Letters to the Editor
-
Criticize Joan the editor, not Joan the woman
Wow. I may have issues with Salon right now, but I'm repulsed by the willingness of some to stoop to sexism in their attacks on Joan. (Just as I favor Obama, but am enraged by the open sexism and demonization of Clinton, which is no better than the demonization and vapid insults against Obama.)
My criticism of Salon arises from a frustration of someone who has the skill and talent to know better, and is doing a bad job. Someone who is getting the feedback to improve, and is ignoring it.
I'm also irritated by insightful critiques of Salon or the Media or the process as a whole which then devolve into "and that's why Clinton/Obama should quit right now and his/her followers are fools". It's like the first balanced paragraph came from a different person.
In a blog about something else, someone wrote they realized feminists were ignoring valid, if angry, criticism because they were used to the flood of invalid and angry criticism. The blogger wasn't making an excuse, just talking about how such habits develop. I feel like every time someone attacks Joan's gender it renders anything which might elevate the dialog moot. Just as the overly broad statement "X can't win the election" immediately turns me off of whatever argument for Y you might have.
Because the valid criticism about Salon being to sensationalist and obsessed with the horse race is surrounded with sexist cheap shots, I guess Joan doesn't see it.