I am amazed each of these sites makes enough money to pay lots of salaries
i always wonder how much they pay their writers
― lex pretend, Friday, 9 March 2012 00:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
does that really annoying mommy blog lady still write for salon? ayelet waldman? i used to read salon in the early 00s just to be annoyed by her.
― sarahell, Friday, 9 March 2012 01:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
if slate can't break even what good is it to wapo?
― iatee, Friday, 9 March 2012 01:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
i dont read any of these and thought the atlantic was a 'magazine'
― Lamp, Friday, 9 March 2012 01:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
well wapo cant break even either
― lag∞n, Friday, 9 March 2012 01:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah i guess slate is prob a better long term bet than a newspaper
― iatee, Friday, 9 March 2012 01:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
Every time I visit Slate they have some challopsy article featured, like "Why Beer is Better Warm than Cold"
― President Keyes, Thursday, March 8, 2012 4:23 PM (3 hours ago)
ha!
― Abarham Lincoln posing (Abbbottt), Friday, 9 March 2012 03:02 (1 year ago) Permalink
Until looking at this poll I am p sure I thought slate and salon were the same thing. Same looking websites! Same looking name!
― Abarham Lincoln posing (Abbbottt), Friday, 9 March 2012 03:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
Like thank god slate is not on trial and I'm not an eyewitness testimony.
― Abarham Lincoln posing (Abbbottt), Friday, 9 March 2012 03:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
even their stupid favicons are borderline indistinguishable
i think the commenters on slate are marginally saner than the ones on salon
― Mordy, Friday, 9 March 2012 03:10 (1 year ago) Permalink
Greenwald, Pareene, Seitz, duh
Seitz has moved to the Vulture, which brings Salon down in my estimation greatly. Still, I'll vote for it because they occasionally have some good articles, I don't read the Atlantic very often, and Slate's Cultural Gabfest is so terrible and annoying I wind up listening to at least 15 minutes every week before I go nuts and want to scream and then i go back to it just because I can't believe how awful they are.
― stay in school if you want to kiw (Gukbe), Friday, 9 March 2012 05:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
though if I'm honest - now that Seitz is gone - I only ever read these when they're linked by someone on Twitter/fb/here.
― stay in school if you want to kiw (Gukbe), Friday, 9 March 2012 05:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
from an older thread abt salon:
worst part of salon: the articles that say "i wondered and wondered about whether i was a bad parent for reasons x, y, and z and then realized how wrong conventional wisdom is because i am really a great parent, though i am not perfect because part of good writing is laying out your imperfections." aaaaaarrrgh.― Maria (Maria), Sunday, July 3, 2005 2:16 PM (6 years ago)
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Friday, 9 March 2012 06:06 (1 year ago) Permalink
I don't know enough about the Atlantic, but Salon and Slate both suffer from that middle-class "am I ethical enough?" bullshit. They sometimes come off as a parody of what the cliché "Guardian readers" are in the UK. That's why the Slate Culture Gabfest is so goddamn infuriating. There are so many things they treat as "ooh, I know it looks kind of stupid and I can't believe I'm saying it but I really like x".
― stay in school if you want to kiw (Gukbe), Friday, 9 March 2012 06:10 (1 year ago) Permalink
When I was in college I had the vague notion of wanting to be a magazine journalist, and my family referred me to a friend who was a moderately successful magazine journalist, and I remember him being like "you should contact this guy Will Saletan, he's doing this thing called Slate on *the internet*" etc. I had never heard of it at the time, and I was so fucking green and dumb that I just e-mailed Will Saletan and basically said "Hi C____ S_____ said I should e-mail you about an internship can I have one?" and didn't attach a resume or anything.
― simulation and similac (Hurting 2), Friday, 9 March 2012 06:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
― stay in school if you want to kiw (Gukbe), Friday, 9 March 2012 06:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
atlantic is more thinking smart thoughts abt the world by inhuman people who have been to lots of college and twitter but not the actual world
― lag∞n, Thursday, March 8, 2012 5:36 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
lol
atlantic has maybe 3 writers i read, slate has 2, salon has 1, so atlantic.
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Friday, 9 March 2012 06:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
I was thinking that you could make a really great site by combining writers from these 3 and you could also make the worst site on the internet
what if there were one stop shop for greenwald, megan mcardle and slate cultural criticism. wouldn't that be your homepage too?
― iatee, Friday, 9 March 2012 17:05 (1 year ago) Permalink
how about a daily back and forth with joan walsh and katie roiphe?
― goole, Friday, 9 March 2012 17:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
Slate, easily. A bunch of my favourite online writers, incl John Dickerson, Dana Stevens, Jody Rosen, and very enjoyable podcasts. Don't understand the hate for their arts coverage at all.
Used to read Salon pre-subscription experiment but I don't visit it unless someone links to it on Twitter - usually a Greenwald or Pareene piece - or I'm scanning Metacritic for film reviews and I remember I like O'Hehir.
― Suede - the fabric, not the band (DL), Friday, 9 March 2012 17:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah i like dana stevens a lot, dahlia lithwick too.
― goole, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:05 (1 year ago) Permalink
I really really dislike their television critic. Worst writer ever.
― Mordy, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
troy paterson?? really?? i dig him a lot
― max, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
i have a kneejerk contempt of all tv criticism. idk why.
― goole, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah me too I realize it's irrational
― iatee, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
theres a lot of bad tv criticism out there but i think paterson is pretty good
― max, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
TV criticism, hardly worth the effort
Vulture is an NYmag thing, yes?
― Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Friday, 9 March 2012 19:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
― iatee, Friday, 9 March 2012 17:05 (2 hours ago) Permalink
I actually think this kind of internet media could really benefit from more consolidation -- there are too many sites to check right now and I wind up checking none.
― the prurient pinterest (Hurting 2), Friday, 9 March 2012 19:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
it seems so pointless. it seems most disconnected from the relationship between program and audience.
xp hurting, get yourself some rss!
― goole, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
i don't know how this is possible. i've never read anything by him that i felt was well-written or insightful about the subject matter. and plenty of embarrassing pieces that read like creative writing assignments
― Mordy, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
well the consolidation is happening on a certain level, like there are more aggregation type sites. I feel like the place where an article came from matters less and less.
xp
― iatee, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
does that really annoying mommy blog lady still write for salon? ayelet waldman?
Mrs. Michael Chabon iirc!
― Cuba Pudding, Jr. (jaymc), Friday, 9 March 2012 19:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
When David Edelstein wrote for Slate in the early '00s, he was probably my favorite film critic. Then he decamped for New York in the days when its website wasn't as culturally prevalent as it is now, and I stopped reading him. Dana Stevens is generally pretty likeable, though.
― Cuba Pudding, Jr. (jaymc), Friday, 9 March 2012 19:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
voted for Slate, mostly for the podcasts which are usually pretty good
Also enjoy the Slate "Explainer" stuff.
― silverfish, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah i dont know i think TP is a good writer. dunno about the creative writing pieces.
dont know goole means about audience
― max, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
― the prurient pinterest (Hurting 2), Friday, March 9, 2012 2:25 PM (10 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
its called twitter dawg
― lag∞n, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
― iatee, Friday, March 9, 2012 12:05 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
to poop on
atlantic has occasional actual longform reporting. i'll probably read more nonsense on salon though, which has some very good writers but also a fair amounts of huffpo-itis. haven't thought about slate in years except when i see the occasional link to some music thing there or remember fondly this article: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/vice/2001/06/monkeyfishing.html
― s.clover, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
criticism of music and movies seems to be inserted more directly into the 'conversation' about those things, because (pre d/l) there is a purchase-decision angle to weigh in on. the 'buyer's guide' aspect of criticism is subject to a lot of debate, sure, but it is part of the deal. there are also specific subculture/genre relationships and narratives to track between producers, products, and audiences. i'm kind of struggling here but the aspect of leaving your home for both music and movies gives each a kind of public life that renders critical work about it more potent? idk
tv is something that people just have in their house turn on. what is there even to criticize? pointless is maybe the wrong word, how about... ineffectual?
i guess in a dvr era tv is a bit more similar to downloaded music and streamed movies, and tv series post-hbo have become more cinematic -- so maybe we are entering into an era when writing about tv will start to have a similar function and relationship as other criticisms
― goole, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
my problem is there is really so little of that cinematic tv that's 'worth criticizing' that it just ends up w/ people talking about the wire again and again
― iatee, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
like even in the neu-era of tv there really are not that many 'ps this is clearly meant to be a work of art' shows
― iatee, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
a lot of criticism about tv -- say in the NYer though in a lot of places online too -- comes a few seasons in. so its less buyers guide (though theres a "recommendation" aspect to it) than it is like. i dont know. "actual criticism" or something. see for example emily nussbaums essay about the good wife, now in the middle of its 3rd season, in last weeks NYer
― max, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
i thought nussbaum's recent piece about good children's television was excellent
― Mordy, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
i haven't read the nyer in a long time, i probably have bad memories of the franklin regime
― goole, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:58 (1 year ago) Permalink
hey should i start a thread about that AWAKE show? i think it's kinda good
― goole, Friday, 9 March 2012 19:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
i also like troy patterson but i feel like he's been "off" for a while idk. i haven't been able to read dana stevens for years and i used to be a fan back in her blog days so i mean it's probably me. dahlia lithwick is easily the best and most consistent writer at slate.
x-post i only like tv criticism that realizes its own pointlessness from the start and hopefully 1) lols ensue 2) you learn something about tv shows you would never want to know. nb i hate tv.
― Your Ample Girth Does Intimidate (Matt P), Friday, 9 March 2012 20:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
an occasional essay about an entire genre of television is fine. A piece on a single show is almost always bad, unless it's one of a handful of really great shows, in which case it's already been written about enough. The worst are those new-season-of-tv roundups where you watch the critic contort himself to find the better and worse among a bunch of completely shitty shows.
― the prurient pinterest (Hurting 2), Friday, 9 March 2012 20:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
lots of times you get these tv-diaries episode by episode recap things where it really ends up being sort of like a group discussion with a moderator, so the author is just talking about what they did or didn't enjoy in the episode and in the comments everyone else chimes in and you get theories about if sawyer was the horse or who is going to sleep with who or whatever. so basically like a more formal version of our rolling ilx threads. and folks read and participate for the same reason -- because its more fun to consume this or that media if you have people to talk about it and argue about it with.
arguably this is not what people consider "criticism." also, arguably, this is more like what criticism used to be in a historical sense until it took a weird detour roughly coinciding with the time of modernism.
― s.clover, Friday, 9 March 2012 20:06 (1 year ago) Permalink
i have a hard time believing that tv writing is bad because of tv
― max, Friday, 9 March 2012 20:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
yes i'm definitely cheered by being reminded how ridiculously young these folx are
― balls, Saturday, 6 April 2013 16:50 (1 month ago) Permalink
Foreign Policy is trying to get hip, though - the most recent issue I saw had a color photo on the cover, instead of the National Geographic-circa-1912 look they'd had until, I don't know, two months ago? And if you go to their website they're definitely Slate-ifying their headlines.
― 誤訳侮辱, Saturday, 6 April 2013 17:30 (1 month ago) Permalink
it was a big blow to slate losing hitchens - probably their only real marquee columnist? (unless u count lol roiphe)
― Mordy, Saturday, 6 April 2013 22:57 (1 month ago) Permalink
hitchens wasn't there that long was he?
― balls, Sunday, 7 April 2013 02:38 (1 month ago) Permalink
foreign policy is one of those things where it's interesting to read *because* the ppl reading it are "respectable" but i hate most of what i've ever read in it, the perspective is so shamelessly fukuyama
― flopson, Friday, April 5, 2013 1:13 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
<3
― Woody Ellen (Matt P), Sunday, 7 April 2013 02:47 (1 month ago) Permalink
a blog post i half-read today sez that in a recent fp article (AS WELL AS A TED TALK BY THE AUTHOR), so-and-so sez 'we are witnessing the rise of laughtivism'.
coolin up, yep
― j., Tuesday, 16 April 2013 18:30 (1 month ago) Permalink
as noted upthread, lithwick is good at slate. don't know how regular her column contributions are though.
― life is good (Hunt3r), Tuesday, 16 April 2013 18:42 (1 month ago) Permalink
http://www.mrdestructo.com/2013/04/destructo-salon-does-matthew-yglesias.html
― Chuck E was a hero to most (s.clover), Thursday, 25 April 2013 18:00 (4 weeks ago) Permalink
yeeeeeees
― hoospanic GANGSTER musician (BIG HOOS aka the steendriver), Thursday, 25 April 2013 19:10 (4 weeks ago) Permalink