Talk:Salon.com
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the San Francisco Bay Area WikiProject, a collaborative effort to build a more detailed guide on Wikipedia's coverage of San Francisco and the Bay Area. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Topics
The following is the previous content of this article. Apparently, it refers to a feud between John Ivring and John Updike. Salon.com appears to have reported on it. I fixed the formatting (the letter part began with several spaces). What is its significance (if any?) Paullusmagnus 16:56 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Dear Mr Updike,
From the letter you address soecifically to me, ( 30 Aug. 1998) I can only ascertain that you hold my own humble opinion, in what can only be regarded as low esteem. This is, as an author of your venerable stature is no doubt aware, your peroragative, but is one in which your own weakness for unsubstantiated hyperboyle, a flaw often found in this young country amoung our old men of letters, is unmistakely revealed.
Yours in cahoots Old Gore
[edit] Not just fannish, but subjective all over
This article is in need of being rewritten to be objective. The definition in the first sentence calls it a 'liberal magazine.' That is not an objective or universal term.
As the poster below asked 'by what standard?'
[edit] this article is pretty fannish, isn't it?
There are a few things in this article that stood out to me as being biased in favor of a "Salon is great!" definition. Here they are:
1. "Though providing several services, it is best known for its online magazine, with content updated each weekday."
What are these services? Stating they exist without defining them just seems to be bragging that Salon.com has other services aside from web journalism.
2. "Salon's magazine covers a variety of topics. American politics is a major focus, but by no means the only one. It has extensive reviews and articles about music, books, and films. It also has articles about 'modern life' in all its forms, including relationships and sex. It covers technology, with a particular focus on the free software/open source movement."
Again, this entire paragraph seems to be apoligist, seemingly trying to convince the reader that Salon is something special. Verbiage such as "but by no means" and "extensive" seem redundant, inserted only to praise Salon.
3. "Its online subscription-only discussion boards, Table Talk and The WELL, are quite popular."
Quite popular to who? By what measuring standard?
4. "As one of the earliest and most prominent web-only media outlets"
where is the cite for this claim?
5. "On 25 April, 2001 Salon.com launched Salon Premium, one of the first online content subscriptions. Salon Premium, having successfully signed over 130,000 subscribers, defied critical expectations and staved off discontinuation of services."
Where is the cite of this 130K figure, or for that matter, "critical expectations"? Where is the evidence of any of this?
This article to me comes across as pretty biased. And the screenshot of the homepage doesent refelct the recent horrible redesign Salon.com got.--202.49.19.27 01:53, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- Are you kidding? Literally half of this aricle is devoted to Salon.coms monetary woes. Although it's money problems are certainly relevant and deserve inclusion, they overwhelmingly bias the article against Salon. I'll try to add some additional content (neutral point of view of course) sometime soon. Freddie deBoer 22:37, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] New screenshot?
Am newbie to this and don't want to attempt images - but can we update the screenshot since the re-design?
[edit] Chief executive editor is not David Talbot anymore
Can somebody please update? Thanks. Andries 19:11, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Much information out-of-date
Hello! Much information on this page is out of date. Current information can be found at these sources:
Thank you.
Louis.bennett (talk) 18:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Technical Project Manager, Salon.com
