TV Guide is published weekly; everyone knows they can get their television listings in their local newspaper or on their newspaper's website. Television and movie reviews are all over the web and the nightly news is available on three national networks, two all news networks, and MSNBC and Fox--whichever suits your fancy.
Do we really need, then, Open Salon to devote its front pages to videos from the news? A day late when they have been reported everywhere already? Do we really need link after link after link to You Tube videos, when everyone know how to find them and their friends send them the funny ones, anyway?
If one must write about what everyone else is writing about, then what should be on the front page is the best of the best, with the videos as a secondary part of the story--rather than the whole thing.
Do we need short rehashes of television shows week after week after week? (the exception being Mad Men where the writer really parses the show and gives readers new things to think about)?
Is Open Salon supposed to be a clutter of nonsense already available in so many other places?
Or is it a place for writing ON the news, ABOUT the news and how it affects peoples' lives? A place to write about issues that affect us and often lots of other people? OUR takes on what is happening in the world and why?
The best and most interesting writing with the most interesting viewpoints should be featured on the cover, not the same old same old over again. What should be on offer is what can be found nowhere else.
Open Salon's front page would be much better served by acting as a sort of universal Op Ed page with a mix of the personal and the political. As it stands now, it's rehash after rehash replete with dumb and redundant videos, that, as far as I can see, bring very few readers to the site. What DOES bring them in the wonderful stories, clever satires, excellent commentary on our world today. Those are too often buried.
Isn't it time for a change?
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Floyd Elliot
Dennis Knight
aging hippie chick
moveovermommy
Will Someone Feed The Cat?
Just Cathy
Salon.com
Comments
Serenity Prayers for all!
Amen.
However, I do get really tired of watching TV on the front page. The interviews or thought provoking articles that arise from a show or a character are interesting, but rehashing shows I've seen or haven't doesn't really do it for me. I also TIVO some of the shows and the headline or the description blow the show for me before I've had a chance to catch up.
VR: Is there a virus? Can we get shots????
Emma: I hope so. There is so much good stuff that should be read and disappears before even we regular OSers can get to it.
But then, I've seen headlines on the front page with misspellings. If the editors can't catch those obvious errors, how can I expect them to know good writing?
Note to Editors: The people who actually PRODUCE THE PRODUCT are not bothering with the cover which is supposed to DISPLAY THE PRODUCT. That should tell you something.
Thumbed.
And Bill: Yes, yes, yes
It's consistent, the people writing these work very hard to present the best recaps, and I look forward to it. Why shouldn't it be on the cover? These people work very hard on these posts.
If TV guide was anything like these blogs, well, it would be relevant, I suppose.
My answer is Yes.
Thank You
rated.
You got the virus. Remember to cover your computer screen before coughing.
1. You're assuming they care. Maybe they do. But I wouldn't know
2. What Bill said.
3. While I agree with you in general (and have not had a virus shot so I could turn surly at any moment. I love that word, surly. . .)
Therere exceptions---one being Paul Levinson, who is not only an established writer; but also brings something to the TV review party that is much, much more than the plot summaries or videos I believe you're talking about.
I read him because I marked him as a favorite a long time ago.
I'm not sure if he's on the front page or not---I only go there when I need a Kim Kardashian update.
I echo what others have written about Silkstone's great analysis of Man Men. It's value-added writing about the show that stands on its own.
We scream, yell, scratch our heads and then, still find ourselves looking at the same damn problem again and again a few days, weeks or months later. The very fact that many people seem to agree that the cover is static (among other things) falls on deaf eyes. I hear you girl, loud and clear. I just don't see change in our future.... so I stop looking for it to happen. That won;t stop me from writing about it on occasion or supporting others who do, but it all remains the same. L'shanah tovah. xoxo
Thank you. I couldn't agree more. Especially since the rehashing of TV shows is typically both "old hat" and gets the same old tired stuff on the cover by the same old writers over and over. And I think the same of the perpetual less than original rehashing of national news items (although occasionally more "localized" or obscure news captures my interest).
By the way, here's a terrific weekly review of MadMen that my wife turned me onto:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/tgoodman/detail?blogid=24&entry_id=47516
Excellent post with which I heartily concur.
(PS - I must disagree Chicago guy about Levinson. I find his reviews of shows, especially 24, to be breathy and vacuous. The fact that he is a published author on other topics isn't germane to his promos of the latest TV sensations. Perhaps he waxes more substantively on other shows, I couldn't say. But in general, I agree with Lisa here, we don't need to redo TV Guide.)
Preach it, sister. In a sort of enlightened acceptance or stoic fashion, of course.
I don't mind tv reviews actually. Sometimes, I love to chat about television shows, if they are good. I'm not above watching tv. I like Fringe, which is on the cover, although I do wonder why the move to make Jackson's character the main cheese this season. I love Battlestar Galactica and reviewed it faithfully, though I must admit it rarely made the cover. I simply like talking about entertainment sometimes with other people who watch it.
That said, I must agree with you about the BREAKING NEWS stuff. It's already days old by the time we read it. I think sometimes there's so much stuff to read on OS that the very tired editors just pick about 30 people or so and read their stuff first. If it's good, up it goes. And then everything else that is topical, that goes up. And that sums it up.
I may of course be wrong. My sympathies are with them on wading through all the writing. I imagine that they don't get paid enough.
I guess the bottom line is that this is a place for writers, and some of them are really good -exceptional - with their coverage.
My big beef is people like David Sirota getting a front page with his whining and he NEVER ANSWERS HIS COMMENTS EVER. He actually whined about getting really bad, sad comments, in an essay posted here, and then of course never bothered to read his comments.
I don't need a TV Guide, but I appreciate some smart tv guidance.
Note to ed's and slumming on OS writers - there are no rules, but the courtesy of a reply would be so appreciated. We also like it when you step away from the mirror and read stuff you didn't write.
Thanks Lisa SW for your hospitality!
The writers here who have built their readership without the nod of the editors have really accomplished something. As I said on Mike's blog, "Your work stands on it's own." xox
Thank you for saying this.
I don't even have a TV!
"The Open Salon home page functions like a real-time magazine cover. We spotlight the best content, but you can also see what other members are reading, rating and commenting on."
So I don't care -- if the best content happens to be a TV review, that's fine, put it on the cover.
But often the cover posts seem to be selected not according to quality but according to some other criteria that have nothing to do with quality. For example, the cover almost always has a GLBT post, and sometimes two or three of them. If it turns out that those posts really are high-quality, the best of the best, I don't have a problem with that. But that's usually not the case.
For example, today the cover features the post "George Takei And Brad Altman to be First Gay Couple on The Newlywed Game." The post contains fewer than 150 words between three paragraphs. There's no analysis, no real argument, no particular insight expressed. The writing is adequate but not particularly entertaining. This masterpiece has been on the cover all day and so far has garnered only five ratings and two comments -- which is not surprising, because there's very little to rate or comment on.
So why is this on the cover? As far as I can tell, it is simply because it's "gay" and Open Salon editors favor gay-themed posts over other posts. But why? When did featuring GLBT topics -- regardless of quality -- become part of the purpose of the cover?
I would ask the same question about TV reviews. Why was it decided to feature so many TV reviews on the cover? What happened to "spotlighting the best content?"
I think it's great that people are starting to get fed up with how the cover is managed. The question is whether the dissatisfaction will reach a critical mass sufficient to have an influence on the powers that be. It's rare that the editors actually engage in conversations about OS. Sometimes I think that OS members need to go on strike -- stop writing, rating, and commenting -- until the editors are willing to have a conversation.
When I first got on here I was curious about the cover and I was told by the editors that it was quality and universal appeal and a catchy title. Now, we have agreed on the lack of quality, we agree on the lack of universal appeal (as many of the cover pieces do not get nearly the number of readers as so many other posts) and the catchy title thing works sometimes and not others. Often the editors change titles to ones that I find are leass catchy. I agree with most of you that this is all very mystifying and I am quite sure that I will get no response. A strike would be nice....but with so many "writers" in the world, they could probably fill our spots in a sec ond:)
What I wonder is: WHAT is the rationale? WHAT are they trying to do there? When they say that "we make the news?" they are wrong if so many writers are writing "newsworthy" stuff that doesn't get covers or EPs. The News that does go the cover is, we agree, old and rehased news. The plethora of televison posts COULD, for instance, go under a separate heading at the bottom where people could click if they want..... There are lots of ways to up the quality and reward really good writers or those who are trying to take on a complex subject.....etc.
So, I ranted and you responded but I have no idealism that things will change.
I think they should, though. This was not a rant about why I am not on the cover more often. It is a constructive criticsm about the quality of the covers and what draws people from the outside into us, which, I thought, was the whole point of OS. Not just to be a cozy community of us who WILL read each other's stuff. But to hook the public at large into coming to the site and discovering something wonderful. Else, why the ads? WE don't click on them:)
Peace and happy new year.
Lead the way. Your army awaits!
I'm not much of a tv watcher, so those stories rarely appeal to me, but then neither do so many others.
Good rant.
I don't really care what anyone posts, (sort of), but I do care when the Editors pick stuff that is repetitive and more akin to gossip than anything creative or provocative. And it really frustrates me when something that is controversial but poorly written gets an EP. We've got too many talented, well written writers for them to be doing that. I've got no problem with some people consistently getting the EP - they've earned it. I've read many who started out with no hits or little coverage, but the kept at it and now they've arrived. I've also seen some of those regulars get knocked off from their positions. Such is life.
I stopped reading the cover almost entirely. I start on my page and look at what's newly posted by others. From there, I click on comments and other new posts on other sites. Sort of a 6 degrees way of navigating. When I do go to the front page, it's because someone has mentioned it. Didn't even know there was a comix weekend thing going on until someone complained about it.
Yes, if we get to rewrite and republish the boring, insipid writeups of the shows-- except where appropriate of course.