Both the New York Times and Salon have articles with details on the apparent demise of these two. The Times observes that along with Salon, these sites “were seen by many as embodying the democratic promise of the Internet, which would unleash a diversity of voices on the monotone media landscape”–a landscape the Times certainly populates, I might add. Salon’s Tech & Business columnist laments Suck’s & Feed’s passing, but observes that the passage provides a counterargument to the dot-com-boom revisionist thinking that says focusing on a niche, rather than trying to be #1, is a superior method. But, then, Flakmagazine’s James Norton adds Salon to the content-site deathwatch.
So, I’m not the only one with an opinion on this?
Leave a Reply