Origin Story (Salon)

(NOTE: This past week brought the disturbing news that David Talbot had suffered a stroke, his second. As a tribute, I’m republishing this remembrance.)

David Talbot is best-known as the founder of Salon, which from a journalistic perspective was one of the more important startups to emerge in the early days of the web.

Talbot had been an editor at Mother Jones and the San Francisco Examiner, where he ran the Sunday magazine, but he had a bigger dream -- to start his own publication.

I'd talked this over with him for some years until finally in 1995 he got his chance. Richard Gingras, then an executive at Apple, staked him with a small pot of money and with that, David gave notice at the Examiner.

There wasn't very much funding at all but Talbot somehow convinced three colleagues -- editors Gary Kamiya and Andrew Ross and designer Mignon Khargie -- to give up their steady jobs and join him in his quest.

The group was rounded out by publisher David Zweig, bringing the staff to five and they settled pro-bono into an architect's office down on the waterfront.

At Talbot's invitation, I joined them too, not on the creative side but on the business side. That made sense because I was just coming off a stint as EVP of KQED, the large public broadcasting company in Northern California, and I knew my way around the Bay Area fundraising world.

While the other journalists, none of whom had a clue about business, developed an editorial plan, I helped Zweig establish a business plan, which proved to be a daunting task. First and foremost, the team needed much more money, so I set about meeting with potential investors in San Francisco bars with a Mac laptop furnished by Gingras. It was loaded with a prototype of the magazine.

What made all of this complicated is that Salon would be on the web, at that time a nascent, unstable platform that as yet was devoid of any real journalism. 

While I was able to convince a few investors to kick in $25,000 apiece, much more significantly I told an old friend and former writing partner, New York Times tech reporter John Markoff, what Talbot & crew were up to. Like any good journalist, he saw that this might make a good story.

Meanwhile, we were able to find two major investors -- investment banker Bill Hambrecht and Adobe co-founder John Warnock. They both agreed to get involved, more because they shared the magazine's progressive political vision than any hope they would recoup their multi-million dollar investments. 

But Markoff’s article was the key. When the magazine launched, it proved to be an instant sensation, and over the years through many ups and downs it has persisted, though it has never to my knowledge actually turned a profit.

But profits aside, the reason Salon mattered is it was one of the first sites featuring original content, proving that traditional journalism could compete with the free-for-all that characterized the early Web. (Microsoft launched a similar site called Slate the following year. It persists too.)

After Salon launched, I left to join HotWired and return to my first and true love -- journalism. But then I rejoined Salon a few years later as Investigative Editor/Managing Editor and Washington bureau chief and finally SVP during its heyday of the Clinton impeachment drama.

Over the 25 years since Salon launched, several people have mistakenly referred to me as one of the founders of Salon. I was more like what in basketball is known as the Sixth Man during that launch period in the fall of 1995. 

And I did play a key role.

A whole slew of other talented people joined Salon’s team early on. But recently as I was cleaning out my apartment I discovered a relic from the earliest days of Salon. It was what must have been one of its first phone directories, a plain piece of paper with the staff's phone extensions in the architect's office down by the Bay.

On it were eight names -- one Gary, one Andrew, one Mignon and three Davids -- Talbot, Zweig and Weir. The other two were Laura Miller and Cynthia Joyce.

Oh, and there was also a printer called Gingras, but that is another story...

[NOTE: As with all such memories, these are simply mine and others may recall the events portrayed differently. According to my operating philosophy, this is the natural way of things. Our memory is as unique as our DNA.]

[End Note: Get better David!]

HEADLINES:

• What to know about bump stocks and the Supreme Court ruling striking down a ban on the gun accessory (AP)

• Stanford’s top disinformation research group collapses under pressure (WP)

• Donald Trump criticized US aid to Ukraine and suggested raising tariffs to replace the US income tax on a visit to Capitol Hill where he also called Milwaukee - the city hosting his party's presidential convention - "horrible."(Reuters)

• DNC launching billboards hitting Trump over Milwaukee comments (Axios)

• Suppressing emotional responses to cope with racial discrimination could lead to depression and anxiety in Black children over time, a new study found. (WP)

• Kate Middleton says she is 'making progress' amid chemotherapy for cancer diagnosis (ABC)

• Justice Clarence Thomas took more undisclosed trips paid for by a megadonor (AP)

• Men’s brains change when they become dads (WP)

• Why a Gaza Cease-Fire Is So Elusive (NYT)

• Putin lays out his terms for ceasefire in Ukraine (BBC)

• Senior US diplomat warns of risks of accidental conflict sparked by China's moves (Reuters)

• Are plants intelligent? It depends on the definition (Cornell)

• This photo got 3rd in an AI art contest—then its human photographer came forward (ArsTechnica)

• What Apple's OpenAI deal means for Google (Yahoo)

• No Matter How You Package It, Apple Intelligence Is AI (Wired)

• 12 Jobs ChatGPT Will Soon Replace, According To ChatGPT (Forbes)

• First Came ‘Spam.’ Now, With A.I., We’ve Got ‘Slop’ (NYT)

• Elon Musk Debuts New Self-Parenting Child (The Onion)

 

Who Will Win?

It’s a bit early for this but the polling site 538 projects by the narrowest of margins that Joe Biden will beat Donald Trumpin the 2024 presidential election.

This projection is based on 1,000 simulations of how the election could go. Biden wins in 504 of the simulations, Trump in 491. In five of the test runs, there is no Electoral College winner, so the decision would be made in the House of Representatives.

The House by a narrow margin is controlled Republicans.

According to the site, its forecast “is based on a combination of polls and campaign ‘fundamentals,’ such as economic conditions, state partisanship and incumbency. It’s not meant to ‘call’ a winner, but rather to give you a sense of how likely each candidate is to win.”

All polls indicate Biden will win the popular vote by a comfortable margin, but as the U.S. is not a direct democracy, that is basically irrelevant. And the election is still five months away, but it’s not too soon to be hopeful.

Read: Who Is Favored To Win The 2024 Presidential Election? (538)

HEADLINES:

• Republicans enter the upside down: Unity with Trump (Politico)

• Senate Republicans block legislation to codify IVF access (The Hill)

• ‘Brazen corruption’: Donald Trump is selling policies for a second term to the highest bidders (Independent)

• A new class of influencers supportive of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump are helping shape the immigration debate. They portray migrants in the country illegally as dangerous and part of a plan to grow the ranks of Democratic voters. (Reuters)

• Trump has long said federal bureaucracy needs to be "brought to heel" and has a chilling plan to bend it to his will if he wins in November. “In the hands of a president who is not committed to democratic norms, taking control of the bureaucracy is a tried and tested way to work toward authoritarian government," one expert said. [HuffPost]

• Wholesale prices unexpectedly fell 0.2% in May (CNBC)

• US and Ukraine sign 10-year security agreement at G7 summit (Guardian)

• G7 leaders agree to lend Ukraine billions backed by Russia’s frozen assets. Here’s how it will work (AP)

• Russia financial system shaken after U.S. imposes new sanctions (WP)

• A Palestinian Professor Spoke Out Against the Gaza War. Israel Detained Her. (NYT)

• ‘Dyson spheres’ were theorized as a way to detect alien life. Scientists say they’ve found potential evidence (CNN)

• Drone footage shows just how close sharks get to unaware swimmers, part of a plan to stop attacks (WP)

• A New Book About Plant Intelligence Highlights the Messiness of Scientific Change (New Yorker)

• An account of Jesus as a boy is decoded from an ancient papyrus scrap (WP)

• Here’s how Apple’s AI model tries to keep your data private (Verge)

• How Big Tech Is Killing Innovation (NYT)

• New Florida Bill Allows Guns To Start Businesses (The Onion)

 

What Does Data Think?

In most of the media companies that employed me in the early years of the web, one of my main responsibilities was supervising the metrics department.

In case that sounds like a big deal, this was well before the days of data scientists and multi-variable analysis; in most cases the metrics department in media companies consisted of a lone individual.

And that person often felt like no one was listening to them.

After all, much more significant than the actual numbers he or she gathered was figuring out how to interpret that data. In and of themselves, of course, the numbers were neutral. But the people we worked with had a wide variety of opinions over what those numbers actually meant.

Was our audience growing? Which types of content were most successful? What was success in this type of media environment anyway? Which metric mattered most?

Occasionally, especially in the early years, we would publish a story that “broke the servers,” i.e., generated more traffic that our system could handle. There was little debate on those occasions over whether we had a winner, particularly because additional things tended to happen to support the data.

Things like attention from other media outlets, tons of email from subscribers and a boost to whatever financial metric we were tracking.

But these experiences caused me to eventually draw a few conclusions about people in general:

• Most of us are not very good at math.

• Most of us see what we want to see in the numbers and don’t see what we don’t want to see.

• Most of us don’t change our behavior or opinions even when the numbers say we should.

In the end, I wondered, what did the data itself think about all of this human frailty? That is one reason I have long been curious about the coming of generative artificial intelligence — we may be about to find out the answer to that question.

(This is originally from last July.)

HEADLINES:

• Supreme Court maintains access to abortion pill in unanimous decision (CNN)

• Hunter Biden's options for appeal after gun conviction (CBS)

• Hunter Biden conviction shatters Trump’s persecution narrative (CNN)

• Hunter Biden guilty verdict could take personal toll on the president (WP)

• About half of US adults approve of Trump's conviction, but views of him remain stable (AP)

• House Republicans prepare to hold Attorney General Garland in contempt (NPR)

• Jack Smith Handed Boost in Bid To Prosecute Trump (Newsweek)

• Trump on Trial: truth or consequences (Guardian)

• Why scientists fear a second Trump term, and what they are doing about it (WP)

• Steve Bannon asks appeals court to allow him to remain out of prison while he fights contempt of Congress conviction (NBC)

• Hundreds of police have sexually abused kids. How do they avoid prison time? (WP)

• As a Gaza truce plan hangs in the balance, the UN says both Israel and Hamas committed war crimes. (Reuters)

• Gaza ceasefire plan in balance as US says Hamas proposed 'changes' (BBC)

• What is behind the rise of the far right in Europe? (Al Jazeera)

• Temperatures are hitting record highs in parts of north and central China this week while a severe drought in the east is also threatening crops, as countries across Asia brace themselves for another summer of extreme weather. (Reuters)

• Canada’s Big Worry: A US Civil War (Politico Mag)

• Russian warships conduct drills en route to Cuba with new hypersonic missiles on board (AP)

• Judge Strikes Down Florida’s Ban on Transgender Care for Minors (NYT)

• Reported birth of rare white buffalo calf in Yellowstone park fulfills Lakota prophecy (AP)

• X is about to start hiding all likes (Verge)

• Elon Musk drops lawsuit against ChatGPT-maker OpenAI without explanation (AP)

• Researchers use large language models to help robots navigate (MIT)

• The war for AI talent is heating up (Economist)

• Wall Street expects Apple's AI updates to power a strong upgrade cycle (CNBC)

• The next evolution in humanoid robots (IntEng)

• All the ways Apple’s AI could change how you use your iPhone (WP)

• 15-Year-Old Finds Summer Job As BetterHelp Therapist (The Onion)

 

The Sixth Chick

On one otherwise unremarkable afternoon, I watched what appeared to be a lone quail pick its way down a hillside, turning first this way, then that, gradually charting a zig-zag course west to east, north to south across the field.

As I was wattching, five chicks came into view following their mother. They too turned from west to east, north to south, replicating her course almost perfectly.

I’m sure there were slight deviations in their paths but I didn’t notice anything dramatic. They were a team — one big one leading the way, five little ones following and, I presume, learning in the progress.

As they gradually snaked their way out of view, something new caught my eye. It was a sixth chick, far behind, lurching wildly from further up the hill. This one didn’t replicate the path of its mother and siblings.

Instead, somewhat out of step, it forged its own rather erratic path as it raced to catch up with the clutch.

That sixth chick, always somewhat out of step. We’ve probably all known one.

HEADLINES:

• Years of scrutiny for a president’s son culminate in guilty verdict (CNN)

• Blinken says fate of ceasefire plan down to Hamas (BBC)

• Wild elephants may have names that other elephants use to call them (NPR)

• Fulton judge say he’ll continue work on Trump Georgia case during Willis appeal (AJC)

• In Secret Recordings, Alito Endorses Nation of ‘Godliness.’ Roberts Talks of Pluralism. (NYT)

• Gas prices are on the decline across the US (AP)

• Alito and his wife are captured in audio recordings talking about abortion leak, flag controversy (Politico)

• Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City, was processed in the criminal case over the effort to overturn Trump’s Arizona 2020 election defeat, the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office said. The sheriff's office also released a mug shot. [AP]

• The US military has a plan to turn the Taiwan Strait into an 'unmanned hellscape' if China invades, top admiral says (Business Insider)

• Southern Baptists are poised to ban churches with women pastors (AP)

• When the C.I.A. Messes Up (New Yorker)

• The Post at a crossroads: Existential questions in a dire season for news (WP)

• The iPhone Is Now an AI Trojan Horse (Atlantic)

• U.S. economy growing significantly faster than expected, World Bank says (WP)

• Argentina Woos AI Giants as World Steps Up Regulations (Pymnts)

• The quest to build robots that look and behave like humans (Economist)

• Apple’s AI Evolution Is Not Quite a Revolution (WSJ)

• Apple’s artificial intelligence makeover is not really about you (WP)

• Man Returns To Work After Vacation With Fresh, Reenergized Hatred For Job (The Onion)

Secrets & Lies

One of the questions journalists frequently get asked is how we get people to tell us things, especially the things it would be in their best interest not to disclose. The simplest answer is: “We ask.”

Most people will want to talk to you when you tell them you are doing a story, even if they shouldn’t. And asking simple, open-ended questions is by far the easiest way to gather information.

Remember this: Most people most of the time don’t want to lie. 

But sometimes they do.

So how do you tell when someone is lying? Well, one way is to ask questions about minor details of the person’s life. And if you’ve done your homework you already know the answers to those types of questions. 

Add them into the mix, because they should be easy for your subject to answer as long as he or she is being honest. But often people will lie about these little things because they’re working so hard to cover up big things.

One lie leads to another, so to speak.

All of this requires a certain amount of discipline on the journalist’s part. So you have to avoid falling into the trap of lying yourself. When I conduct journalism ethics seminars, one issue that often comes up is whether it is okay to misrepresent yourself in order to get a story.

I don’t think that it is okay. Working undercover, some journalists have uncovered huge scandals, but in my opinion that happens at the sacrifice of a greater goal. We are supposed to be about the truth — not just getting big stories — so if we get information by misrepresenting ourselves we are subverting one of the core values that legitimize our work.

It’s not that we have to be squeaky-clean in everything do as journalists — far from it — but if your story eventually ends up in court you have to be able to look the judge and jury in the eye and say you believe the information you gathered is accurate and that you gathered it in legitimate ways.

(“Reporter’s Notebook” is an occasional series based on my lectures over many years at Stanford, U-C Berkeley and San Francisco State.)

HEADLINES:

• U.N. Security Council passes Gaza cease-fire proposal drafted by the U.S. (NBC)

• Hunter Biden Gun Case Goes to Jury as Prosecutors Wrap Up Closing Arguments (NYT)

• The Terrorism Warning Lights Are Blinking Red Again (Foreign Affairs)

• The far-right’s election gains rattle EU’s traditional powers (AP)

• ‘A Slow-Rolling Nightmare’: Inside the Revolt at the Wall Street Journal (National Review)

• Inside Israel’s hostage rescue: Secret plans and a deadly ‘wall of fire’ (WP)

• Justice Alito Caught on Tape Discussing How Battle for America ‘Can’t Be Compromised’ (Rolling Stone)

• Japan's Latest Plan To Reverse Declining Birthrate (Newsweek)

• Microplastics are infiltrating our organs, threatening our health (WP)

• OpenAI hires new CFO and product chief, announces Apple deal to integrate ChatGPT (CNBC)

• As OpenAI Employees Warn of AI Apocalypse, Apple Is Poised to Embrace ChatGPT (CNET)

• Apple jumps into the AI arms race with OpenAI deal (WP)

• Study Finds More Americans Taking On Third Job To Help Keep CEOs Afloat (The Onion)

 

Origin Story: CIR

When we opened the first office of the of the Center for Investigative Reporting in downtown Oakland in 1977, it was in a corner suite on the sixth floor of the old Broadway Building in what was at that time a sleepy downtown.

We had a nameplate on the door and one of our first potential customers was a woman who wanted us to follow her husband, because she was sure he must be having an affair.

We explained we were not that kind of agency exactly and referred her to some private eyes that we knew. But our little company did have a certain Sam Spade-like air to it, as we figured out how to establish something then without precedent — a non-profit that would do its own original investigative stories and then sell them to a wide variety of outlets.

Lowell Bergman and I brought some unfinished projects with us from Rolling Stone, and Dan Noyes had additional ideas and contacts. Soon we had a few magazines and television networks interested in our work and we were up and running.

But finding the funds to sustain our operation was a constant struggle and we often found ourselves cutting our salaries in half for a while until the next grant or contract came through.

Two years later we had one of our first big hits when we shared the National Magazine Award for a story package that was called the “Corporate Crime of the Century” in Mother Jones.

The main story in this package also became the centerpiece of our book Circle of Poison in 1981.

By that point, CIR was here to stay, and 47 years later it is still producing stories. In fact, earlier this year it merged with Mother Jones so they now represent double trouble!

Dance of the Narratives

Back in the print era, writers worked with photographers at newspapers and magazines to produce stories. Some editors seemed to expect the photographers to simply illustrate the stories told by the writers. But the better ones devised a different process with a richer outcome.

They saw that the visual and editorial narratives worked together more like interlocking vines, snaking in and out to produce a product much greater than the sum of its parts.

When we got the mixture right, there was an interactive chain that moved, much like how musical notes flow with words in a song.

And that’s true for good story-telling in any form. 

The process becomes more complex when you move from the world of print into multimedia — radio, TV, and the movies. Now, the actual or mediated voices and images of people enter the space between you and your audience.

It’s easy to overdo it. Then the story becomes preachy or melodramatic like in a soap opera. Good editors know that in most cases, less is more., and just to let the sounds and the pictures tell the story. 

Silences become magnified, which is useful in any medium.

In the end, in any good story, what the teller leaves out, the listener will fill in.