salon vs. slate vs. atlantic

'slate is actually a good website' haha burn

What crazy social experiment should David Plotz and Hanna Rosin try to replicate next?

The social experiment of being fired from their jobs and never having attention paid to their writings.

atlantic's new design looks okay

quartz sucks, all the articles are bland nothingness

slate is in the publishing military fanfic business now
http://www.slate.com/blogs/quora/2012/11/27/civil_war_who_would_come_out_on_top_if_the_united_states_all_declared_war.html

slate is apparently in the reblogging quora business now idgi

quartz sucks, all the articles are bland nothingness

― iatee, Monday, November 12, 2012 8:25 PM (2 weeks ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

it's like monocle fucked fast company its the worst

Dumbest thing about that Quora deal is that it starts with the premise that units will splinter back to their home states but leave, say, Texas with all the hardware at Fort Hood. If you wanted to write a real alt history about Civil War II: Civil Warrer that's the story - how does the military fracture?

i was kinda hoping that article would take the perky, overly literal angle slate usually does on stuff like that -- like, which state really would win in an all-out battle to the finish? instead we get that unreadable bs.

So pissed I fell for that Atlantic linkbait about how signing off work emails with "xoxoxoxo" is "feminizing the workplace."
I'm not sure if I'm out of touch with reality or they are, but the world they are describing is not one I recognize whatsoever. So you don't have to click on it too:

The phone call was friendly, the kind any two professional contacts might have. A colleague had put Amanda McCall, a comedy writer in New York, in touch with a producer in Los Angeles. The two women had admired each other’s work from afar. They chatted about whether they might want to collaborate on a project. They made plans to talk again.

The next morning, McCall received an e‑mail from the producer. “Absolutely LOVED talking,” the woman wrote, followed by a seemingly endless string of X’s and O’s. That afternoon, a follow-up to the follow-up arrived, subject line “xo.” The body read simply: “xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo.”

McCall was mystified. Should she e‑mail back? Should she ask her what it meant? Was she weird for thinking this was weird? “I’d never seen so many hugs or kisses in any kind of correspondence, even from my parents or boyfriends,” she says, laughing. “In which case: Was this person actually in love with me? And if I didn’t respond with equal love, was it going to hurt her feelings?”

This e‑mail was extreme, yes—yet it’s an example of a tic that’s come to plague professional correspondence, especially among women. The use of xo to denote hugs and kisses dates back to at least 1763, when The Oxford English Dictionary first defined X as “kiss,” but e‑mail and social media have provided a newly fertile habitat.

“I feel like xo has taken on its own kind of life,” says Karli Kasonik, a Washington-based consultant.

“I do it, most women I know do it,” says Asie Mohtarez, a writer and social-media editor, noting that she prefers a single x to the full xo.

“In my field, you almost have to use it,” says Kristin Esposito, a yoga instructor in New York.

In some settings, xo-ing may be a way to indirectly apologize for being direct—think of all those studies concluding that women must be authoritative in the office, but also nice. One such study, by a psychologist at NYU, determined that the best way for a woman to be perceived as likeable at work is to temper strong demands with “a little bit of sugar.” In that context, xo can be seen as a savvy means of navigating a persistent double standard.

Or maybe, as Trubek suggests, xo‑ing is just like actual hugging: women do it more often than men, some women do it more often than other women, and that’s that.

“As someone who’s regularly ended letters to her accountant with xxx, I refuse to feel any shame for this widespread woman-trait,” says Caitlin Moran, the British feminist and author of How to Be a Woman. “Statistics show we’re slowly taking over the world, and I’m happy for us to do it one xxx e‑mail at a time.”

I'm about 3/4 of the way through the new issue of the Atlantic and am really thinking of cancelling my own damn subscription. It seems to have turned wholly into Freakonmics bullshit and corporation porn.

what a Moran

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/12/where-masturbation-and-homosexuality-do-not-exist/265849/

i don't fuck with the magazine at all but the site has some good writers

am kind of an alexis madrigal stan

the magazine side barely matters at this point I think, my friend who worked there said they never even had copies in the office

well when i worked in a deli i couldn't eat the food after a while either

lmao http://www.theatlantic.com/sponsored/scientology/archive/2013/01/david-miscavige-leads-scientology-to-milestone-year-/266958/

it's hard to believe the pr nightmare this is gonna be was worth whatever they got paid

lol three threads bumped sorry

scientologists should have just bought newsweek imo

their churches look really nice fwiw, except cincinnati

ha scitis trying to fill up the comments

Operation Reverse Ferret

"We have temporarily suspended this advertising campaign pending a review of our policies that govern sponsor content and subsequent comment threads."

scientologists should have just bought newsweek imo

― mookieproof, Monday, January 14, 2013 7:58 PM (Yesterday)

haha the thought of tina brown trying really hard to make scientology look Of The Now is cracking me up

http://boingboing.net/2013/01/14/dread-cthulhu-leads-his-cult-t.html

http://blogs.thescore.com/mlb/2013/01/14/jeffery-loria-leads-the-miami-marlins-to-milestone-year

lolllllll oh that is too good

http://www.theonion.com/articles/sponsored-the-taliban-is-a-vibrant-and-thriving-po,30910/

well it finally happened, salon has published a truther:

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/22/give_truthers_a_chance/

oh dear

the best thing about that is how he buries it in the middle of the piece though, like yeah these sandy hook people sure are crazy, btw planes can't melt steel

i like how he ends it by reminding us that "the jfk 'truthers' were eventually vindicated." oh right, i remember when that happened!

salon runs JFK conspiracy stuff a lot

ghost rider did 9/11

"What concerns me about the repudiation of the Hookers is that the 9/11 Truthers are being tarred with the same “crackpot” brush. "

lololololol

oh good salon finally found a replacement for greenwald

there it is

salon removed the story and apologized for the truther stuff (but not the JFK stuff lol).

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/01/no-jfk-in-salon-apology-for-truthers-piece-155038.html

Salon founder David Talbot (no longer with the company) has said that the Kennedy assassination "grew out of the American government."

"I think it was the CIA that was given the job of implementing (the coverup); I think they brought in the mob at crucial times to take care of some of the dirtier work," Talbot, the author of a 2007 book about the Kennedys called "Brothers," said in a 2011 interview. "Basically, this was an executive decision made at the highest levels of American government, and that involved people at the CIA and at the Pentagon."

In 2011, Salon published an article by Jefferson Morley called "The holy grail of the JFK story," which advised readers on how to "get into the conspiratorial weeds" of Kennedy's assassination: "Kennedy’s death was said to be the tragic result of the psychotic actions of one individual... More likely, Kennedy was ambushed by enemies who sought to avoid detection," Morley wrote.

salon is like atlantic's lil brother trying to get attention after the scientology thing

hey guys look at us we publish crazy shit too won't somebody talk about us on twitter please just a little

wow,in the last few weeks Atlantic puts up Sci-Ti propaganda and Salon publishes a Truther. It's only a matter of time until Slate starts publishing stories about how black people are genetically inferior. oh wait.

hah

lol slate couldn't help taking a swipe
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/01/23/salon_truthers_online_mag_publishes_retracts_9_11_conspiracy_story_give.html

slate won "the contest"

The article was selected from the partner site because a junior editor saw that it was connected to the Sandy Hook truther coverage and got a little “overexcited” about it, Lauerman says.

Salon fucked up that Imam gives Syrian rebels permission to rape 14-year-olds story too. I wonder if it was the same junior editor.

fuckin junior editors amirite

i totally get it. what senior editor wants to read the fucking "partner sites" for content?

favorite part of that article is when he says "all conspiracy theories" are the result of "bogus" official stories. Like, for example, the moon landing?

ok but to be fair there is a lot of strong evidence that kubrick directed the moon landing after the actual moon landing failed to provide usable footage

no real person would ever call himself 'buzz'

i wanna know where they stand on beyoncegate.