The HP is junk "journalism" loaded with the "unpaid bloggers" mentioned, as well as very little of real value. But even worse, their comments sections are overly monitored and censored to the point of absurdity. In my opinion, not worth the electronic ink its printed with.
16
Verizon should throw out the Huffington Post with the other trash.
4
The Huffington Post is not liberal- The Nation and Mother Jones are liberal.
The Huffington Post is full of clickbait celebrity gossip, wire service stuff and a lot of village speak beltway trash.
It cannot go away soon enough.
Put your money on Vice.
The Huffington Post is full of clickbait celebrity gossip, wire service stuff and a lot of village speak beltway trash.
It cannot go away soon enough.
Put your money on Vice.
13
I wonder if Arianna will turn coservative again if she leaves.
1
This article... everyone knows Jimmy Maymann runs HuffPost, not Arianna Huffington. The idea that the site is in limbo bc Arianna hasn't renewed a contract is totally ridiculous.
It's also ridiculous to call the HuffingtonPost one of the great liberal voices in media today. It may have been when it started, but it's little more than a trash online magazine today...
It's also ridiculous to call the HuffingtonPost one of the great liberal voices in media today. It may have been when it started, but it's little more than a trash online magazine today...
14
Only in America wealth speaks a volume other wise how Ms. Huffington was able to make billions of dollars exploiting her unpaid bloggers for years?
The lady meditates and " thrives" getting eight hours of sleep every single night while her unpaid bloggers and meagerly earned employees spend sleepless nights thinking how to sustain in this ruthless atmosphere.
The lady meditates and " thrives" getting eight hours of sleep every single night while her unpaid bloggers and meagerly earned employees spend sleepless nights thinking how to sustain in this ruthless atmosphere.
17
I really dislike the website. I found that I couldn't say what I wanted to say. Typical of Liberals/Communist. I'm not talking anything divisive either. I'm talking definitive answers to wrong thinking. Nothing mean. As long as the moderator agree's with you it's all lovey dovey but as soon as you say something that goes against the hard-line your post doesn't make it up on the board. I moved on and never thought about it again. They gripe about the 1% when in reality they are the 1%.
2
Liberals encourage diversity of thought, but the HuffPo is faux liberal.
Liberals pay their employees a living wage.
Liberals pay their employees a living wage.
9
"Liberals pay their employees a living wage."
Really? Like AirAmerica? As I recall those "liberals" went out of business, twice, stiffing their employees each time.
Really? Like AirAmerica? As I recall those "liberals" went out of business, twice, stiffing their employees each time.
The Huffington Post does for journalism what Oscar Mayer does for fine dining. And if I never read another word by, for, or about Arianna Huffington, I'll be better off.
12
Verizon makes me feel in limbo also, but what choice do I or most of us have in service?
7
Why would we possibly care about a multi-millionaire CEO whose whole business model is based on exploiting the desire of bloggers to be posted on a regular basis. This is just the unpaid-intern scam in a different guise. Like TV shows, websites come and go and are little missed overall; 1000s more stand ready daily to take the place of those fallen by the wayside and the unpaid bloggers will find new homes for their oh-so-important insights gleaned from their parents or their 20-something friends.
8
Ahh, because she is a liberal?
Network of unpaid bloggers, while Arianna makes $50M. How come when politicians complain about CEOS making so much more than their employees, Arianna is given a pass for this?
19
I do not respect a very wealthy woman who does not pay for the content provided by hard-working writers--especially in this tough economy. Does she go to the doctor and not pay for services? Does she go shopping and steal the items she wants? Does she shop at farmers markets and refuse to pay? Writers should be paid. The 'great exposure' line is so irritating to professional writers who need to pay the bills just like everyone else.
I stopped reading the Huffington Post a couple of years ago because of this exploitation of writers. Further, the comment section is extremely censored and the Facebook sign in demand is also too controlling. But Huffington got rich off it, so I guess she wins in the end. She should have demanded more integrity in her product, though.
I stopped reading the Huffington Post a couple of years ago because of this exploitation of writers. Further, the comment section is extremely censored and the Facebook sign in demand is also too controlling. But Huffington got rich off it, so I guess she wins in the end. She should have demanded more integrity in her product, though.
24
People tend to get paid what they are worth. If sitting at your kitchen table in your jammies all day spewing naive random thoughts on your keyboard was hard work, then bloggers would get paid for it. As it is, it seems like there is a more than ample supply of people willing to provide this service for free, and so it goes.
3
I just don't get what it is that bloggers expect out of contributing content for free. I post news items to my FB page for a small few whom I know and hope that it is informative come election time and I suppose comments to here occasionally. Blogging, self-promotion on social media hoping to build business/a brand, and writing reviews of businesses for free have proved to be a major waste and unproductive use of time.
1
Wasn't aware that Huffington was twisting anyone's arm to get them to post content. Ms. Huffington may be making money on the deal by providing a platform and a ton of professionaly created (and paid) content, but exactly who is using who? For the record, except as a regular reader, I have no connection with Huffington.
1
AOL bought Huffpost in 2011 and very soon after fired most of it's own existing US-based editorial staff. From the beginning it looked more like Arianna Huffington's takeover of AOL rather than other way around and that feeling is still there as there is a great deal of division within the company (in the US - not globally) between Huffpost people and AOL-ers from other departments (including content). To think they will now have to deal with Verizon, on top of AOL... it's just hard to imagine.
Another point that I'd like to make is in regards to unpaid bloggers and the false sense that somehow Huffpost is exploiting these people. The nature of a blog is that it is a self-published piece of writing. You can decide to do so on your own independent website - and have your blog post read by a few hundred visitors. Or you can contact a professional (and paid) Huffpost editor, and have them publish it for you (for free) on their homepage and gain an audience of millions. Please note, I've never really been a Huffpost fanboy myself but... that's a pretty sweet deal for any prospective blogger I'd say.
Another point that I'd like to make is in regards to unpaid bloggers and the false sense that somehow Huffpost is exploiting these people. The nature of a blog is that it is a self-published piece of writing. You can decide to do so on your own independent website - and have your blog post read by a few hundred visitors. Or you can contact a professional (and paid) Huffpost editor, and have them publish it for you (for free) on their homepage and gain an audience of millions. Please note, I've never really been a Huffpost fanboy myself but... that's a pretty sweet deal for any prospective blogger I'd say.
1
According to a couple senior people who left HuffPo recently, there are no "ambitious plans". That's why they left. There are no plans, just endless meetings.
3
Her ambitious plans require an AUDIENCE.
3
Once it was sold to aol it went downhill ( "The five best ways to button your shirt" or whatever). When people commenting were allowed to use names like "Minneapolis Mike" (and he was terrific and funny) it was terrific then all of a sudden one had to sign in with Facebook, it lost me.
9
When I learned that HuffPuff doesn't pay its bloggers, I stopped visiting the site. I was stunned that so many writers and journalists willingly enabled Arianna Huffington's overt and shameless exploitation of their intellectual capital.
At the end of the day, what is HuffPuff's true worth? The mentioned valuation is overblown and calculated by greedy people who are talking to members of the same tribe: other greedy people who spent too much time inside glass-covered buildings with recycled air.
At the end of the day, what is HuffPuff's true worth? The mentioned valuation is overblown and calculated by greedy people who are talking to members of the same tribe: other greedy people who spent too much time inside glass-covered buildings with recycled air.
14
Wasn't Huffington Post created by Arianna before she conveniently discovered that a progressive agenda would be more profitable than her then outspoken conservative beliefs? And wasn't the late Andrew Brightbart a co-developer of the concept and the website?
6
@ Timeout77
Bingo. For the first few years she lived here she was very much in the Republican tent and indeed married to a Republican congressman who (or rather she did) spent a fortune running for the senate in CA and was defeated by Feinstein. I vaguely remember attending a Chamber of Commerce event (I think) where she was speaking. Total piffle. She is however no dummy and an expert at re-invention.
Bingo. For the first few years she lived here she was very much in the Republican tent and indeed married to a Republican congressman who (or rather she did) spent a fortune running for the senate in CA and was defeated by Feinstein. I vaguely remember attending a Chamber of Commerce event (I think) where she was speaking. Total piffle. She is however no dummy and an expert at re-invention.
6
Every media outlet whether it be digital or print has a slant of some sort; Fox on the right to MSNBC on the left. What is being lost with news outfits being bought up or consolidated into larger corporate empires is journalistic integrity and independence. Would these media outlets criticize their parent companies or investigate them if it hurts the bottom line on the balance sheet?
2
Point of order: MSNBC is not the inverse of Faux Newz Channel.
Fox is GOP TV 24/7/365- opinion radio masquerading as news.
MSNBC is a channel where all contributors are subject to the established standards of NBC News excepting when clearly marked as opinion. Republican Joe in the AM is hardly liberal- he is as establishment Republican as they come. Most of the daytime M-F programming is centrist and about as controversial as CNN. Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell's shows are center left in their tone but also stick to the NBC News Standards. Chris Hayes' show is liberal in guest selection but does not trade in innuendo or rumor like Fox and he earned his stripes working at The Nation Magazine.
We all know Chris Matthews is a D.C, Villager "Third Way: type through and through.
Fox is GOP TV 24/7/365- opinion radio masquerading as news.
MSNBC is a channel where all contributors are subject to the established standards of NBC News excepting when clearly marked as opinion. Republican Joe in the AM is hardly liberal- he is as establishment Republican as they come. Most of the daytime M-F programming is centrist and about as controversial as CNN. Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell's shows are center left in their tone but also stick to the NBC News Standards. Chris Hayes' show is liberal in guest selection but does not trade in innuendo or rumor like Fox and he earned his stripes working at The Nation Magazine.
We all know Chris Matthews is a D.C, Villager "Third Way: type through and through.
1
“It does raise that larger question,” the media analyst Ken Doctor said. “When you have major journalistic outfits owned by companies that do not have a journalistic legacy, what happens when intense pressures occur?” At the BBC or The Guardian, he said, “you know the legacy is there; you know that there is going to be such pushback that editorial integrity will be maintained.” That is not so clear with new players like Verizon."
Who is trying to kid whom, here? There has never been journalistic integrity at Huff'nPuff. It is all about advertising and has always been a 1%-er deal. Greed, greed, greed. Maybe Hillary could go run it.
Who is trying to kid whom, here? There has never been journalistic integrity at Huff'nPuff. It is all about advertising and has always been a 1%-er deal. Greed, greed, greed. Maybe Hillary could go run it.
3
Ms. Huffington is in fact a Stassinopolous, so the Huffington post has long been without a Huffington.
4
"The Huffington Post will ... to its network of unpaid bloggers." Why stop there? Why not harvest your unpaid bloggers' organs and sell them on the black market?
4
I am not aware of any HuffPo bloggers that are forced to blog against their will; are you?
Who needs Huff Po? You can get the same feeling looking at the tabloid headlines at the grocery store checkout wait lineup.
7
I bailed on HP when they ended their native comments section. It was, by far, the best designed forum for robust discourse. Then, the chimera that you had to participate using your FB account to insure civility (doesn't seem to be a problem here at NYT.)
Then, the complete elimination of the comments section, relying solely on FB.
I'll never understand a business that willingly throws away good customers who are readily buying the product.
Then, the complete elimination of the comments section, relying solely on FB.
I'll never understand a business that willingly throws away good customers who are readily buying the product.
9
Lots of criticism of the bloggers who get published on HF here in the comments section.....
In my experience, as long as one exercises some discretion on who's doing the writing, some of the blogs are interesting and worthwhile -- more so, in fact, tha some of the op-ed writers that the NYT features (e.g. Brooks, Douhat, etc.)
In my experience, as long as one exercises some discretion on who's doing the writing, some of the blogs are interesting and worthwhile -- more so, in fact, tha some of the op-ed writers that the NYT features (e.g. Brooks, Douhat, etc.)
1
The Huff Post is where I go for fluffy news. It's take on hard news is just plain silly, even for this whacky liberal. But I lost interest in this story when I read that Verizon was buying AOL for $4.4 billion. A little alarm went off in my head: ding, ding, ding. We're getting back to that point - circa January 2000 - where large, well-managed, highly profitable companies are making really odd acquisition choices. We all remember the AOL-Time Warner merger - perhaps the largest blunder in business history - which was many times the size of the Verizon/AOL deal, but the logic is just as flawed. AOL's advertising technology? AOL doesn't have any advertising technology. At best, such a statement is a misnomer, at worst, an outright deception to cover up the real reason, which is anyone's guess. But whatever that reason may be, it's illogical. $4.4 billion won't but a dent in Verizon, but keep your eyes open for more such stupidity. The trend may be afoot and that can only lead to one thing.
3
Arianna, let's be clear, verizon will have no use for you or HP. Have them spin you off and give it back to you.
4
I find it interesting that HuffPo concentrates so much on the income equality myth, yet doesn't pay bloggers. This woman has done more damage than good to what used to be journalism. I find her reprehensible.
11
After reading HuffPost for several years, I stopped reading it months ago. Except for some of the editorial and opinion pieces, it's mostly just a rehash of current news stories. or links to other news outlets. That's convenient, but not particularly cutting edge.
6
With a little luck, we'll see the last of a particularly annoying and unresponsive media channel that never deserved to exist in the first place.
6
As many have learned before, any relationship with Mrs. Huffington will be unpleasant and costly.
9
Huff and Puff has some of the worst reporting anywhere. Sensationalist headlines and headlines that emphasize the lest important part of a story. The grammatical and typographical errors make many stories unreadable or readable only after rereading over and over. There seem to be no editors and the organization works on the cheap by using interns for everything. Though an AOL subscriber for many years I avoid reading anything Huff and Puff puts out and go elsewhere.
It's decision to allow comment only by people with Facebook accounts has made the comments section boring and with little stimulation to think about what was reported. Sure there were Flamers but most of us ignored them. AOL should Huff and Puff as soon as possible.
It's decision to allow comment only by people with Facebook accounts has made the comments section boring and with little stimulation to think about what was reported. Sure there were Flamers but most of us ignored them. AOL should Huff and Puff as soon as possible.
9
To those who don't like Huffington Post: no one is forcing you to read it.
2
Believe me, we're not......except accidentally, when Drudge links to it.
1
The Huffington Post. So lousy a rag that it can't even keep a Huffington. Now that's bad.
5
Tim Armstrong on the fate of the Huffington Post, TechCrunch: "It's all staying." http://www.fastcompany.com/3046894/fast-feed/tim-armstrong-on-the-fate-o...
My home-delivered paper headlines this story: "After Deal, Whence Huffington Post?" I see that the direction-of-time-challenging headline has been changed in this online version. The print headline reminds me of the complaint of wags in the history-rewriting Soviet Union: "The future is clear. It is our past that is uncertain."
2
Break Verizon and Comcast into tiny little pieces. It is the only way to stop this nonsense.
9
That is always the Statists position, bring in the government to in force their idea of right and wrong.
Why not just let the market determine the outcome.
Why not just let the market determine the outcome.
1
How Ms. Huffington was able to run Huffington Post is known to so many including myself. I was posting there almost from the beginning the website flourished only because of the community exchanged they had and so many wrote weekly articles without getting paid. Only to have their expectations to run out the limit for how long they could do that without a wage.
Ms. Huffington`s ruthlessness and exploiting her workforce is legendary.
Ms. Huffington`s ruthlessness and exploiting her workforce is legendary.
14
Some Huff Post writers are hoping that blogs submitted will continue to get a close link. There has always been room for pieces are stray from the liberal bent.
Back in 2013, the ruthless and hypocrite, 1%'er Arianna Huffington made over $315 million dollars by exploiting the creativity of unpaid bloggers and the collective spirit of the internet community. Go away and enjoy your millions in obscurity.
13
Who actually reads the Huffington Post?
7
Drudge gets 5 times as many hits per month. So the answer is somewhere between no one and Liberals.
1
Life may not be much fun if you work at huffy puffy -- http://tktk.gawker.com/hell-is-working-at-the-huffington-post-1707724052
7
Does anyone know the viewing stats of the HP? Would like to compare vs Drudge... Drudge offers these stats on its website... HP doesn't.
As a reader of Drudge and HP it would be nice to know. Also, I read the center and right columns of the HP and ignore all the noise on the left column... Can't be bothered with content in the left column... Means nothing
As a reader of Drudge and HP it would be nice to know. Also, I read the center and right columns of the HP and ignore all the noise on the left column... Can't be bothered with content in the left column... Means nothing
2
The H. Post is totally a one-sided liberal propaganda machine. I hope that Verizon keeps this loser going just so the liberals can't say that a more conservative management is responsible for their demise. In fact, the biased and totally one sided content of information published in the site is what is destroying the blog.
12
@ Jack Griffiths
Destroying the blog? It's valuation has climbed from $315 milion to $1 billion in four years. Some Republican partisans are so funny.
Destroying the blog? It's valuation has climbed from $315 milion to $1 billion in four years. Some Republican partisans are so funny.
13
The fact remains, it's still a one-sided liberal propaganda machine.
1
And money is all that matters, right?
1
There were many of us who had been on the internet since the mid-nineties who knew AOL was a big nothing when Warner Brothers sealed its doom as a company by buying AOL for $162 billion back in 2000. People who used the internet knew AOL was nothing special, but Warner Communications founder Steve Ross was dead and mergers had brought Time Magazine and Ted Turner into an unholy mix on the board of directors. For Verizon though, the AOL buy is just peanuts. Its probably just as stupid a way to get into programming as AOL was earlier as a way to get into an internet venture. The AOL that was a safe harbor for the Huff Post is possibly the opposite now.
7
The early on AOL was in fact something special. The way it was set up was as an internal community much like someone might see the gated community today. When one logged in to AOL they logged in to a private network, one that was a safe place to do things for kids and adults. To compare, it was sort of like dialing up a bulletin board as opposed to just jumping on the internet. You went to AOL first and then went to the internet from there for everything else. E-mail was internal. Access to the internet might be down, but AOL mail was already locked in and stored. If you sent mail it would go out as soon as service was connected.
A virtual world where people who volunteered their time made the place a safe haven. Of course that was before the leftist politics showed up. A prime example was the boards, or what we today refer to as forums. One could do all manner of research on many topics that volunteers had already done the leg work for. Believe it or not, the Second Amendment back then was one of the most popular boards and quite accurate, much to the chagrin of the anti Second Amendment bunch. One would never know that today. The contrast after the leftists came in was day and night. Just one example.
A virtual world where people who volunteered their time made the place a safe haven. Of course that was before the leftist politics showed up. A prime example was the boards, or what we today refer to as forums. One could do all manner of research on many topics that volunteers had already done the leg work for. Believe it or not, the Second Amendment back then was one of the most popular boards and quite accurate, much to the chagrin of the anti Second Amendment bunch. One would never know that today. The contrast after the leftists came in was day and night. Just one example.
1
They really need to drop their pretense that they are some American lite version of the Guardian...going after the evil 1% in their main banners. If you look just below the banner you'll find they worship the 1%. They should embrace their love of the Kartrashians and just become a lite version of People magazine.
14
Well, if you've ever done a read through of the "Huffy-Puffy" there is a great deal of liberal posturing and a lot of gibberish in-between. It's tacky, sensational and unscholarly. The lower you go down the front page, or men's room, as it used to be called, the lower the quality of news—eerily similar to National Enquirer "Mom With Three Heads Works as Typist, Art Director and Laundress" sort of thing, though not as kitschy.
We hope Ms. Huffington finds another venue for her fervor.
We hope Ms. Huffington finds another venue for her fervor.
17
Wow. $4 Billion for a second tier backbencher that couldn't generate enough interest to get a real buyer. Verizon got AOL(OL) just for its advertising models. Maybe it can recoup some of that dough by getting rid of the rest of the deadwood...
4
IT'S SIMPLE: NEWS MEDIA SHOULD BE RUN BY JORNALISTS . . .
The excellent quality of the NYT is due to family ownership with a more than a century of commitment to quality.
The HP which was begun by Arianna Huffington was more "tabloid style" in its selection of articles. And, whether Verizon or AOL owns it... Their bottom line is profitability and the boards have little concern for journalistic integrity or quality.
And, for a democratic republic to maintain viability, the population needs information which is accurate, important and relevant.
And, as far as Ms. Huffington goes she seems to me to be a media star who is incapable of running an media outlet whose primary goal is to provide information to the public.
The excellent quality of the NYT is due to family ownership with a more than a century of commitment to quality.
The HP which was begun by Arianna Huffington was more "tabloid style" in its selection of articles. And, whether Verizon or AOL owns it... Their bottom line is profitability and the boards have little concern for journalistic integrity or quality.
And, for a democratic republic to maintain viability, the population needs information which is accurate, important and relevant.
And, as far as Ms. Huffington goes she seems to me to be a media star who is incapable of running an media outlet whose primary goal is to provide information to the public.
13
She is also constitutionally incapable of honesty, sincerity or humility. Her book on Maria Callas was shamelessly identical to major portions of "The Art of Maria Callas" by John Ardoin and Gerald Fitzgerald. She lifted whole sections verbatim to write that trashy tome of "beaucoup de rien". She doesn't know music, so how could she know what a musician feels? Ugh.
1
There is something to be said about 'standards'. When I was NOT subscribing to NYTimes, I would hunt for news. I think the best reliable source was Google news which of course was a compendium of articles from other outlets. My next resource was HP, but half a month's of experience was sufficient for me to switch to yearly subscription of NYTimes.
I wonder what was it about HP that I did not like. Some of the genuine, serious articles did seem genuine almost at par with NYTimes articles. It was the other trash that diluted my consideration for HP. If NYTimes does the same thing tomorrow with heaps of trash articles mixed with its 'present content' - I would give it up.
Similar phenomenon occurred for many major 'NYTimes alike' news paper organizations in Asia (as an example The Times of India). At one point it was an outstanding news paper outlet with enviable editorial content, but after the advent of online journalism it has become equivalent of HP. People still flock to it - perhaps even more - because of its racy contents.
So I guess, I do not care what happens to HP personally, though I do feel bad for serious, skilled news bloggers.
I wonder what was it about HP that I did not like. Some of the genuine, serious articles did seem genuine almost at par with NYTimes articles. It was the other trash that diluted my consideration for HP. If NYTimes does the same thing tomorrow with heaps of trash articles mixed with its 'present content' - I would give it up.
Similar phenomenon occurred for many major 'NYTimes alike' news paper organizations in Asia (as an example The Times of India). At one point it was an outstanding news paper outlet with enviable editorial content, but after the advent of online journalism it has become equivalent of HP. People still flock to it - perhaps even more - because of its racy contents.
So I guess, I do not care what happens to HP personally, though I do feel bad for serious, skilled news bloggers.
10
At most, Verizon probably considers the HuffPo something to be sold off eventually. It's the ad tech that mattered.
3
Getting rid of her would be advantageous regardless of who owns it.
7
I must not be mainstream but I rather enjoy the Huffington Post and would hate to see it dismantled. If it is, hopefully Arianna Huffington will start another similar paper.
4
There is lots of vitriol here about Ms. Huffington, and her exploitation of unpaid bloggers to accompany the rather witchy-looking picture of her. Nobody forced them to write for her. She can't be happy with what she is seeing here, but it also probably doesn't matter to her very much. Today's public figures have to have a thick skin to survive today's social media criticisms, which can be character assassinations done from safe, anonymous perches virtually anywhere in the world.
Verizon would be foolish to push Ms. Huffington aside from her successful creation of the Huffington Post, a rare enough success story even in today's era of billion dollar web-based enterprises. I doubt they will do such a thing. They will likely make the Huff Post an independent company, with her in charge of it, and see how things go from there. Why do otherwise? It's not like Verizon doesn't have billions to spare because they do. The company makes money hand-over-fist overcharging consumers for its monthly wireless phone contracts, and the smart phone equipment to use them. They are one of the major victors in the move to mobile computing Americans are convinced they need, even if most of them don't need 24/7 connections for what is mostly daily Facebook drivel. It's bread-and-circuses for the masses now. We sell ourselves our own exploitive culture willingly.
http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/05/heres-how-badly-were-getting-rip...
6
I don't understand what most of the people here have against the Huffington Post. I read most of my news from the Huffington Post, then I go to New York Times as my second news source, and then I go to other sites for a broader understanding. It's true, Huffington Post has a great Entertainment section, which is the one that is mostly seen on social media, but they also have amazing sections on politics, sports, science, civil rights issues etc. etc. etc. And their opinion articles are more than great. They also have a huge presence internationally. Don't judge a book by its cover people.
7
Are writing satire or sarcasm? Maybe all you've looked at is the cover?
1
Here's one reason to NOT get the news from huffpo. A few years ago I was involved in a local news story that was reported in a small local paper. There was an error in the reporting, so I emailed the reporter and the error was corrected. Meanwhile, huffpo had copied - not linked - the story, so the error remained on their site.
2
AOL will be just another corporate division. If you think it is subject to P&L scrutiny now, it will be worse, in the sense that Mr. Armstrong, much less Ms Huffington, will be just another suit. Both will be gone in a couple of years at most
1
I hope Verizon sells HuffnPuff.
4
I'm surprised that these mergers, buyouts by Avago of Broadcom, Intel of Altera, Verizon of AOL, Charter of Time Warner haven't been stopped by our anti-trust laws.
4
Huffington Post, a news site without any reporters depending on aggregate content and feeds.
May be she should donate the proceeds to her former cash strapped country of origin, the Greece or open up a diner on Highway 89 in Upstate New York.
All the best to Verizon with barrage of copy right infringement law suits that are mainstay at modern day news sites such as Google News.
May be she should donate the proceeds to her former cash strapped country of origin, the Greece or open up a diner on Highway 89 in Upstate New York.
All the best to Verizon with barrage of copy right infringement law suits that are mainstay at modern day news sites such as Google News.
2
Currently, Verizon receives several hundred dollars a month from me under a bundled internet/FIOS/phone plan. That will cease if/when the company assumes control over the leftist lunatic political ravings of HP. The list of severed business relationships is long and growing longer, due to these large corporate conglomerates' insistence on co-mingling political activism with simple commercial transactions.
1
Skimming through the Huffington Post just now, I found a few articles and columns worth reading. It would be unfortunate to lose a media outlet that publishes these. I suspect that I would find less to read on Fox News outlets, while evidently many of the commenters use that as their primary news source. Yes, there are also a lot of trivial (at least to me) articles and columns. Those who are not interested in reading these are free not to, but evidently somebody reads them.
3
As people discuss and debate HuffPost's ultimate position within the new structure, I am far more concerned about Verizon's takeover of AOL: it continues the quite dangerous trend of the agglomeration of telecomm and media in the hands of fewer and fewer companies.
5
AOL ought to be defunct by now. It's a bad match for huffPo.
2
I became smarter and more knowledgeable about the world after I stopped wasting time at HuffPost.
13
The HP and AOL are past their prime and have next to nothing to offer, both spend their time repeating what others have found and look to be mismanaged, this is the decline of the left wing and all their rags......Time for objective, non bias journalism to come back into the fold and offer the readership substance mixed with integrity......
2
Verizon is not stupid. If "the most recent valuation" was about $1 billion, they will find a way to realize that amount, cutting their cost of AOL from $4.4 to $3.4 billion. It seems unlikely they would allow $1 billion to slip from their grasp. In their position, with a fiduciary duty to stockholders, would you?
1
I visited the site in the beginning, but then the website seemed to become more tabloid like and I lost interest, visiting only occasionally. One day I visited the site and a headline in the right margin announced a photo of a "raped woman left on street". It was not necessary to click to see the photo, it was in the margin under the headline. That was the very last day I went to Huffington Post. I'll never go to the sight again. the site is a disgrace...and I'm a hardcore liberal.
9
I would think and I hope it happens Verizon will dismantle the Huffington Post and replace it with Huffmax. News with a twist of truth.
6
It would be the most truth the HuffPo would have ever told.
Interesting mention of the BBC. Owned by the UK government/taxpayers, and many wonder why. But it survives (somehow), and Huffington will probably do the same under Verizon. P.S. Pretty sure I have never been to the HP site.
Most people read the HP for entertainment. There is no real news when it comes to politics or government, though many people enjoy the pieces on the Rolling Stones, or an interview with Bob Dylan, those kinds of pieces. Only the least informed, least thoughtful of the nation take news about government or politics very seriously when it comes to the Huffington brand, who most intellectuals view as kind of an air-head.
16
Losing the Huffington Post, or completely revamping it under new management, would do a lot for journalism and the quality of information going to readers. It specializes in columnists who act like experts with absolutely no expertise, churning out quick listicles for which they have done no reporting. "10 things you must own by age 50." "8 Mistakes Parents Make when Their Kids Apply to College,' laden with misinformation. Then there is the matter of unpaid bloggers, which should be illegal, and Arianna putting out orders for more feel-good stories that would play well on Facebook. Bye bye HuffPo, you won't be missed.
30
Like anyone cares what Arianna Huffington says or does? She is the Sarah Palin of the Democratic party. As a Democrat, I am embarrassed by her and her shallow and specious organization. Good riddance.
The most painful thing for Ms. Huffington would be for her to be left without a platform- which would be the best thing for all the rest of us.
The most painful thing for Ms. Huffington would be for her to be left without a platform- which would be the best thing for all the rest of us.
28
Can we please just shut it down? It contributes nothing to society and indeed condescends to fads and stupidity.
Media ought to elucidate and intrigue before it humors. I'll stick with the Times.
Media ought to elucidate and intrigue before it humors. I'll stick with the Times.
25
There is something terribly terribly wrong for a company to be valued at a billion dollars that doesn't pay workers for content. Shame on everyone profiting so grossly on the backs of unpaid labor
104
Is anybody forced to write for the HP?
6
No loss at all. If it falls off the face of the earth, would anyone notice?
32
A few years back I was invited to Ariana's house for a TV network fundraiser event and party. I introduced myself and mentioned the name of the website I was an editor and main contributor of. She beamed and said "I love your site, xxx.com why don't you blog for.me?" I knew better to pursue the conversation. Journalism and the craft of writing has been gutted by the likes of her. You want free content? You get what you pay for. Some do it better than others, but in the end, the smart ones are like "Oliver's" Fagin luring kids into indentured servitude.
48
Both Arianna and the Huff Post don't add much to the dialogue. The world wouldn't miss either one or both of them.
31
I suspect Verizon does not want someone like her continuing to run HP into the ground. It has never made money and they can have someone else run it for profit, leave it to her to continue ruining it or let it die a quick and painless death.
10
She'll leave with a truckload of dinero.
6
I suspect that truck already pulled out right after AOL came by....
1
She already had a truckload. She'll leave with a Cayman Island-full!
Huffington Post was a great until they partnered with Facebook. Informative and intellectual discussions are now reduced to "whatever". I suppose one will have to be a Verizon customer to have the privilege of posting a comment on HP.
21
It is crazy to realize, but the Huffington Post is meandered far more to the Left Wing in its bias than Ariana Huffington. They make money from their ad revenue by posting extremely biased opinion pieces and then censor any alternative thought out of their forums.
It was funny, but I was reading through the comments on a Huffington Post article about "equal access" when it came to the Colorado bakery that refused to make a cake for a gay wedding. The Huffington Post moderator was deleting any comment that stated the alternative view.
The Huffington Post readers were arguing that the HuffPost has a right to censure their forums according to the forum rules (apparently anti-free thought) but they don't believe that the Colorado bakery should have the same right.
Because of this anti-Conservative and even anti-Moderate bias and attitude, I simply don't visit the Huffington Post anymore.
It was funny, but I was reading through the comments on a Huffington Post article about "equal access" when it came to the Colorado bakery that refused to make a cake for a gay wedding. The Huffington Post moderator was deleting any comment that stated the alternative view.
The Huffington Post readers were arguing that the HuffPost has a right to censure their forums according to the forum rules (apparently anti-free thought) but they don't believe that the Colorado bakery should have the same right.
Because of this anti-Conservative and even anti-Moderate bias and attitude, I simply don't visit the Huffington Post anymore.
18
Where do you go...Fox?
18
Just another example of how Mr. Economics recognizes no ideology. Whether she stays or goes, I suspect this piece of leftist debris will be spun off to whoever is foolish enough to subsidize it.
5
I am a pretty discerning news consumer with a nose for agendas and somewhere along the line I came to perceive the HUFF POST as a trashy tabloid site/news outlet comparable to London's DAILY MAIL and I started to view anyone who got their news from either as similar to those who might subscribe to, say, STAR MAGAZINE. Ha! Those old reports of goat heads on human bodies helped STAR MAG establish its place in the least-common-denominator ranks. It felt like HUFF POST was going that way. I would never turn to it for legit news. Just for amusement or hints at what might be real news elsewhere. That said, I think Arianna is a one woman tour de force and one tough lady. I really felt for her when she found out her husband was gay and she had to start a new life. Good for her for going on to build an empire. She'll restart, reinvent, renew and resurface.
6
Mergers of media muffle speech. Arianna should start a new medium.
6
Huffington Post is a sprawl of minimally-useful items, mostly click-bait and almost never worth a look.
Arianna Huffington loves content she doesn't have to pay for - but she sure does like getting lots of $$$ into her own bank account. She's all for "work-life balance" - but Huffington Post employees are worked into the ground and treated like chattel.
In my opinion, if Huffington Post ceased to exist, it would be no loss to the world.
As for Ms. Huffington herself, she'll find another way to make money for herself; she always has and she always will. She was conservative, then she was liberal. She changes with each shift in the wind, and always to her own enrichment. Her philosophy seems to hew to the concept of "there's a sucker born every minute" - that, and positioning herself as some kind of enlightened lifestyle "guru."
Arianna Huffington loves content she doesn't have to pay for - but she sure does like getting lots of $$$ into her own bank account. She's all for "work-life balance" - but Huffington Post employees are worked into the ground and treated like chattel.
In my opinion, if Huffington Post ceased to exist, it would be no loss to the world.
As for Ms. Huffington herself, she'll find another way to make money for herself; she always has and she always will. She was conservative, then she was liberal. She changes with each shift in the wind, and always to her own enrichment. Her philosophy seems to hew to the concept of "there's a sucker born every minute" - that, and positioning herself as some kind of enlightened lifestyle "guru."
67
HuffPo lost me when right under headlines there would be celebrity gossip, it seemed it was trying to be all things to all people.
Still, when a NYT piece doesn't seem to be giving all the details on something in Congress or a national issue, I'd go to HuffPo to see if more had been gleaned from around the country. And usually there'd be more info there, maybe because journalistic standards aren't so high there.
But the bigger question is why must all media be held in the hands of a few giant companies? This isn't good for any business, but media especially. Enough money can silence a lot of contrary opinion, and that's not good.
Still, when a NYT piece doesn't seem to be giving all the details on something in Congress or a national issue, I'd go to HuffPo to see if more had been gleaned from around the country. And usually there'd be more info there, maybe because journalistic standards aren't so high there.
But the bigger question is why must all media be held in the hands of a few giant companies? This isn't good for any business, but media especially. Enough money can silence a lot of contrary opinion, and that's not good.
34
Verizon, a company that spies on its customers and has no respect for them as anything other than a revenue source to be taken advantage of as often as possible and as deeply as possible, will destroy The Huffington Post because the last thing Verizon wants loose on the street is truth or someone questioning the truth. One can only hope Verizon will spin off THP, because otherwise the editorial shackles are on the way.
31
Much ado about less than meets the eye.
4
Will anyone notice? Their viewership is less than MBNBC. Which means, apparently, they can't even get their mothers to look.
13
No FOX viewer will notice, which is just as well.
7
I hope Arianna shows the backbone she has shown in the past. This will dissolve into corporate big money blackmail. You want to be a team player? You want to help us? You show what we want you to show, though we will cloak it in ever decreasing snippets of what you once were, or we replace you. Don't go there Arriana!
9
Larry, she has ALREADY been there for years!
10
Because the BBC World Service is funded by the license fee that British households pay, I expect it to be around long after one progressive favorite after another in the United States is bought up and shut down.
36
Sadly, the newly elected Tories are trying to gut the BBC... It would be a crime if they do, but don't hold your breath.
6
Not to worry, KB. If the UK is anything like the USA, a government program never, ever dies. That includes the state-run BBC media.
Even an outlet like Pravda survived the complete economic upheaval of its host organism without dieing off.
Even an outlet like Pravda survived the complete economic upheaval of its host organism without dieing off.
... HP went corporate. I was a frequent visitor to the site in the first few years. Now I hardly care to even read or browse anything on the site if I bother to visit at all. Salon, Mother Jones, Slate Magazine, The Atlantic, or The Daily Beast has more interesting & engaging twist on contemporary issues.
Huffington Post is now blatantly commercialized, and has lost its soul. Shame!
Huffington Post is now blatantly commercialized, and has lost its soul. Shame!
52
Exactly. It started out great but then with the sale to AOL and the connection to Facebook, it lost both it's credibility and its soul and resembles a tabloid now more than anything. Shame, indeed.
1
Ms. Huffington's plan to "add to its network of unpaid bloggers," speaks volumes, just as the endless stream of blogs that run alongside HP's genuine news articles - also speak volumes, most of them silly, most of them poorly researched and poorly written. Her plan to add even more voices to this unpaid (and I suspect unedited) free army of pajama-clad bloggers could only be motivated by profit. It's a shame that Ariana doesn't see the need for a robust, paid and fully supported journalism staff with the resources to report in-depth, consequential stories of genuine concern. The journalistic legacy that made liberal blogs like HP, ThinkProgress, Talking Points Memo and Buzzfeed possible - the Bernsteins and Woodwards and Katharine Grahams that set such an example for journalists, are not served by Ariana's insistence on doing things on the cheap.
99
Like the MCI purchase, Verizon will keep what it wants and sell off the rest. Huffpo probably one of the excess arms of the purchase.
5
Oooh-Kay! As I write this, there are no -zero, nada,zip- comments on this article. This should be interesting.
I consider myself to be about as liberal as a gun-owning, gluten-free, atheist, Vietnam vet Texan can be. And I have never been a fan of the Huffington Post. The fact that until about two or three years ago, when I switched from dial-up to satellite internet service (rural Texas will probably never see fiber-optic quality service, and I live less than 75 miles from the downtown centers of Dallas and Ft Worth), dial-up HuffPost hammered users with so many ads the editorial content didn't reach the monitor screen until I was well in REM sleep, may have something to do with it.
Add to that all the crapola links to the 10 or 20 or 30 most BIZARRE/WEIRD/FATTEST celebrity bikini photos, and strangest plastic surgery results, one gets the distinct feeling a long shower followed by a Himalayan Salt Colon Cleanse is not such a bad idea after all.
I liked and trusted Arianna more when she was Al Franken's conservative and weird bedfellow foil on Saturday Night Live.
I consider myself to be about as liberal as a gun-owning, gluten-free, atheist, Vietnam vet Texan can be. And I have never been a fan of the Huffington Post. The fact that until about two or three years ago, when I switched from dial-up to satellite internet service (rural Texas will probably never see fiber-optic quality service, and I live less than 75 miles from the downtown centers of Dallas and Ft Worth), dial-up HuffPost hammered users with so many ads the editorial content didn't reach the monitor screen until I was well in REM sleep, may have something to do with it.
Add to that all the crapola links to the 10 or 20 or 30 most BIZARRE/WEIRD/FATTEST celebrity bikini photos, and strangest plastic surgery results, one gets the distinct feeling a long shower followed by a Himalayan Salt Colon Cleanse is not such a bad idea after all.
I liked and trusted Arianna more when she was Al Franken's conservative and weird bedfellow foil on Saturday Night Live.
23
"The site was founded 10 years ago, and built its growth on relentless aggregation and search engine optimization. "
Which means it could be one Google algorithm update away from seeing its value slashed.
Which means it could be one Google algorithm update away from seeing its value slashed.
16
In the 1967 spoof of the James Bond story, Casino Royale, Woody Allen's character reveals that the power behind SMERSH was "the telephone company". Woody was right.
20
Maybe the NYTs needs to consider adding the Huffington Post to its stable.
1
Huffington Post was once a vital and thriving internet community - an exciting place to read people's opinions and form friendships. That was all destroyed quite suddenly when Huffington consolidated with Facebook. I, for one, completely lost interest in Huffington after that, feeling that I had been somehow betrayed. I'm sure there are many other people who felt the same way.
74
I refuse to join Facebook. Even as so many interactive news and current event sites force readers to join Facebook in order to interact and opine with others, I refuse. If it silences me, so be it. After I lost the interactive community at HuffPo due to my refusing to join Facebook in order to participate, I lost interest in the site.
45
You hit the nail on the head. It has never been the same .
Joining Facebook did no good anyway. Huffington's internet community was destroyed without apology and the Facebook connection was both inept and useless.
1
Consolidation of communication is so efficient. Only one story line to consider no matter where you get your news. Contact a web site in the future and get calls from similar businesses later that day.
13
What a terrible tragedy. I'm sure Ms. Huffington will survive. When I read about the life changing predicaments of the social elite, the lyrics of Dylan's "Like a Rolling Stone" come to mind and after a brief chuckle I return to life in the real world. Cheers!
5
The Huffington Post model of unpaid, exploitative journalism is just nothing short of monstrous. Making billions off the backs of unpaid writers and mindless stock photos is disgusting. I avoid the site.
111
That's the theory. The reality is they don't make a dime. Nobody looks at the silly thing.
2
Nobody's FORCING those poor bloggers to blog!! They willingly--joyfully!--crowd onto HuffPo's mega platform in hopes that even a fraction of HP's million of eyeballs will read their posts, share them, link to them, retweet them, etc. For crying out loud they're not slaves or indentured servants--they're trying to become net celebs & monetize their own brands!!
1
Deleted my HP app long ago, it's been months since I clicked on a newsarticle from them. I used to be leery of Buzzfeed but I find they have interesting stories so I installed their app.
"one of the nation’s leading liberal news outlets..."
That's a sad line, especially from the Times. News should be just news, but find a media site today that doesn't pander to its base for financial reasons and it's likely you'll find a money loser. Readers and viewers want a slant, and news media generally give it to them. The Times is one of the most neutral, but still has its share of agenda on its sleeve. Its old balancer, the WSJ, is done as a neutral reporter of the news.
Too many sites with too little to say making too much partisan noise. No wonder we're so divided.
That's a sad line, especially from the Times. News should be just news, but find a media site today that doesn't pander to its base for financial reasons and it's likely you'll find a money loser. Readers and viewers want a slant, and news media generally give it to them. The Times is one of the most neutral, but still has its share of agenda on its sleeve. Its old balancer, the WSJ, is done as a neutral reporter of the news.
Too many sites with too little to say making too much partisan noise. No wonder we're so divided.
48
'the Times is one of the most neutral'.....I suppose so called journalism has surrendered into an us against them argument, where the sides can't even comprehend their lack of objectivism.
5
In reply to "WestCoaster,"
"Too many sites with too little to say making too much partisan noise. No wonder we're so divided."
I wholeheartedly agree. Thank you!
"Too many sites with too little to say making too much partisan noise. No wonder we're so divided."
I wholeheartedly agree. Thank you!
As the Times is obviously way left of center, it is hardly neutral.
2
The interests of talent and capital will always be in conflict, as were labor and capital throughout the last century (capital won). It is very clear that, under current law, the soulless forces of money are once again winning, without adding much value of their own. That needs to change.