Monday, June 05, 2006
Dear Salon:
You would think that a publication that has received substantial criticism over one of its articles would be extra-careful about how it treats letters to the editor. But if the publication was Salon, well... read on.
Thanks, but editorial proprieties in quotation lacking.
Ms. Walsh, I am deeply flattered that Salon featured Mercury Rising in its review of the blogs.
However, whoever prepared the excerpt of my article was mischievous--and deceptive-- in welding by ellipses one paragraph early in the post to a sentence many, many paragraphs distant and referring to a different, narrowly-defined topic.
My post was titled, "Why the Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. article alleging the election was stolen is substantially right and the critics substantially wrong." Salon's title was "There's wrong, and then there's less wrong." So, Salon falsified my attempt to be fair to Farhad Manjoo into a snide attack on Robert Kennedy.
I would much rather that you had closed the quote of my piece by appropriate methods, using the line that follows directly:
"Justice has not been done."
-- Charles
Monday, June 05, 2006 11:29:54 PM
PS: This letter belongs to Salon. They are welcome to come get it.
Comments:
<< Home
Wow. I know Joan Walsh hates to admit being wrong, but to actually pull an editing trick usually used only by right-wingers -- well, that tells you something about her. And it's not good.
Salon was once essential reading for me. From 1997 through 2000 I stopped by daily, sometimes hourly. But then they dumped their best investigative reporters, Murray Waas among them, and hired either nonentities like Manjoo or pandered to the conservatives by running pieces by David Horowitz and Camille Paglia. Table Talk soon became the only part of Salon worth visiting on a regular basis.
Salon was once essential reading for me. From 1997 through 2000 I stopped by daily, sometimes hourly. But then they dumped their best investigative reporters, Murray Waas among them, and hired either nonentities like Manjoo or pandered to the conservatives by running pieces by David Horowitz and Camille Paglia. Table Talk soon became the only part of Salon worth visiting on a regular basis.
Apparently, she doesn't care. As of now, they haven't amended it and haven't written me to explain. If there's any response, it's buried in a long thread and I simply don't care enough about Salon to look.
They're not bad people, but the professionalism has been headed down and down.
Post a Comment
They're not bad people, but the professionalism has been headed down and down.
<< Home
More blogs about politics.
