Replies

What is it with you guys? Speaking as a journalist, I hope they find a way to survive. It's always good to have more publications out there, and almost always bad when one of them goes under. Even if it's a publication with a well-earned rep for publishing reams of crap.

It's always good to have more publications out there, and almost always bad when one of them goes under. Even if it's a publication with a well-earned rep for publishing reams of crap.

Nah. THOSE should go under. Survival of the fittest should never take a break, even for journalism. Mother Nature's rules work for a reason. Thos who publish pure crap should see some consequences for their stupidity, so that they can initiate improvements. If they absolutely refuse to do so, they should go under.

"It's always good to have more publications out there, and almost always bad when one of them goes under. Even if it's a publication with a well-earned rep for publishing reams of crap."

I've got to disagree with you on that. I'm in the newspaper business myself, but I don't shed a tear when I see a lousy publication go under. There's no reason that those of us in the news/information/entertainment business should be immune to the laws of capitalism.

Salon is going under because they have a lousy business model and/or not enough people like their content. In either case, they deserve to fail. I don't say that because I don't like their political slant either. If it was a conservative site having the same problems, I'd say the same thing. The folks at Salon thought they had a good idea. The market is saying otherwise. Let the market prevail.