Now why couldn’t print media be so spontaneous AND interesting? (salon.com)

Member Name: redcockney

Product:	salon.com
Date:	29/12/00 (17 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: There is something for everybody....

Disadvantages: ....unless it’s naked pictures of women and unreasonable journalism, you’re after.

Apart from the old (and always true) adage that a newspaper is always there if you want it, many people on the internet realise that print media only has a limit to how entertaining it can be (you CAN if you
want to, keep a stockpile of interesting articles and interviews to read over again AND it’s always better than their web editions BUT can a newspaper be as candid and as good value-for-money such as ‘Salon’? Well, there’s always the photographs if you want a disadvantage.

I don’t understand how people can just decide to throw away magazines (and with many of them particularly the ones I choose, costing over £3, I’m not given them up without a fight).

With ‘Salon’, there is always a seemingly intelligent article here and there covering a vast array of subjects that no other e-zine can cover in so much detail and so comprehensively (remember it’s quality
not quantity BUT ‘Salon’ regularly flouts that rule over and over again).

Personally, I just LOVE Amy Reiter’s ‘Nothing Personal’ column where the pick of the week’s quotes and activities both stupid and thoughtful come up for air to be exposed to the world (although the only
negative criticism for Amy is that some of these aren’t NEW ones BUT there’s always something wonderfully weird and wacky that comes out from the actions and mouths of celebrities....).

AND the design is just so easy-to-the-eye (unlike ‘Slate’ for example) where it’s simply just very easy to navigate and with links to all the the right places BUT the criticism here is that their ‘Table Talk’
(message boards, if you like) is just a TAD too complicated and messy to manoeuvre around.

The columnists aren’t by any means in a league of their own BUT they’re pretty damn good and Camille Paglia could easily rival Julie Burchill for nonsensical and
meandering articles that mean absolutely
nothing much except to their fans (although yes, I wouldn’t take either of them on, in a ‘verbal fistfight’).

Unfortunately the plans for a UK edition of ‘Salon’ seemed to have fallen through (although it’s focus is obviously American, I can still appreciate what they’re saying) and so we won’t see a British effort
(although several UK writers make their presence felt occasionally welcome and unwelcome such as Toby Young).

Although they are ‘cliquey’ in their range of choices to what they cover which are often as narrow and high minded as many ‘intellectual’ publications.

BUT why do I choose to read it? I LOVE reading it for their writers’ thoughts on the current crop of films in release, the books that are currently available AND the TV that’s currently wowing their critics
but NOT for it’s music reviews of which are often TOO eclectic for a mainstream music fan like me to ‘appreciate’ (more often than not, I just think they’re wrong). I LIKE reading about the columnists ill-fated adventures in sex and dating which AREN’T too explicit but certainly nothing staid enough for you to show your parents.

The stories are divided into ten main categories (and those who are interested here they are):-

‘Art & Entertainment’, ‘Books’, ‘Comics’, ‘Health & Body’, ‘Media’, ‘Mothers Who Think’, ‘News’,
‘People’, ‘Technology’ and ‘Travel’.

If you find ‘Doonesbury’ more funny than Steve Bell’s efforts (of which I’m occasionally susceptible to) then Salon’s comics are certainly geared towards your liking of which my favourite is ‘Story Minute’ by Carol Lay, a series of ‘Twilight Zone’-styl
e comic strips BUT ‘The Dark Hotel’ which often uses the week’s US political news stories as some kind of ground is occasionally a corker.

BUT for sheer ODD and WONDERFUL stories that wouldn’t be covered elsewhere, ‘Salon’ is a
definite bookmark (not ‘Fortean Times’ odd btw) and of course, it doesn’t cost a penny.

Summary: