The Washington Independent
This post is kind of boring. But that also means no animals were murdered in the course of writing it, which means you can consume it without any guilt or trepidation.
A few weeks ago I made one of those predictions that are so obviously true as to be borderline witless, namely that we’re in the midst of the rise of the partisan media, a point made far more persuasively by David Frum and others. I’ll just add that this development is likely to have highlights as well as lowlights, and that The Washington Independent, which just launched today, will likely be one of the highlights. Sponsored by the Center for Independent Media, the site is part of a flourishing ecosystem of nonprofits, for-profits, think tanks, media outlets, and nontraditional pressure groups that’s grown out of the Howard Dean campaign and the broader (self-styled) progressive movement. As a webdesign fetishist, I was struck by the ease of navigation. I’d do things a little differently, to be sure (EveryBlock more closely reflects my aesthetic preferences), but it is a clean, fairly attractive look that captures the spirit of a lean blog-newspaper hybrid.
The Independent‘s staff is impressive, and landing Spencer Ackerman was a coup. As much as I disagree with Josh Marshall — I really, really disagree with him about a lot — I’m one of the people who thinks he deserves a Pulitzer. Now his innovative approach is finding converts — the Independent is stocked with veterans of traditional journalism. And talented alumni of Marshall’s School of Distributed Journalism are going to have a lasting impact on the media business.
One small quibble: two of the maiden opinion pieces, by Bruce Schulman and Michael Kazin, were disappointing, particularly Kazin’s (because I expected more from Kazin, a genuinely brilliant dude). Apart from being dry and not terribly provocative or surprising, they were both longer than I’d expect from an outfit that hopes to do something distinctly webby. That’s not to say webby needs to be short — note the dramatic success of Glenn Greenwald, who is very careful and very long-winded. Rather, it means the traditional, awkward op-ed length needn’t fence you in. Overall, though, I think this is a tremendously promising effort and I look forward to reading more.
Many moons ago, Patrick Ruffini predicted that the right’s failure to create comparable agenda-sitting institutions would prove costly. That will become very clear in the general election.
Reihan— Well, thanks for the adjective— but what disappointed you about my piece? The assignment was to see if Huck deserved the Bryan comparison — what else would you have said?
Michael
— Michael Kazin · Jan 29, 03:18 PM · #
Michael:
Well, if you want an honest answer I’ll give you one — I was expecting something really thoughtful about the evangelical style, and the way the legacy of prairie populism (a phenomenon of the “left”) has shaped politics on the right in ways that are good and bad. Perhaps that’s a tall order, but I think it could’ve been done at a shortish length — some stylized part of an answer, at least. Instead it was a fairly boilerplate recitation of Huckabee’s flaws (which I emphatically agree are flaws). Also, the op-ed hangs on a fairly thin premise, namely that “some journalists” have made a trite comparison between two historical figures who have very, very little in common.
Now, most opinion journalists hang more on thinner premises, and I’m no exception. In fact, a disappointing effort from you would likely be an excellent effort from me because I am a callow ignoramus. My criticism extends entirely from the fact that I hold your work in high esteem, disagreements aside. I apply the same sliding scale to most of my (rare) criticisms.
It could be that the assignment itself was misconceived. Keep in mind that my post was a brief, glancing evaluation of what strikes me as a very promising journalistic enterprise.
Respectfully,
Reihan
— Reihan Salam · Jan 30, 02:28 AM · #
Sorry, me again.
On the separate question of what I would have said, I think it would go track some broad analogy concerning the shape of the economy in WJB’s day, then-prevailing attitudes about what economic self-rule means and what it ought to look like, etc., and the very different state of things today. I really like Jackson Lears’ book on antimodernism, and I wonder about how the way we think about consumption (passive vs. active) conditions how we think about government. There’s something (trivial) to say about how new modes of consumption (user-generated content, etc.) suggest a retreat from passivity. Who knows. My main preoccupation is this idea that families and neighborhoods have lost control of their lives in important ways. Some blame the market economy. Other blame the administrative state. I guess my sympathies are slightly more with people who blame a certain type of administrative state. But there are a lot of subtleties here, and a lot of lacunae in the tried-and-true worldviews.
This is why, incidentally, I am a muddled writer. I contradict myself all the time and my ideas only rarely cohere. I never said you had set an easy task for yourself!
— Reihan Salam · Jan 30, 02:35 AM · #