-video' and link them to the original piece?

Similarly with nightly news features or TV opinion pieces, why not include viewer feedback via email and phone immediately?

The internet and blogosphere have acted as the catalysts, lets take these lessons now and let people provide feedback on other mediums and make journalists/directors/producers hold themselves accountable to counter-opinions.

First off: Boo Hoo Hoo! You brought this on yourselves, and it is nice to see Salon admit as much, although I find this cry for mercy to be nothing more than self-serving, and too-little too-late. And the blame-the-reader tone is downright insulting, especially as you frankly admit that you did it for the money.

Second: BLOGBACK. That's right, blogback. It's like blowback, only with blogs. Get it? OED Word of the Year, 2007, use it, re-use it, parse it around, but don't forget where you read it first -- Salon online, January 30th, around 11:00 am Eastern time, subscriber fka.

Salon is by and large nothing but a collection of blogs. And the readers are blogging right back at you. And it's the most damn successful blogfest on the interweb. Does any other online magazine get as many hits as Salon letters?

Third: Journalism? What journalism? Is that what you call what Salon is doing? Do any of you actually do any reporting? No. It's all opinion. Okay, sometimes a book reviewer will actually talk to the author, and Andrew Leonard actually reads all that stuff that I don't have time to, and Broadsheet chimes in with obscure foreign news that I might not otherwise have heard of, but other than that it's mostly blogging about what other writers and opinion makers in the media have to say. Salon is just one big blog. And you know what they say about opinions! So don't try to throw your alleged integrity in my face.

Now, to the letters. Back in the old days, I had a few letters printed in Salon. I have had a few printed in my local daily as well. One had to take in the article, think about it, write, think some more, make a point, edit, fine tune, stay on topic -- really, craft a mini-essay. It could often take a day or more. It encouraged thought and compelled one to excel at writing. And to see that letter in the pages of Salon was, truly, a thrilling thing, an accomplishment.

The Red Stars don't do it. They are often just as poorly written as the surrounding material, and provide no incentive to excellence.

And so, looking sadly on as Salon spiraled down into the decaying orbit of the page hit, I gave up caring, trying, and my subscription. And now when I post, I am, as often as not, simply "No Name Given".

I begged Salon not to do this. I begged them to go back. I exhorted, I threatened, I cajoled. My pleas fell on deaf ears. So I again make one simple sugestion, one that I made long ago. It may not alleviate the problem but it will make it a little less painful. PUT THE LETTER WRITER'S NAME AT THE TOP OF HIS/HER POST. That way we can all scroll past our own personal dis-favorites. I won't name names. I'm sure we all have our least favorite correspondents. But then at least, when two LWs go mano-a-mano, it will be much easier to skip past the foodfight.

Never again to be...

Thank you very kindly for an informative, thoughtful essay. Lately, I have concluded that I was about ready to give up on Salon. There just didn't seem to be that much in it that interested me all that much. I was thinking that Slate has more to offer, and it's free. Well, maybe I was wrong. Just one comment: Do you think it possible that the Rush Limbaughs and Ann Coulters of your world might have something to do with the subject of your piece? Personally, I hope that those people and their ilk get get what they so richly deserve.

I thought this was a nifty piece of writing, even if I don't know who this Stendahl character is.

"And, of course, there has been an explosion of expertise. The information revolution has set off a million car bombs of random knowledge at once, spraying info fragments through the marketplace of ideas."

Everything is black-and-white, without nuance, and as purposefully (and disturbingly) polarizing as could be. You can almost see the editors counting the letters before the enter buttons are hit. The more the better.

But this is not journalism in the great tradition of the craft. Nor is this the kind of “democracy” that will result in a better nation or even better on-line community. Honestly, it’s more like “American Idol” Journalism. It’s sheer rabble-rousing and, often, reading through the letters that result only serves to depress me on a grand scale.

Indeed. Fortunately, and quite rightly, Salon is free.

Wow! I had no idea Al Gore invented the internet! He should run for President!

Honestly, I enjoy reading the letters as much as I enjoy reading the actual article, simply because it really does allow me to get ALL sides of the issue in question. So I hope they do not do away with the open letters section. That said, I do think certain news stories should not have this option. A friend of mine recently died in a car accident and the short news blurb about it in my local online newspaper had a comments section. A few callous souls felt the need to make jokes and speculate that since it had been a Porsche he had been riding in, he somehow deserved to die in a horrible wreck.

Gary, I thought this article was articulate, smart and thought-provoking. If you read these letters (against your own better judgement) you should know that someone out there had nothing negative to say about it. I enjoyed it immensely, and I think it was almost brave of you to write it, knowing that some of the responses would inevitably be viscious, given the topic. Kudos.