But
enough about us--what do you think of Slate?
As we noted in this space
three weeks
ago, the average Slate reader is intelligent, discerning, politically
involved, culturally aware, and physically attractive. Also, of course,
skeptical of cant and immune to flattery. But we'd like to know even more about
you. Do you consume vast quantities of alcohol? Do you drive expensive
cars--and trade them in often? Are you, by any chance, in the market for a
Boeing jet fighter? A Ralph Lauren undershirt? A good book? A carton of milk?
How many times a week do you have sex? Would you be willing to pay for it? Say,
$19.95? (Or are you one of those people who think that sex, like Web sites,
ought to always be free?) Are you, in short, the kind of reader advertisers are
looking for? (Please say "yes.") Actually, what we mainly want to know about is
you and Slate: how often you read it, in what form, what you like--and don't
like--about it, and so on. Toward that end, we have composed an online reader
survey. (Our e-mail delivery readers will receive their own version.) We would
be grateful if you took a few minutes to fill it out. Thanks very much.
Go to survey.
Warning:
Do not read this book review
Also Monday, we post a
review by
James J. Cramer of The Microsoft Way by Randall E. Stross, a big new
book about the well-known Seattle-based coffee--uh, we mean software--company.
Slate's official editorial position about Microsoft is, of course, scrupulously
neutral. We believe Microsoft is a marvelous flowering of the American
entrepreneurial spirit, a boon to all mankind, a splendid example of employer
benevolence at its finest, an institution beyond legitimate criticism of any
sort, with a damned fine tuna tostada every Thursday in the cafeteria. But
beyond that, we take no view. It is unfortunate, therefore, that we were
tricked into publishing the highly biased opinions of Mr. Cramer, a man of no
discernible qualifications whatsoever--beyond extensive experience in both
business and journalism, a brilliant track record on Wall Street, and a lively
writing style, that is. When we showed Cramer's review to Bill Gates (not
because it concerns Microsoft, of course, but because he insists on reading
every word of Slate before publication, in an admirable effort to improve his
vocabulary), his reaction was swift. "Have it killed," he observed
reflectively. We said, "You mean, 'Have him killed.' " Gates shrieked,
"No, you fools. What kind of person do you take me for? Kill the piece .
Kill the piece!" But by that time, the review had already been loaded into
Slate's "doomsday server," a device designed to ensure that this magazine
continues to be propagated into cyberspace in the event of a nuclear war. Once
loaded, an article cannot be retrieved. There was nothing we could do. Honest,
Bill.
Listen
and learn
If you haven't done so yet,
check out the new format for our "Dispatches & Dialogues," and the Slate "Diary." It's
part of our continuing effort to make Slate more user-friendly. Many readers,
however, were quick to tell us they regarded one particular change--a reduction
in the type size of "Dispatches & Dialogues"--anything but friendly. (A
sample: "I'm as frumpy as David Brinkley because Shearer's dispatches are
posted in print that's too goddamned small!!") Honestly, we were only trying to
help: Smaller type means more words per screen, and therefore, less scrolling.
(Especially helpful, or so we thought, in consuming Harry Shearer's hilarious
but epic O.J. trial dispatches.) The smaller type also, we thought, enhanced
the "e-mail" look and feel of the feature. But the readers were clear: The type
was not (clear, that is). So we're back to the normal point size, in a more
legible typeface (Times New Roman) to boot. Readers were also clear in their
responses to last week's query about saving space in the print-out edition by
removing the "links" discussion at the end of each piece. By an overwhelming
margin, those who responded prefer to learn about Internet links, even when
they're not reading Slate online. So we'll continue as before. Your wish is our
command.
Another
party heard from
"The Fray" now has more than 15,000 registered participants. One of
them, last week, was Cliff Jackson, the Arkansas lawyer who is Captain Ahab to
Bill Clinton's White Whale, and the orchestrator of Paula Jones' lawsuit. (His
Frayhandle is "Mugwumps." To read what he has to say, type this address after
you've registered: www.slate.com/The/fray/main.asp?thread=111.) Jackson has
some choice words for Susan Estrich, who has been engaged in a lively dialogue with
Stuart Taylor Jr. about Jones and Anita Hill. Feel free to enter "The Fray" and
talk back.
