Salon Reshuffled

The only thing more perennial than the Salon-death-watch story is the Salon-near-viability story, so your guess is as good as mine what David Talbot's exit as Salon's editor in chief and CEO means for the longterm future of web journalism's ancient past.

Talbot tells The New York Times' David Carr that the site will announce its first profitable quarter tomorrow. His CEO position will be filled by Elizabeth Hambrecht, and his EIC job will go to the formidable Joan Walsh.

Kremlinology: This continues the ascent of both Hambrecht (who is the daughter of major shareholder Bill Hambrecht, Salon's original IPO impresario) and Walsh, who took over from Scott Rosenberg when he left as vice president in November. "Betsy" Hambrecht's steady takeover of key spots in the Salon structure has been seen as evidence that Salon Media Group is now a mere subsidiary of the Hambrecht organization, and it would be callow to imagine there isn't some truth in that view. On the other hand, Walsh has been a quiet but crucial figure in Salon history since the Pleistocene period, and has done some great work over the years, so her succeeding Talbot is a perfectly logical move. Also, Scott Rosenberg (who is obviously still present on the Salon blog) tells me he is just taking time off to write a book (which you can find out about here and here), and I have always considered Rosenberg an honest character.

Talbot's cover story, that he is working on a book about Robert Kennedy, sounds considerably dicier, and it defies logic that, having devoted a decade to the welfare of Salon, he would choose this time, just as the "profit" is coming through, to make his exit. Walsh tells the Times: "I think that when we went to a subscription model, we lost a lot of casual readers… My job is to get people's awareness up and let them know that you can read Salon for free." This may be a tacit admission that its subscription model isn't setting the world on fire, but before you scoff at Salon as an obscure leftwing relic nobody cares about anymore, just remember: The site's Alexa traffic ranking is well ahead of NationalReview.com, Instapundit.com, and (by a factor that makes my flesh creep) Reason.com.

"I want us to be helpful in figuring where the Democrats go next," Walsh says, "but I also want us to be the ones to tell you why America's Top Model is the best show on television." This last bit can only be seen as a classy nod to powerhouse Heather Havrilesky. Whatever it takes to keep them going, I'm always happy to see Salon get another of its many leases on life, and wish Walsh and the new gang the very best of luck.

Comments

[Extended Server Migration]

I'm sure their traffic is greater, but, Cavanaugh, give me 15 minutes, and we can jack your alexa rankings sky-high (particularly now, since so many spyware detectors zap the toolbar.)

If Salon were to take blogads, so you could see all the stats on a rather neutral page... that'd be more interesting.

And congrats to Reason for moving up so quickly in the blogad #s, (though, free markets and all, you can drop the positioning or triple the price... not both.)

[Kevin]

Nothing has made me question the value of free markets more than knowing Salon.com is profitable and Suck.com is no longer with us. Oh, the humanity!

[Russ D]

Has anyone ever wondered if perhaps the name "SALON" might keep people from checking it out? It sounds like a political magazine for hairdressers.

[Umbriel]

I enjoy Salon's movie and non-political book reviews. They're not especially doctrinaire, though any remotely sexual theme has an amusing tendency to set Charles Taylor off on a rant about American prudishness. I find most of the site's content to be pretty excruciating, though. And that's just the headlines...

And one visit a day is enough. I typically visit Reason every few hours for updates of articles and comments.

[Douglas Fletcher]

I think I'll start collecting old Bazooka Joe bubble gum wrappers. It's gotta be more interesting than reading Salon, and who knows, maybe I'll make a profit.

[Matt J]

Salon is great on culture and annoyingly predictable when it comes to politics. King Kaufman and Heather Havrilesky are why it still ranks a spot in my bookmark bar. Many of the liberal angst ridden, is it all right that my daughter wants to be a Disney Princess, articles are unintentionally hilarious. Just for fun I like to cruise TownHall right after Salon for the sake of juxtaposition. It helps to remind me why I can't vote for either party.

The Day Pass model is cool. I wish more subscription sites would adopt it.

[rich]

Phase 1: collect bazooka joe wrappers
Phase 2:
Phase 3: Profit!

[Cridland]

> I'm always happy to see Salon get
> another of its many leases on life...

This reminds me of what Wolcott said about Wendy Shalit (paraphrased: "There's something about that little gal that makes the middle-aged journo wanna slap on some Aqua-velva and start a-mentorin'"). This fantasy of pioneering an innovative publication, which Salon seems to inspire, is every bit as transgressive. It swaps the inane and insipid self-righteousness of the left for infatuation with an apple-cheeked maiden.

Salon hasn't been worth visiting since Paglia gave it up.

[dagny]

I don't know, I've found many of Salon's movie reviews as amusing as their politics -- maybe I'm just reading the wrong one. There was a review of Star Wars Episode II where it was exceedingly clear that the reviewer hadn't seen the original trilogy (yeah, Lucas thinks those clones "for the Republic" are a GREAT idea! So is Anakin's mechanical hand! Great!)

[Tim Cavanaugh]

They're not especially doctrinaire, though any remotely sexual theme has an amusing tendency to set Charles Taylor off on a rant about American prudishness.

I've grown to like Charles Taylor for two reasons: 1) I went to high school with a 300-pound, flamboyantly gay Fred Berry type whose antics were always a scream, and his name was Charles Taylor, so I like to visualize the Salon reviewer as the same guy, bringing his distinct brand of fabulousness to early-morning screenings filled with grumpy critics. 2) He is hilariously incapable of writing a review where he doesn't wave the bloody shirt in a fairly insane way: "When the pogrom begins, it's the producers of Racing Stripes who will have blood on their hands," "Does Lucas not realize how irresponsible it is to bring out a movie like Attack of the Clones in a country still reeling from the Beltway sniper shootings?" "From every frame of Meet the Fockers sounds the refrain, 'To the gas chambers go!'" And so on. Zacharek you can have.

[David T]

http://www.salon.com/letters/editor/2002/11/13/birthday/

"Over two years ago, Forbes intoned that "Salon May Need Buyer to Keep Doors Open." In January 2001, the Boston Globe ominously announced that "Deathwatch Begins for Salon.com." The Globe's funereal prognosticator wrote, "Call it a hunch, but I don't think the online magazine Salon will survive year one of the Clinton Downturn." Business Week next spied "The Wolf at Salon's Door." And Ad Age was certain that "Salon.com Teeters on the Brink." The Salon dying game even crossed the Atlantic, with the BBC solemnly declaring well over a year ago that "Delisting may spell doom for Salon.com ... It is a future that is bleak indeed."

"In fact, our impending non-existence has been predicted in the press for so long, and with such conviction, that we considered adopting "Die another day" as a marketing slogan until the Bond franchise beat us to it."

[David T]

BTW, on the matter of ideology, I would say that the one group that is most underrepresented on the Web (I mean in proportion to its support among the American people) is social conservatives. The Web in general and the blogosphere in particular have had lots of libertarians and conservatarians from the beginning, and in the past two or three years they've gotten plenty of left and center-left types. But even conservative sites that are not quasi-libertarian do not really put much stress on social issues as compared to, say, Iraq.

[Tim Cavanaugh]

Tell that to Derb. For that matter, tell it to gaius marius, crimethink, Eric, and assorted other defenders of Christian values and/or feudal aristocracy, who keep the conversation lively right here at Reason.

[David T]

But even Derb is a heretic on evolution...

[Vicki]

Has anyone ever wondered if perhaps the name "SALON" might keep people from checking it out? It sounds like a political magazine for hairdressers.

Actually... when Salon started several years ago, the domain salon.com was already owned by a hairdressers organization of some kind, and you had to access the magazine at salonmagazine.com (or similar URL). At some point they acquired the rights to salon.com.