A CALL For Liberals To ABANDON Huffington

[Segami]

:smoke: :smoke: :smoke:

Adbusters: The left built Huffington, and we can tear it down to



" The purchase of the Huffington Post by AOL left many of the progressive writers and readers that made the site into a powerhouse looking for a new home.


Adbusters magazine set out to unite those disaffected former supporters of Arianna Huffington's flagship site by suggesting they use social media to promote alternatives.


"Socialite Arianna Huffington built a blog-empire on the backs of thousands of citizen journalists," a post at Adbusters begins. "She exploited our idealism and let us labor under the illusion that the Huffington Post was different, independent and leftist. Now she’s cashed in and three thousand indie bloggers find themselves working for a megacorp."


But the Huffington Post is not Arianna’s to sell. It is ours: the lefty writers and readers, environmentalism activists and anti-corporate organizers who flooded the site with 25 million visits a month. So we’re going to take it back.


We’ll stop going to her site. And we’ll stop blogging for her too. Then we’ll give birth to an alternative to AOL’s HuffPo by using the #huffpuff hash tag to tell the world about our favorite counter-culture websites and indie blogs.


"We are the ones who built the Huffington Post. And now we will be the ones who will huff & puff it down," Adbusters concluded.


A quick search of the social network Twitter indicated that the hashtag #huffpuff was already being used to propose alternatives.

"My favorite @HuffPost alternative is @therealnews. Join the #huffpuff boycott!" Ben Lucyk suggested.

"Following #HuffPuff? Try @therealnews | @truthout | @buzzflash | @factcheckdotorg | @CatoInstitute | @Truthdig | @AlterNet," James Young tweeted.

Al Giordano, publisher of Narco News, pledged to no longer provide content to the Huffington Post.

"As long as I live and breathe, this online newspaper - Narco News and its pages - will never be sold to a profit-making venture," he wrote. "Somebody has to set a higher standard around this water cooler called the Internet."


cont'


http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/bloggers-readers-band-quit-huffington-post/


.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

1. K & R

[Roci]

81. Considering

my own options on this, too.

The Blog itself does belong to AH. It is her box of crackers.
Most of what is on it belongs to individual authors.

In the past three days, I have authored three very well reasoned critiques of this sell-out. None of them have been posted. It seems there is a sensitivity there that is a bit less than warranted. You can talk politics on HuffPo, but if you start asking cogent questions about how it's run and the even handed application of policy, you are suddenly less than relevant.

My concerns are that we hear nothing but how "great" this will be. Fine and dandy, but that doesn't keep me up nights. AOL does. My concern is basic: What happens if it all goes south? It is a question the management isn't willing to countenance, apparently.

So everything is sunshine, light, and roses.

And if anyone, up to and including Huffington herself really believes that, it is because of ego or just plain naivete. She is far to intelligent to be naive. That leaves only one answer.

I have been increasingly put off by some of the "gimmickry" introduced on the site itself. Even with the ability to "opt out" of some of it, there is still a tendency to create two or more "classes" of people who post on the blog. If you would gave a forum to the voice of the "common man" you don't make some "less common" than others, nor do you give some the ability to arbitrarily restrict the opinions of anyone but themselves.

So the odds are that I will be looking for a new political "home" soon enough. In all fairness, I must say that as much as I enjoy DU, that home will probably not be here. The "turnover" here is far too fast, and to be blunt, the constant pressure to donate in order to use certain features is simply as off putting as some of the "Features" at Huff Po.

But it's a big web, and there are lots of spots for me. I had a politcal life decades before the day I discovered HuffPo, and that life will go on the day after I quit the blog.
In the middle of all the "zeros" being sliced up and tossed around in this deal, we seem to have lost sight of one thing I keep uppermost in my mind.

When a blog, or a person becomes more important than the voices that sound inside it, discourse becomes noise, and it is time once again to seek a place of reason and quiet, where the music of all voices can be heard. That is real freedom of speech.

Roci

[Mosaic]

174. Great comment!

When a blog, or a person becomes more important than the voices that sound inside it, discourse becomes noise, and it is time once again to seek a place of reason and quiet, where the music of all voices can be heard. That is real freedom of speech.

Roci

[border_town]

157. After reading the articel

Arianna has lost any credibility. On one had she writes a book about Third World America and then she contributes to this Third World problem by selling out to AOL and laying people off. For what? For her money in her pocket. Fraud? Greedy? Those are some words you could use to describe her actions.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

187. I don't get it either. I don't begrudge anyone making a shit ton of money especially

if it's something they actually worked for and didn't just inherit it. But this is a ridiculous amount of money. And what for? AOL is a bullshit right wing company. It has been for as long as I can remember.

[JuniperLea]

2. Late to the party, but good to see this in writting...

I would have forgotten all about HuffPo by now if I didn't see links here and at other Progressive sites.

[liberalmike27]

78. I understand Arianna still has editorial control

And as yet I'm not sure how this'll work--will they just put links on AOL that go to Huff, will there only be certain links, will they exclude anything liberal? Or will it just stay Huffpo, and AOL will own it.

In any case, just switch to Alternet, or Truthout, or any number of others. Like another said, the great thing about the Internet is if one site gets con-corrupted, then there are plenty of others to switch to.

Hell, the Internet was where all the liberals went when the fairness directive was repealed, and all liberal news was abandoned from 1988-2005, and very little still exists. We live in a world where facts have the liberal bias, and aren't often seen.

[tavalon]

115. Yeah, except for links from here, I stopped going there some time ago

[Octafish]

3. It'll be another My Space.

AOL. Ha ha ha.

[rurallib]

44. I am old enough to remember what AOL did to CNN

Ted Turner had a good liberal newser there. AOL stepped in, bought it, turned it drastically right and essentially disappeared it.
I expect HuffPo to do the same.

[Octafish]

46. Precisely.

And We the People are all the poorer for it.

There's a reason why the Press is the only business named in the Constitution:

"Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed — and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment — the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution — not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants" — but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion."

-- President John F. Kennedy, a former newsman.

[Alameda]

66. I'm old enough to remember what it did to CompuServe

RUINED it!

[axollot]

88. I've got one worse. I had to help tech CompuServe into the ground, lost

all of my stock options because of the price drop. Major burns there, the whole place was on fire then. Lots of friends within the place that were going to India and knew they were working themselves OUT OF A JOB. (did all the mergers with AOL for years before Time Warner merger killed everyone's stocks. Pop went the bubble. Teched Aol 1.0 thru 11.0 LMAO. Still, their AIM is decent, not too bloat wear comparatively - for them.)
Then they closed all centers but Dulles. Bastards put a lot of people out of a job.

I was one of them.

cheers
sandy

[defendandprotect]

107. True -- and was surprised to hear Thom Hartmann yesterday saying ...

he wasn't concerned about it -- AOL ... "an American company" -- etal ???

Hartmann even wondered whether it might be a broader opportunity for the left --

a bigger arena!!

Thought his comments very odd -- !

[LTR]

112. I can see his point

I'm guessing AOL ain't gonna mess with a good thing. And HuffPo gets massive traffic. They even outdraw Drudge!

Then again, AOL did basically destroy Netscape, and pretty much did the same thing with Winamp.

[defendandprotect]

113. We'll see .... but not much to recommend AOL -- on the right --

[BobTheSubgenius]

144. I have a big piece of the company that ended up....

...with the tarball with the last updates to what turned out to be the final revision of Netscape. AOL never even bothered to release it. In fact, they never even bothered to take delivery. Interested? I'll take that box of Triscuits someone was talking about.

What a cluster**** THAT was. They took a historic marque and dragged it down to a market share of less than 1%. I only hope history repeats itself.

[frazzled]

4. What? And miss finding out which airlines have the hottest flight attendants?

And whether Chris and Gwyneth Are Doomed?

We'd also be uninformed about "Woman Dies After Buttocks Injection."

Whatever would we do.

[WilliamPitt]

5. Rarely read it anyway

The site always ran poorly for me.

[truebrit71]

55. Yup, me too...it was very laggy...

...

[Major Hogwash]

76. It was a dark and stormy night . . .

The windows were plasterd over with bird poop.
I gotta move those pigeons one of these days, I thought to myself as I looked out through the globs of white.

[MiddleFingerMom]

106. If ever I've been tempted to plagiarize -- what you just posted has me SORELY tempted!!!

.
.
.
:applause:
.
.
.

[snappyturtle]

74. Me too! Always too slow and the formatting looks like a flea market. imho nt

[TomClash]

119. I always create an excuse not to read it

On Tuesday I couldn't read it because it was Truck Day.

[Javaman]

6. Already did. Once I saw they inked that deal with AOL, I was done. nt

[PBS Poll-435]

7. Huffington Post

:rofl:


A bandwidth bloated disaster. I honestly can not understand how it was sold for anything more than a box of Triscuits.

[TK421]

118. I just paid $1.50 for a box of Garden Herb Triscuits...and I got a wedge of brie

come on over! I also have wine and beer!!

[rhett o rick]

179. Do you have a cheap red? I'm in, but I prefer reg Triscuits and Mahon cheese, which I will gladly

bring.

[TK421]

181. Blackstone Merlot...$13 a bottle and quite good!

:D

[rhett o rick]

183. Yes I like Blackstone Merlot. Do I get my own bottle? nm

[TK421]

184. We can get you one...no problem! more the merrier

:D





























































bring extra cheese

[EC]

8. Has anyone presented the opinion that just maybe

AOLers have to be exposed to a better news source than they've been reading? Maybe Huffington Post can get some of the more reasonable AOLers to see the light.

[PBS Poll-435]

9. Do they have access to sources other that the AOL news page?

Like http://anything ?

[EC]

16. Well now they do.

AOL has been so right wing that it's dead to most people - only idiots still go there...so I'm hoping that maybe the idiots will be exposed to something more left.

As far as huffington goes, I hardly ever read it...it's just mostly gossip anymore.

[Alcibiades]

43. I just went there

Boy, it's ugly.

http://www.aol.com/

Their home page looks like it's from 1997.

[nxylas]

45. It looks like a parked domain

You know, when you go to a dead website and see a page of semi-relevant links.

[alp227]

185. 1997? LOL here's what it really looked like in '97

http://web.archive.org/web/19970421165310/http://www.aol.com/

[rhett o rick]

90. I think you miss the point that it will be controlled by a major corporation.

That's like saying that if Keith Olberman went to work for Fox, that the Foxheads would get exposed to some left programing. Wrong.

[clayton72]

93. Olberman on Fox? Might be a good match

Olberman is famous for being a pain in the ass to management, just like most of the big names on Fox news. He might get along better with the managment there with his temperment. It's just their political allignment that might be a bit off. Details, details. :)

[rhett o rick]

176. He isnt on there because they would control what he says. Kinda like MSNBC. The reason

more progressives arent on MSM is because they cant be controlled to give the conservative bs.

[ReggieVeggie]

94. isn't MSNBC a major corporation? and/or controlled by?

That makes Keith, Rachel, Ed, Lawrence, and Cenk ALL suspect

[rhett o rick]

130. In a word, yes. They are there at the pleasure of NBC/Comcast. Except Keith, if you hadnt heard,

he left. Most likely because the big corporation was trying to influence his show.

[HEyHEY]

149. Don't even bother

I've decided 80 per cent of duers are blowhard fuckwits. This thread proves it.

[fatbuckel]

173. What`s a fuckwit?

[friendly_iconoclast]

10. I think liberals and progressives should still visit HuffPo....

....as long as they use AOL dialup to do it!

[PBS Poll-435]

11. ...

:rofl:

[patricia92243]

12. It seems like a way for Progressives to get their message into the mainstream - maybe I'm missing

something.

[HuckleB]

31. The Huffington Post‘s War on Medical Science: A Brief History

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=473

[sufrommich]

35. That is the problem with promoting "bloggers" to the level

of actual reporters on Huffington (or anywhere else for that matter).There is very little demand for factual references to back up their claims. One of the flaws of internet news.

[HuckleB]

39. Well, the main problem with that is that there is no one minding the store.

If HuffPo had editors who demanded better, things could have been different. Many science blogs are starting to get more and more traffic, largely because they're bloggers are scientists who fully reference their posts.

[sufrommich]

42. Minding the store is impossible on the internet. The people

who are moving to science blogs for science news are those who respect science,those that don't will stick with their woo.Human nature is such that people will believe what they want to believe and look for sources to back them up,the internet is a perfect example of this.

[Danchi]

139. David Gorski & Science Based Medicine/Huffington Post

David Gorski is the de facto heir to Quackbusters Stephen
Barrett: 
http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/06/david-gorskis-financial-pharma-ties-what-he-didnt-tell-you.html
Quackbusters: Who are these so-called
"Quackbusters"?...
http://quackpotwatch.org/WisconsinWar/who_are_these_so.htm
Anti-alternative "Quackbusters" Have Giant Court
Losses on Two Continents:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/284400,
Quackbustwatch: http://quackpotwatch.org/
antialternative_quackbusters_have_giant.html?cat=68
Orac Unmasked - David H. Gorski, M.D., Ph.D.
(Updated)http://www.patsullivan.com/blog/2005/09/orac_unmasked_a.html
DAVID GORSKI, M.D.: THE WORLDWIDE WANKER OF "WOO" 
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/orac.html
Dr. David Gorski and His Merry Band of Idiots Don’t Like Full
Page Ads: 
http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/02/dr-david-gorski-and-his-merry-band-of-idiots-dont-like-full-page-ads.htm
Point here: I have been a reader of HP since it began and it
is very definitely a pro-vaccine, pro mainstream medicine
supporter.  Occasionally an article providing an alternative
perspective but nothing very deep. Because HP has basically
gone the way of the Doe Doe, I rarely go to the site.
The obsession with Sarah Palin is nauseating. 

[HEyHEY]

150. Nope, you're just not part of an immature teenaged anxt type mob mentality

Be happy it means you actually have missed nothing.

[still_one]

13. I have removed all my links to the site. Why should I put money into the pocket of a right winger?

[brooklynite]

14. I don't understand the issue here...

Bloggers have been posting on the HP website -- for free -- since it started. The site has always been a commercial operation, and if writers expected payment, they should have worked that out at the start, or taken their services elsewhere.

[DRex]

75. It's not a problem to work for free....

its just that if you are working for free you're more likely to care who you're working for.

When it was an independent blogging community it was ok, but no one wants to work for free to line the pockets of AOL and have them exercise editorial control over their work.

[brooklynite]

125. As far as I can see...

Arianna Huffington will be exercising the Editorial control, and unless you have evidence to the contrary, I have no reason to believe she's going to change the policies she used at HP.

[DRex]

175. Well, that remains to be seen...

...but it's an issue of perception for many people right now. For legitimate reasons they are wary of media conglomeration, which this is certainly an example of, simply one more outlet being pulled in under the umbrella of the established media. That usually results in a change in the editorial tone, but even if it doesn't, there's still the issue that people want an independant outlet, not another arm of the corporate superstructure.

[Kweli4Real]

98. I don't know much about blogging, but ...

I would imagine, by way of analogy, that these bloggers are akin to small (or maybe not so small) organic farmers that regularly bring their crops to the local food Co-op ... Because of their organic product, the Co-op grows wildly popular ... Then, because the Co-op is wildly popular, the Co-op decides to sell-out to a large supermarket chain.

I'm certain that such a move would leave a bad taste in the organic farmers' mouth.

[brooklynite]

126. But that's the issue...

Huffington Post was NEVER the "organic co-op" of political blogging. It was a political news site that was founded by someone who made a living as a political pundit, and who sold ad space on the page. If writers and readers saw it as more than that, that was their choice, but it wasn't any less commercial because of their interpretation.

[peace13]

166. On that same line, soldiers get paid so they don't mind if we kill them.

I think I know you.

[tyne]

15. Yes...

abandon HP and let a Murdoch crone head AOL. Sounds great.

[Ricepaper]

17. What's with the rightwingers buying leftie media like HuffPo or MSNBC?

Seems like coordinated action to me.

[MinneapolisMatt]

18. it is.

To silence us.

[SpiralHawk]

40. "All your media are belong to us. Sneer." - RepubliCorp, Inc.

eom

[femrap]

59. AOL paid

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too much....just like the Time Warner fiasco. AOL is stupid. And for Arianna to say that her site wasn't LEFT, is just a load of crap. I guess she had a price in mind and she sold out.

[defendandprotect]

105. Any liberal commentary is a threat to the rw myths and lies ....

it's like a pebble hitting a mirror -- it shatters it --

poof! -- myths, lies, propaganda -- shattered --

Keep tossin' those pebbbles!!

[Taverner]

50. Ex-actly

Pretty soon all that will be left for us is Pacifica Radio. And even I think they verge on the loonie side pretty often.

[immoderate]

56. Pacifica has always been a home for woo.

I first encountered Clive Baxter there, the guy who put lie detectors on plants. This was on WBAI in NYC. Their news director at the time had a day job as an astrologer. And Gary Null did a daily health show. He promoted exercise and diet, but also things like coffee enemas and chelation therapy.

Some of the shows had a Pagan theme. And there was a new agey interest in crystals and music that didn't resolve.

OTH, there were skeptics. I first heard James Randi's investigative results on BAI. And the original core of Bob Fass, Steve Post, and Larry Josephson were free thinkers, as I remember.

--imm

[Taverner]

58. True

KPFA out here has some loonies too. I remember once listening to some nut 'channeling' an ancient spirit.

[Alameda]

67. Big problems there too....or didn't you notice?

[JNelson6563]

19. I saw her for what she is long ago.

Surprised so many here didn't see it also. She played many. I left her long ago, in fact was never really with her. Didn't trust her. And now millions of others don't either.

She always has and always will pimp herself out to where she can make the most $.

Julie

[PBS Poll-435]

20. Zee Prada Don't Buy Itself.

nt

[femrap]

61. Joe Bageant

of 'Deer Hunting w/ Jesus' didn't like/trust her either. But he hates most rich people....as do I. Most have no souls.

[DeSwiss]

77. +1000

:thumbsup:

[relayerbob]

110. Yep

[Dappleganger]

21. HuffPo is taken far too seriously...

as is Arianna Huffington.

[cleanhippie]

22. STRONGLY AGREE!

[ensho]

23. good

nt

[grahamhgreen]

24. Does DU have a hash tag?

[PBS Poll-435]

25. No, but many here smoke it

:P

[xxqqqzme]

80. Yea, bay-bee

:thumbsup:

[Chimichurri]

32. #huffpuff

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/bloggers-readers-band-quit-huffington-post/

[Hutzpa]

26. I had this feeling from way back then

that Huff post was going to be a sellout and sure enough it leaves up to my expectation.

I signed up and then deleted my account because I knew that they were just a front.

Just look at Ariana's connection, nuff said.

It is all about juxtaposing for some of these people.

[CrossChris]

27. K & R

Still scratching my head over this merger.

[niyad]

37. welcome to DU

[CrossChris]

38. Thanks!

:)

[Spyderama]

28. Paradigm Shift

Arianna has always been a sellout millionaire. HP has not been a liberal site for a long time now. Read Paradigm Shift: The Progressive Left Strikes Back!

[disillusioned73]

29. Once I found DU, my Huff visits declined.....

very quickly.... thank DU - looks like I made the right choice.

[TuxedoKat]

133. Me too

I rarely went there after I discovered DU.

[alp227]

186. funny thing is that DU frequently links to HP especially in the breaking news section

and HP publishes DU faves like Cenk Uygur

[HuckleB]

30. Huffington Post had already abandoned true liberalism when it abandoned science.

The pseudo-science and fantasy that it published as "science" killed all reason for HuffPo's existence years ago. If liberals don't defend science, who will?

The Huffington Post‘s War on Medical Science: A Brief History
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=473

[tomp]

168. science is not independent of the ruling powers...

....or the social and economic forces of any given era. the best example i know of this is the rise of bio-psychiatry. read that history and tell me about science. but now it is virtually dogma that NOT to treat with medicine is tantamount to malpractice.

i have no problem with REAL science. capitalist science on the other hand is giving us GMO foods.

give me science that is independent of industry and politics (both of which are pervasive at our great universities), and then we can talk.

[SidDithers]

33. Done long ago...

too much anti-vax, pseudo-scientific woo is uncritically posted over there.

Sid

[HuckleB]

34. Pseudoscience In Medical News at the Huffington Post

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=463

[SidDithers]

36. Hive mind, down to the minute...

:hi:

Sid

[underseasurveyor]

41. Since I try and avoid anything AOL like the plague

Leaving huffpo will not be a problem. Unless Arianna has some bigger grander scheme in mind I'll also avoid her like the plague.

[L. Coyote]

47. SUBSTITUTE IDEA: A CALL For Liberals To Take Over the M$M

Nice start, Adrianna!

[leftstreet]

52. +1

and an unRec for the thread

[L. Coyote]

57. I see your UNREC and add my -1

[rhett o rick]

92. Fock the MSM. Why let them profit? nm

[rucky]

48. We'll always be out of the mainstream with this attitude.

What if this buyout exposes our views to millions more people? What if this allows progressives to influence mega media corporations, instead of the other way around?

The site may have transferred ownership, but Arianna is now in charge of ALL AOL content. If she's smart enough to keep doing what she's been doing, this could be a huge step forward in putting progressive thought into the mainstream.

[HuckleB]

53. Giving voice to David Klinghoffer is something liberals want to be associated with...?

http://scienceblogs.com/primatediaries/2010/07/huffington_post_is_afraid_of_c.php

I don't think so.

[alfredo]

54. That's what I was thinking. It would be like Maddow bringing

her show to Fox. If she didn't change her viewpoint, it would be a good thing.

Let's wait and see how HP acts once on the job.

[HEyHEY]

151. Because to DUers, it's all about being a "cool club" and a fashion statement

Not an actual political group trying to make change. Sad. I'm glad all the intelligent comments I've read on this thread are by DUers I've always suspected of being sane.

[closeupready]

172. She doesn't really care that much. So her strong left message will be muted by

her own bosses, likely. Who knows, she may not even have a problem with turning a leaf and switching back to the Republican Party (which she once was, I hope you know).

[rhett o rick]

177. It isnt the attitude that's keeping progressives off MSM. Remember Phil Donahue? nm

[du_da]

49. For those that already abandoned HP

I can see the point of all this. But for those that haven't, I have to ask the question why do so now? Wouldn't it make more sense to wait to see what if anything AOL does? They might actually improve it. If they are doing this from a profit perspective then it is entirely possible if not likely that they would want to maintain the leftist nature of the site possibly even taking efforts to reestablish confidence from progressives toward the site's legitimacy. Otherwise wouldn't they have just built their own site or if they really wanted a conservative site had bought something like Free-Republic which is failing on its own even among those who would seem to be inclined supporters likely because of its really bad design and hostile attitude toward users. Plus FR would have likely jumped at a chance for a pile of money and it all would have been cheaper for AOL.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying we shouldn't be weary of AOL just that when you look at their likely actions in this endeavor then I wouldn't be so quick to jump to the conclusion that they are trying to shut down a liberal source of information. Of course, with AOL it is also entirely possible that they would want that liberal source then due to their incompetence screw the whole thing up anyway.

[stuntcat]

51. never had that much use for them.

NOT to jump on the present bandwagon against them, that ain't my way! I'm just saying.

Now where's the radical newspeople? :)

[Uzybone]

60. only fools still thought highly of HuffPo in the first place

they've been a puff website for at least 2 years now.

[DainBramaged]

62. We've been saying that here for a LONG time

[blondeatlast]

63. I'm in.

:hi:

[Common Sense Party]

64. What's this "Huffington Post" I'm hearing about?

[CLANG]

65. No need to think about it anymore

I've deleted my iGoogle links and my bookmarks.

[loudsue]

68. Cato institute? Are they kidding me?

That rightwing-libertarian group?

[spooky3]

96. same reaction - surprised no one else raised this question

[Dark]

170. Not to mention Koch funded. It's an anti-liberal group posing as

a libertarian thinktank. WTF?

[Generic Other]

69. Hope they come here!!!

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[ermasdaughter]

70. I'm in...

I've been screaming about this Trojan horse for a year!

[TBF]

71. There's a lot to be tearing down, might as well start with this. nt

[harun]

72. Was never onboard to begin with.

[Major Hogwash]

73. Huff poopy.

No more.
No more.
The raven cried I don't post there no more.

[DeSwiss]

79. K&R n/t

[d_b]

82. done

[Politicub]

83. It's positive that many of the Huffington Post voices will be included on AOL

Because now, they're not.

And if you look at TechCrunch, which AOL bought a few months ago, they have been allowed to keep their independence. It's rather fun to read the TechCrunch editors criticize their parent company.

It was a smart move on AOL's part. They offer nothing like the brand of journalism that HuffPo presents.

I'm not ready to join the boycott, because I'm eager to see how AOLHUFFPO develops.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

85. True. Would be nice to see liberal views get more exposure...

Wasn't it nice when KO broke through on television. Now MSNBC has given liberals a broader platform.

Why do you want liberal views to stay underground?

Crazy... :eyes:

[AsahinaKimi]

86. I agree...

When I start seeing RIGHTWING BULL PUCKY on Huffpost, then I will leave.

[Stuckinthebush]

84. Yeah, I wondered about this when I heard

HuffPo bought by AOL? Wow. How crappy. Ariana just parlayed her leftist blog by volunteer journalists into a multimillion dollar sweet deal for herself. How nice for her.

[dadzilla]

87. I was already leaving

To be honest I've had one too many comments removed for no good reason.

[Crowman1979]

89. Already did! Now I flock to Alternet.

[rhett o rick]

91. Dang, my pledge is meaningless because I never liked Huffin Puff before. nm

[Bette Noir]

95. Check this out, from the LA Times:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-rutten-column-huffington-aol-20110209,0,7406565.column

[relayerbob]

111. Classic line

"To grasp the Huffington Post's business model, picture a galley rowed by slaves and commanded by pirates." LOL!!!!

[MissMoxie]

161. thanks, great article.

It helped me see exactly how a share-price-obsessed corporation can harm an internet information site...profitability consideration...

"That's borne out by a memo from AOL Chief Executive Officer Tim Armstrong on where his company's journalism is going. It's fairly chilling reading, ordering the company's editors to evaluate all future stories on the basis of "traffic potential, revenue potential, edit quality and turnaround time." All stories, it stressed, are to be evaluated according to their "profitability consideration." All AOL's journalistic employees will be required to produce "five to 10 stories per day.""

[MindPilot]

97. I still think Arianna is hawt.

And that's what's important to me...

[Blue_In_AK]

99. The only time I ever went to Huffington Post

was when a Mudflats article was linked there.

[Disintermedia8]

100. I love it. "socialite" Arianna H

[krabigirl]

101. AOL wants access to all of that free, user-generated content.

So, it's up to people to stop posting stuff there, and then it will die.

[Electric Monk]

102. Good for them. They're right, the volunteers were NOT Arianna's to sell in the first place.

She, however, is laughing all the way to the bank. AOL bought vapor.

k&r

[SaveAmerica]

103. Do they have to call for that? No brainer the minute I got the news

[Blue-Jay]

104. I almost never read it anyway.

I guess I'll continue not reading it. That'll show 'em.

[EFerrari]

137. It takes so long to load, it's not worth it.

I didn't know so many people didn't care for it very much, too.

[Codeine]

108. Abandoned it a long time ago.

Woowoo bullshit is the dominant paradigm over there.

[relayerbob]

109. My only surprise ...

is how long it took for people to figure out that AH is no more or less of a ratings seeking cash-grabber than those clowns at Fox, CNN and MSNBC. Create controversy => make more ca$h for $elf. Simple equation. Ditto Kos, by the way, and he won't be far behind, mark my words.

[HuckleB]

114. Is Kos pushing pseudo-science BS?

:shrug:

[relayerbob]

182. No, but he'll sell it out anyway

[Ikonoklast]

116. "Dahlink, why you are so bitter?"

"It's alvays been about the money vith me, Dahlink....alvays."


Never trusted her, never liked her, just a money-grubbing opportunist that fooled lots of people.

[Doremus]

117. Already DONE! Thank you!

[lonestarnot]

120. Never went there anyway.

[bluerum]

121. Don't think so. Thanks for asking though. eom.

[BrightKnight]

122. She has editorial control and I see the glass as half full.

I don't trust AOL but they need her more than she needs them. What good can come from boycotting it?

[alp227]

123. I don't read Huffington Post regularly but have read articles linked from elsewhere

I despise them for facilitating alt-medicine quacks and other advocates of pseudoscience, but some of my favorite authors and pundits like Cenk Uygur, Bill Maher, etc. publish there at times. And I do not plan on reading the Post regularly when AOL begins running the joint.

[sellitman]

124. We all watched MSNBC

That's owned by the most Conservative company in the world.

That was ok and Huff Post isn't

Bullcrap.

When they change the content then and only then will I leave.

You people really need to focus on what's important not build problems before they even arrive.

[peace13]

167. When they change the content?

Just monitor the top story for ten days and you will see that they don't have to change to have an agenda.

[TheDebbieDee]

127. Huffington Post gave my computers viruses, anyway!

Fark is a much better site anyway, despite the fact that nearly half of the membership crawl to the site from conservative cesspools.

[Taverner]

128. It's 'Adbusters: The left built Huffington, and we can tear it down too' not 'to'

Why do I obsess? I was trained a journalist.

[onehandle]

129. But I like boobs and celebrity trash news.

Well, boobs at least.

[JI7]

131. abandoned them a long time ago because I'm liberal and they aren't

[pengillian101]

132. K&R n/t

[peacetalksforall]

134. I rarely went to Huff Post because of lingering resentment of her Republican

persona during the Clinton years. Her humanity was absent. She was a pimp and shill for Republicans. I stated it a few times then shut up because I thought if everyone loved her so much she may have converted.

Wasn't AOL a member of the group of communication companies who agreed to supply spying data to the Pointdexter project?

It will be easy for me to not support the new company. However, I'm willing to switch if I'm wrong. I'm open to being educated if what I learn doesn't set off credibility sirens.

[matt819]

135. I've been an HP for a long time

Went there for all the obvious reasons. But, quite apart from the "sell-out," the site has long since lost its cache as a home for liberals, progressives, or even middle of the road dems. Comments have been taken over by RW trolls. And the fatuous entertainment news and "new age" issues are pathetic. 99 times out of a 100, when they show an image of a "celebrity" with the headline "Divorced" or "Expecting" or "Drunk Again," I have no idea who that person is. The top 10, 15, 18, etc. lists are inane and clearly compiled by unpaid interns or contributors with far too much time on their hands. And what's with the obsession with eateries and home prices in Los Angeles?

So I'm off to check out other sites. By the way, what's with the reference to the Cato Institute in the OP. Aren't they libertarians?

[peacetalksforall]

136. Owned by the Koch Bros.

[DonCoquixote]

138. K and R as much as possible

Ariana sold progressives and others out, turning what was supposed to be a movement into cold hard cash.

[HEyHEY]

140. That slave shop adbusters? Worst employer ever. Aside from that.......

Why don't we wait and see what huffington post becomes before boycotting it?

[VPStoltz]

141. I left long ago when every post started being held back for "approval."

I had thought it was a site established for the free exchange of ideas.
More progressive wussiness - let's not offend the Reich.

[wial]

142. I wonder if Olbermann/Gore saw this coming

and decided to seize/save the day?

The fact they don't have an online newspaper to speak of to go with their TV station makes me think not, but maybe that's coming.

[yankeepants]

143. That was done by this liberal a while ago

I had found the flavor of Huffpo to be so about Ms. Huffington's personal agenda that even cruising for the good fluff stuff was an exercise in aggravation.

[pam4water]

145. I left it when they started censoring my posts.

[earth mom]

146. Glad to see this! HP was DEAD to me the day I read the rethugs from AOL bought it.

Fuck HP AND AOL! :thumbsdown:

p.s. DU needs a middle finder smilie.

[era veteran]

147. I thought it was People magazine anyway

[earth mom]

148. I liked HP because they were honest about Obama being a corporatist AND they were honest about

the oil spill in the gulf. They also covered the autism epidemic honestly and fairly too.

Sure, the entertainment section borders on TMZ, but that didn't bother me much-I liked the overall variety.

But now that AOL has it's vile and nasty rethuglican hands on the place-they can shove it where the sun don't shine! :grr:

[PatrynXX]

152. Don't think killing the messenger is gonna help

at the moment your just panicking over nothing


tell me what happens in a year then yall can do it.

[HEyHEY]

154. No, absolutely not, we must all freak out and act like scared lizards

Suggesting a reasoned approach? Good god, man, are you mad?!

[NuclearDem]

153. I'm still going to read it

I'm also still watching MSNBC.

I mean, I GUESS everytime management changes at liberal media outlets, we could cut and run...until they all sink into the ground. But hey, if that happens, we'll at least have a legit reason to complain about there being no liberal media!

[Paka]

155. Gave up on HufPo a while ago...

rarely check it these days and I won't miss it. :silly:

[creon]

156. RW trolls

RW trolls took over Huffington Post. It is full of dross written by RW 'comedians'. Their junk is succeessful if you answer.

It became a waste of time.

[pam4water]

188. Seem like they manage to take over a lot that is good. How do they do that :(

[Obamanaut]

158. Oh, what to do?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=384487&mesg_id=384487

[PavePusher]

159. Crocodile tears.

Poor, poor, pitiful you...

[MissMoxie]

160. Corporations are taking over everything...

That's my problem with it. AOL is "owned" by shareholders. From what I've seen, when a for-profit corporation is making decisions, they don't make moral or community-conscious decisions, they do what will increase share prices. Ie, when a company announces lay-offs, share prices soar. Its so sad. The company I work for went public, & they slashed 1/3 of the employees, restructured, & doubled my positions' workload, while lowering the pay. What kind of stock-centric choices are going to be made now, at Huffpo? Other than Ms Huff's choice to say now that it never was politically left? Which sort of foreshadows things to come....maybe. We'll see.

[rosesaylavee]

162. Don't read it anymore unless someone links to it...

It's been lost to the left for a few years now.

[MasonJar]

163. I am waiting to see if her editorial content alters.

I heard Arianna speak very recently in Louisville. She is an educated voice for the Liberal point of view. I doubt she will change, as she seems totally and sincerely devoted to having a better world for everyone.

[BigD_95]

164. sorry but

everything I read this is a way to reach more people with our Left views. We need more people reading the truth. Im not 100% on this but it seems like a win.

[Nordmadr]

165. The Huffington Post has increasingly become the equivalent

of Britian's Daily Mail.

Interesting in its way, but not really something I can reliably count on for fact based NEWS.

[samsingh]

169. this shows there is a market for liberal sites

let's start another one

[karynnj]

171. I see no reason to change my opinion at all at this point

HP was always a mixed bag. There were some excellent, well written and fact based articles. There were more that were essentially gossip, but on political goings on rather than celebrities. There were many articles that could later be seen as having been fed to the writer (they are all not journalists) by a politician trying to achieve his own ends.

It also kind of reminded me of the discount stores, where you always knew they would have lots of stuff, sometimes interesting and some gems, but you could not count on them carrying the category of stuff you wanted. They also seemed to lack an editor and any fact checking. (The saving grace is that their culture included comments - not much but something.)

Whether I read will depend on which writers stay and which ones go. The quality always depended just on them.

[creon]

178. I agree

That is my view of HuffPost as well.

I just go take a look once in a while.

[rhett o rick]

180. I always preferred BuzzFlash, CommonDreams and TheNation. And DU of course. nm

[okieinpain]

189. hahahaha. man oh man. the teaparty has nothing on the ultra left.