How can the contributors to HuffPo be described as slaves? No one forced them to contribute!
I don't quite get this comment. They were working for nothing already. What's deeper than NADA? If these putzes were looking for reward, they were hypocrites. Clearly, they thought that once the revolution was complete, they would be a part of the ruling class.
Bad luck!!
It is not going to sit well with many writers, when it is pointed out that some writer did indeed get paid fairly well, the elite.
The serfs, nothing, but vanity in seeing their names attached to a story.
The fact is that AOL and the Huffington Post simply recapitulate in the new media many of the worst abuses of the old economy’s industrial capitalism — the sweatshop, the speedup and piecework; huge profits for the owners; desperation, drudgery and exploitation for the workers. No child labor, yet, but if there were more page views in it…
Umm.... I think theL.A Times has forgotten that they wrote and posted these articles without being forced to do it. Slaves had no choice, these Libs had a choice and chose not to get payed. Sure, they were used, but they were okay with it until now. I guess the Communist utopia was all a hoax perpetrated on the workers (as is the case with ALL communism). Those at the top get richer and those at the bottom stay there. Why so capitalist all of the sudden?
I’m confused by this articles use of the word “journalism”.
Showing once again that to be a liberal is to be a hypocrite.
Maybe Arianna can buy some dignity with all that cash
Didn’t it cost her 50 million to start and untold millions to keep it afloat? It may survive but very doubtful. Ass for the establishmedia crying about low wages, put out a salable product and the world will pay you accordingly.
Pray for America
Nothing new.
They have been exploiting their audience since Gutenberg.
“Huffington Post’s business model”
All socialist are equal, but some socialist are more equal than others. What a hypocrite.