|
|
Camille Paglia's Oct. 28 column, "The dangers of the gay agenda ," set off a tidal wave of negative reaction. Some outraged readers thought Paglia had "lost her mind"; others were outraged that Salon had published her piece; still others requested us to fire her. Check in next week , when we will publish a collection of these responses. On the other hand, David Horowitz's Oct. 26 take on hate-crime legislation caused several letter writers to nod in agreement with Horowitz for the first time. But mostly, this week, a wide variety of people wrote to us about a wide variety of stories -- from Carol Lloyd's thought-provoking piece on the optimism movement in psychology to Daniel Reitz's report on an over-the-top stag party. |
|
In "Praise the Lord and Pass the Remote," author Joyce Millman casts a jaundiced eye on two upstart, Christian television networks. While I agree with some of the author's statements regarding the marriage of Pat Roberston and Rupert Murdoch, the rest was an unnecessary screed against "narrowcasting." In reviewing a network like MTV you don't bash them because they show music-oriented programming. If you don't like the content of a network because it is bad TV, say so. Don't hide your animosity for those who practice the Christian faith behind withering irony and biting sarcasm. -- Chris Cotner
Joyce Millman's piece on PAX TV and the Fox Family Channel snores with uninspired, knee-jerk liberalism: "Money plus Christianity must equal hypocrisy," her skewed logic yawns. But making money and being genuine about faith and family values are not mutually exclusive. And Lowell Paxson's business savvy and ability to leverage "must carry" legislation do not invalidate his Christian faith or moral integrity. Here's the real story: Paxson's a smart guy with enough bank to beam his unhip-but-wholesome agenda to three-quarters of America's television viewers. And that just pisses Millman off. -- Lynn Vincent
|
|
Like some of your writers, I am also appalled with the power we have given the Office of Independant Counsel. The employees of the OIC, none of whom were elected by the people, appear to have more power than Congress or the president. Throughout the whole Washington, D.C., media circus, what worries me most is the ability of the OIC to ruin anyone's life in the pursuit of "truth." Why hasn't there been as much media fixation on the excesses of the OIC? Is it because it's not as steamy as the soft porn that OIC has deemed appropriate to print or Congress to release on the Net? I am not that familiar with the judicial system and the dances that lawyers perform. As a result, I am under the "mistaken" impression that that illegally obtained tapes, possible conflict of interest, wiring your witness, releasing grand jury evidence (particularly prosecutor's side only) and so on would be thrown out in any other court of law. Why the big deal about the president "not being above the law" when at the same time he's not been given the same protection and rights as any other citizen of the United States? The OIC seems to have blanket rights to do anything (however illegal, however damaging to the "innocent" victim) to obtain evidence. I thought that one of the primary reasons our country was founded was to establish personal rights. We seem to have forgotten that lately. -- Gynii Abracosa Gilliam
It is the work of people like Mollie Dickenson and those of Salon Magazine who separate the "men from the boys" when it comes to true investigative reporting. The big broadcasting monopolies and newspaper affiliates should have the guts and sense of honor in journalism that has been represented by Dickenson and Salon Magazine. -- Nancy Taton I just read the article by Mollie about the Starr/Tripp/Jones sting operation. Great reporting. I hope to see more like it. I've always thought the President was "set up." -- Janice Wheeler |
|
I teach Introduction to Film at Towson State University outside of Baltimore. My favorite film critic was Stanley Kauffmann of the New Republic. Now it's Charles Taylor. I recently read his reviews of "Beloved" and "Pleasantville." They were lucid, incisive, and witty. "Pleasantville" began with a clever premise, but had no direction whatsoever. The sophomoric pontificating by all of the major characters at the end was downright embarrassing. The black-and-white/color "metaphor" was pure gimmick and schmaltz. Unfortunately, I should have read Mr. Taylor's review before I read my local newspaper review, which bent over backward in its praise to the tune of "three-and-a-half stars." I could have saved myself $15. -- Arthur Laupus |
|
Last week it was Kosovo, now it is the Mideast peace accords. The Great Liar is loving this. Every day that the Clinton sex scandal is put on the back burner, it is a victory for the White House gangsters. While Arafat and Netanyahu fall under the same charm that causes women to drop to their knees for William Jefferson Clinton, the cowards in the media participate in a grand deception on the American people, and the cowards in our Congress bow down in respect to the unrespectable. Like everything Clinton is associated with, the Mideast peace accords will turn out to be false and deceptive and empty. -- Andrew Levinson
|
|
I have very much enjoyed Ms. Paley's eloquent and beautifully crafted stories, but was much disturbed by her interview in Salon. Disturbed because although she has much to say about truth and honesty, her thoughts on the subject of abortion suggest a person who is at best blind, and at worst, willfully blind to the moral reality underlying that medical procedure. -- John O'Leary |
|
I just read the article on Michael Bérubé and couldn't help but think he probably didn't start talking like he does until he'd achieved tenure. -- Dennis St.Germaine
|
|
R E C E N T L Y+| HATE CRIMES GO BOTH WAYS BY DAVID HOROWITZ
| If you would like to submit a letter to the editor for publication, please e-mail us at salon@salonmagazine.com. Letters sent by fax or "snail mail" are less likely to be accepted. Do not send attachments. Please include your full name and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours, so we can confirm your identity. This information will not be used for any reason other than verification and will not appear on the site. Letters may be edited for clarity and conciseness. Brief letters are more likely to be published. Place the name of the article you are responding to in the subject heading of your e-mail. If you do not wish your letter to be published, please say so in the subject line. For more information on Salon's letters policy, click here. |
Arts & Entertainment | Books | Comics | Life | News | People
Politics | Sex | Tech & Business | Audio
The Free Software Project | The Movie Page
Letters | Columnists | Salon Plus
Copyright © 2000 Salon.com All rights reserved.