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
Image Caption
Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images
Autocurated
0
Last week, the House of Representatives passed the Antisemitism Awareness Act. But American Jews who care about fighting antisemitism should be against it.
HR 6090, the Antisemitism Awareness Act, passed 320–91. Seventy Democrats and 21 Republicans voted against it (including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who noted that she was against antisemitism but wanted to protect her Christian right to say that Jews killed Jesus). The legislation would see the adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism.
There are some who have long opposed codifying this particular definition because it comes with troublesome examples, most of which have to do with Israel. These include things like “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor,” “applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation,” and “drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.” Under this definition, then, Masha Gessen’s New Yorker essay on Holocaust memory and Israeli policy in Gaza would be considered antisemitic under the law. Gessen is a Jewish descendant of Holocaust survivors and victims.