Salon
Salon has a far left bias in its daily reviews of domestic politics and provocative cultural topics. The American Journalism Review described Salon's political views as provocative and liberal, while many readers have noticed a uniquely progressive, Northern California style in the website’s content. Accordingly, the AllSides Bias Rating™ for Salon is far left, a rating we have a medium confidence level in. A majority of nearly 3500 AllSides community members agreed with this rating, while 29 of those who disagreed gave Salon an average bias rating of 70. This score falls in the middle of the lean left bias, but it is not enough evidence to change Salon's rating.
More on Salon
In addition to politically liberal commentary, Salon covers a variety of topics including reviews about books, films and music; articles about modern life, including relationships and sexuality; and reviews about technology. Founded in 1995 by David Talbot, it was created by former San Francisco Examiner staff members who departed the newspaper looking to explore digital journalism. The website has maintained its progressive style over the years, producing stories in the format of a “smart tabloid” in order to reach popular audiences, as Talbot said in 2008. Although it has historically been unprofitable, Salon offers both free and premium content, with about 15 new articles posted per day.
Sources:
Wikipedia: Salon
Headline Roundup
Type of Content
Approved Story
1
Format
Region
News Item Format
Standard
Never let it be said that the Trump administration can't walk and chew gum at the same time. Even as the president's minions work overtime to botch every single aspect of the federal response to the COVID-19 crisis and prepare to cover up the number of cases and the number of deaths in order to make his "numbers" look good, they still manage to find the time to complete the purge of Trump critics within the government and destroy all mechanisms for accountability.
Trump's forces have pretty much rendered the Congress impotent, going so far as to argue before the Supreme Court last week that not only should a sitting president be immune from any and all investigation and prosecution, he's also immune from congressional oversight. It's well within the realm of possibility that the right-wing majority on the court will see it their way — at least when it comes to Republican presidents. (I wouldn't expect them to feel bound by their own precedents when it applies to Democrats. )
On Friday night, the administration announced the fourth firing in six weeks of an inspector general, State Department IG Steve Linick, in what the Washington Post has dubbed a "slow-motion Friday Night Massacre."
Back on April 3, Trump fired intelligence community IG Michael Atkinson, in retaliation for his having done his job by passing on a whistleblower's complaint to Congress about the president's phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. That seems like another era of history now, but it did indeed lead to Trump's impeachment. A week later he removed acting Defense Department Inspector General Glenn Fine, who had been tasked with overseeing the $2 trillion pandemic relief fund. He was replaced with a Trump loyalist.