He can't answer because Salon didn't tell him what to parrot. See how Salon is funded and you'll see that it is nothing more than an organ of partisan Dems:
June 18, 1998
Another Dab of Brylcreme
In dissecting the Ken Starr article in Brill's Content, we did
not have access to the entire magazine. Now that we've seen it, we have to
admit that sometimes it's nice to the media.
There's a two-page puff piece, for example on Salon, the Internet magazine
that back in April trolled Arkansas for a Tarot-reading former girlfriend of a
friend of Starr witness David Hale and ginned up a thin report claiming that
Mr. Hale was being paid off by Richard Mellon Scaife through the
American Spectator magazine. Attorney General Janet Reno remarked at a
press conference that the Salon "charges need to be examined," neatly
catapulting the matter into a government inquiry into a magazine's sources,
the serious press freedom aspects of which have pretty much escaped press
mention.
Brill's Rachel Lehmann-Haupt does mention that "Salon's scoop was short
on proof and has yet to be confirmed elsewhere." So much for press
criticism, and on to Salon's efforts to make money on the Internet. Its
attempts at corporate alliances, we're told, "raise ethical dilemmas." Much
discussion of whether it's ethical having a "buy" button next to book reviews
that clicks you right to an order form from Salon investor Borders. Salon
editor David Talbot promises to maintain his independence, bragging,
"Salon is not owned by a big media conglomerate with tie-ins to TV
networks, studies and amusement parks."
So who does own Salon? According to Brill's Content, it got started with a
$60,000 assist from Apple Computer, plus the Borders money and funding
from two venture capital funds--Adobe Ventures and ASCII Ventures,
adding "Talbot will not discuss the financial details."
Well, a bit of reporting might have revealed that Adobe Ventures is a limited
partnership involving Adobe Systems and the investment house Hambrecht
& Quist. William Hambrecht is former chairman of the venture capital firm
and sits on Adobe's board. According to New Media Week, indeed, the
Hambrecht/Adobe partnership put one to three million in Salon.
Last February, Mr. Hambrecht hosted a big fund-raiser at his home
attended by President Clinton. According to the Landmark Legal
Foundation--a righty group skirmishing with the lefty Salon--from 1991 to
1997 the Hambrecht family gave more than $380,000 exclusively to
Democratic candidates. And Adobe's top officers donated more than
$130,000 to Democrats since 1990.
The press criticism story that might have been written, in short, is:
publication funded by rich liberal William Hambrecht complains that another
publication is funded by rich conservative Richard Scaife. But you don't
learn that kind of thing from press critics proclaiming themselves above the
battle; only from the clash of opinion between combatants such as Salon
and Landmark.
In its Salon story, Brill's Content recounts an anecdote from the April dinner
of the White House Correspondents' Association. At the dinner President
Clinton joked, "How come there's no table for Salon magazine?" At least he
understands who his--few--media friends are. Indeed, a moment later, he
added, "I am not the only one who is anxiously awaiting the release of Steve
Brill's new magazine. I have an advance copy here. See? It's called
Content." We somehow can't find the second half of the anecdote anywhere
in Brill's Content.
interactive.wsj.com |
