Sources Say

Casting our gaze on the media

 

31 May 2007

The Great Debate: Salon vs. Slate

Dear Marco,

Greece or Rome? Jordin or Blake? Star Wars or Lord of the Rings?

It’s hard to resist comparing two obvious rivals, and Internet-based publications Salon and Slate are no exception. To be fair, these two online magazines are close cousins, both offering a mix of politics, culture, the arts and some blogging. In addition, they both feature lively writing that goes heavy on the irony. But Salon is the better magazine.

The simple reason is that Salon, even in its currently anemic state, still does more heavy lifting, digging up new information and revealing it to readers. Check out Mark Benjamin’s story about the death of a suspected terrorist in CIA custody, for example. Also, Salon also has more of an edge, a sense of outrage. The website still offers a link to a complete file of Abu Ghraib photos and reporting as if to say: we have not forgotten. That kind of commitment to the important issues of the day is what journalism is supposed to offer. In addition, I’d be remiss not to give Salon props for having a female editor and a highly readable blog about women’s news and issues called the Broadsheet. On a related note, don’t forget that back in Salon’s halcyon days, the magazine gave birth to a feature called Mothers Who Think. MWT launched a whole new way of writing about motherhood, offering a welcome alternative to slick and predictable parenting magazines. As for premium content, I wish you didn’t have to go through the home-page ad to get to Salon’s articles, but it’s well worth the few seconds delay.

What of Slate, then? It’s all cleverness, no real sincerity and not enough real reporting, relying a little too much instead on that tired old staple, commentary. And while there’s nothing wrong with wise-guy writing that blithely disses President Bush, Paul Wolfowitz and the like, it’s not compelling in comparison to the prospect of learning fresh new information. As for Slate’s propensity for explaining things, let’s just say that if I needed more background information I’d go to Wikipedia. Finally, some of Slate’s stuff is supposed to be clever but it doesn’t work for me. Case in point, the multiple choice quiz on Jose Padilla, headlined “Padillapalooza”. This kind of goofball format would work on, say, Scooter Libby, but not on a life-and-death matter. Bottom line: Not funny. Of course, Slate is known for playing around with creative formats. One that I especially like is when they have one person write a letter and another responds. And on that note….

Sincerely,

Amy


Hi Amy,

It is indeed hard to resist comparing two rivals. It’s been happening recently in media circles up here in Canada, where our two biggest newspapers, The Toronto Star and The Globe and Mail have both debuted redesigns in the last month. The early winner, in my opinion, is The Star—ironic since it looks a lot like the old Globe.

But we’re here to talk about Slate and Salon and I’m supposed to defend the former and slay the latter. Before we get to that, let me just point out that I think both websites are at times entertaining, insightful, well-written, frustrating, and most of all, innovative, or at least, good at stealing all the best ideas from other places and using them for their own purposes.

Slate, though, is the better online magazine—and not for the classic journalistic reasons you’ve pegged your Salon case on. You’re right in pointing out that Slate doesn’t do much original reporting, but I don’t think that’s ever been a part of their mission. Breaking stories is a job for the folks at the New York Times, Washington Post, big-time print magazines like The New Yorker and all those citizen journalist types on the web. Slate‘s goal is different: help people make sense of the overload of information dumped on us everyday—a very important task in our media-saturated societies. To equate Slate’s organized, witty, and smart explanatory journalism to Wikipedia is akin to equating a classic novel with the Coles Notes version. You lose the soul.

As you mentioned, Slate’s become known for playing around with creative formats and here I think they shine much brighter than Salon. From David Plotz’s wonderful Blogging the Bible feature to the delightful TV and Book Clubs to the What’s in Other Magazines and Today’s Papers round-ups, Slate has made itself into a one-stop shopping destination for media consumers. Combine these with the untouchable layout (it’s almost shocking that their model hasn’t been adapted by every newspaper and magazine on the continent) and flawless display writing (today’s cover story: “The Great American Beer Crisis”—come on!), and you’ve got one of hell of a magazine.

I don’t have much to attack Salon with. The layout isn’t as nice to look at or intuitive to use. There’s not as much content. No Jack Shafer. No Christopher Hitchens (or is that a good thing?) But I like it for the most part—that is, whenever I stick with it. I think you’ve totally underplayed that whole premium content/front page ad thing. It’s an awful online model and more often than not, discourages me from bothering with the magazine at all.


Peace,

Marco

—Amy Depaul and Marco Ursi

 
Bookmark and Share

Comments

The words ‘freelancer’ and ‘Salon’ in the same sentence still raise suspicion in the minds of those who remember the Thomas White dustup.  Slate is more likely to challenge its readers than Salon, which panders to them.

Comment by Mark Richard from Columbus, Ohio — May 31, 2007 @ 12:03 pm

I agree with Mark.  Slate is a much better magazine, doing a broader range of both writing and thinking.  Salon has become too blog-like and US-centric as well.

Comment by Steve from New York — May 31, 2007 @ 12:32 pm

I’ve read both regularly for years (I subscribe to Premium Salon) and think that Slate is mostly better written and more original (the Explainer is fabulous; wikipedia can’t touch it) but Salon has features that bring me back every day - including Andrew Leonard’s fabulous “How the World Works”; Ask the Pilot; Kauffman’s sports stuff; and the comics (although WayLay isn’t what it once was).

Comment by DW Brooks — May 31, 2007 @ 1:29 pm

I think Slate does a much better job of anticipating reader’s questions and then answering them in an original way. I agree, Salon panders—especially politically.

And it’s sort of ancillary to the fundamental differences between the two, but Salon’s music coverage has been beefed up nicely.  Slate has great writers (Jody Rosen), but they cover music so sporadically.  Overall, edge to Slate.

Comment by Ronald from Boston — May 31, 2007 @ 1:57 pm

Count me in for Slate.  Salon’s sense of outrage?  Sure, great, fine.  I see it as an extension of the breathlessness with which their examine most everything - race, sex, teenagers “hooked” on caffeinated drinks.  They’re also aligned with every other upper-middle-class liberal view around, and it gets tiresome (speaking as an upper-middle-class liberal).  “Pandering” is exactly the word.  Despite having some great writers (King Kaufman is the only sportswriter I’m inclined to read), I don’t feel any draw.  The advertising is much more tolerable than it used to be, but it was so intolerable two years back I ended my habit of checking the site.

Slate may not have that wide a range of writers or subjects either, but at least they’ve got some reliable gadflies (Kaus, Hitchens) to at least make me examine my views.  Their generally more temperate style is more readable.  And I wouldn’t trade Dahlia Lithwick and Emily Bazelon for any legal writers.  I do really miss Tim Noah and William Saletan, the reasons I originally started reading Slate, who have mostly disappeared into minor features - not to mention Mike Kinsley.  All in all, though, Slate is the better of the two.

Comment by J from Michigan — May 31, 2007 @ 4:01 pm

Why at this late date even compare the two, especially in this kind of lazy impressionistic way? It is great that both have survived and given employment to many, many good writers, a lot of whom are now at high paying print magazines. I read them both, love some writers, hate others, are eh about many… Both have good critics. I hate Slate’s too-cool attitude but sometimes Salon’s knee jerks too much in the other direction…

Comment by Steve Din — May 31, 2007 @ 6:32 pm

When I thought about the question, I immediately thought about the sponsored ad. So I like Slate better, no matter which has the better content.

Comment by Eddie from Leimert Park — June 1, 2007 @ 12:24 pm

I prefer Salon because of its original reporting. I hate Slate’s navigation and wonder why a website that was begun by Microsoft is so buggy and slow to load at times. When you want to comment, you have to go back and try again more often than not because of multiple redirects.

The main reason though is the snarkiness and overly ironic tone at Slate. They seem to think they are too cool to be serious about very serious topics such as the Padillapalooza. Moreover, when they discuss policy, they focus more on the politics not the policy. You won’t be that well-informed if Slate is your main source of info.

Comment by Kija — June 1, 2007 @ 9:17 pm

— PopMatters sponsor —

If you read Salon you will be told exactly what you want to hear. I suppose that’s comforting to some.

Comment by Esther — June 2, 2007 @ 8:35 am

Add a comment

Please enter your name and a valid email address. Your email address will not be displayed. It is required only to prevent comment spam.

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?