Patterico's Pontifications

6/18/2007

Malkin’s Site Gets Overhaul

Filed under: Blogging Matters — Patterico @ 8:21 pm

Michelle Malkin’s blog has a new look. She plans to bring back the comments, which is welcome news. (She also has a new photo up, which I prefer to the previous one, as I think it looks more like her — based on what I’ve seen of her from TV appearances.)

Check it out. Michelle’s site is one of the very few I read every day. You undoubtedly do as well — but if you’re one of the few who doesn’t, now’s a good time to start.

17 Responses to “Malkin’s Site Gets Overhaul”

  1. Actually, the change is down for now, the old site it what’s up…

    next 24-48 hours it should be all set and ready…

    Or so sayeth her post.

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  2. The relaunch includes a new look, a new platform, new features, and a new server. Because it’s a new server, the changeover involves DNS (the thing that translates “michellemalkin.com” to the IP address of the server) being repointed to the new server. DNS is distributed and cached, so it takes longer for some ISPs to update their DNS cache. Most people should be seeing it by now, but others might have to wait another 12-24 hours.

    Mark Jaquith (9c05f2)

  3. Realclearpolitics and townhall offer plenty of good analysis that (a) give a diverse set of viewpoints and (b) save me a ton of time that “comment wars” tend to waste.
    I guess I am one of the few who doesn’t feel compelled to read Malkin or Coulter’s writings in order to be informed. Little too much like high school news delivery.
    Perhaps when the comments which disagree with them are not controlled nearly as tightly as they are(To disagree = liberal = traitor = hater = moonbat, etc.) I might read them on a routine basis.
    Much credit to bloggers such as Patterico who are confident enough that they can tolerate differing opinions on their site, with minimal comment removal.
    I hope (perhaps foolishly) that this is the direction the future holds for blogs and columnists.

    voiceofreason63 (cfae0f)

  4. I did like the look while it was up, and I’m super excited about comments opening back up…

    I assume she’ll be screening for Moonbatism?

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  5. I don’t know, but I’m guessing she’ll be screening for those who make racist and/or threatening comments. Those screened out will then scream crushing of dissent!.

    Patterico (d64095)

  6. Coulter is political entertainment just like Olbermann and Colbert on the left, except she uses more cutting wit and less simple foaming at the mouth than they do. Ann does not have comments for the same reason Al Franken doesn’t… she is not writing a blog.

    Malkin is political commentary, with a distinct conservative slant, but a lot of solid content and very little ranting. The reason she does not have comments: because she is a visible minority, the left felt that she was a particularly egregious sellout and regularly filled her comments with the filthiest slurs imaginable, and threats to her and her family that included publishing her home address with incitements to violence.

    I am reminded of David Letterman’s comment that Bill O’Reilly’s show was “99% bullshit”. When O’Reilly asked Letterman if he had ever watched his show, Letterman answered, “No, I wouldn’t waste my time.” Now, I happen to think O’Reilly is a buffoon, and I don’t watch his show unless MM is on, but I wrote to CBS (?) and told them that when your on-air host makes Bill O’Reilly look gracious, you really need to be asking some questions about your programming, not other peoples’.

    Finally I have to relate how my wife and several other guests at a party were discussing how big an idiot Rush Limbaugh is. I finally asked what he had said in particular that they thought was idiotic. Nobody had an example, because nobody in the group of 7 or 8 poeple, all of who were professing utter distain for Limbaugh, had ever listened to him on the radio. Not once.

    sherlock (b4bbcc)

  7. You mean that you don’t read my site every day?

    Is it possible to sue for hurt feelings? :(

    Dana (3e4784)

  8. Where are the stories about the city prosecutor’s wife driving numerous times on a suspended license and illegally driving a city car? Where are the stories about the city prosecutor sticking the taxpayers for the repair of the city car after his wife damaged it? Oh, did I say car? No, it was a SUV. Why are city officials driving SUVs while lecturing us on being green and all that crap? Where are the stories of the city prosecutor’s wife getting in another accident and refusing to provide proof of insurance because she had none? Where are the stories about the city prosecutor being uninsured himself? Both Rocky Delgadillo and his wife should be in jail. And he has the nerve to go after Hilton??

    sam (8b49b8)

  9. Forgot: Where are the stories about the mayor knocking up the Telemundo chic? Let’s see — that makes three illegitimate kids from three different women plus another two with his wife. What a role model!

    sam (8b49b8)

  10. “…she’ll be screening for those who make racist and/or threatening comments.”

    Ah, the beauty of free speech: the hateful can utter the despicable to a point, yet she can hit the delete button if she chooses. I love America!

    Dana (b4a26c)

  11. Dana: You and everyone else should know that free speech only applies to state action and has nothing to do with how anyone chooses to run their blog.

    sam (6be18e)

  12. Patterico, I read your blog every day. I really appreciate the fact that you rarely refer to people with differing political assumptions in disparaging terms. I check Malkin’s about once a week on average — she’s got a lot of coverage, and it’s worth sweeping through to see thing’s she’s picked up.

    But Malkin’s incessant editorializing about how people who disagree with her are basically irrational and insane is really tiring. She’s great at covering the news, but she’s extremely high on rhetoric and has very little reasoning or examination of alternative perspectives on her blog. Maybe it’s because she’s got a different audience and a different focus — you’re a lawyer, she’s a sub for Bill O’Reilly.

    Because I don’t slavishly agree with her political positions, I generally find myself being called names (like moonbat) and accused of everything from terrorism to treason to being insane, very frequently on her web site. And I’m just a reader.

    Phil (427875)

  13. Sam, you should know that I was making an off the cuff remark based on the utterly hateful misogynistic and racist comments that were posted on her site. Its wonderful she can happily block those and involve the authorities if necessary.

    Dana (b4a26c)

  14. After a rereading, you’re right.

    sam (6be18e)

  15. I’m not a big fan of the redesign, at least at first glance. From what her intro said, the most space will be devoted in the left column to what will basically be a daily column, updated throughout the day. Other posts will be relegated to a rather thin middle column, showing only their headlines, not even an intro paragraph. In order to read those other posts, we’ll have to click through them one by one. I’m not going to bother with that.

    PatHMV (7f2300)

  16. #12
    Phil,

    Good points. It really depends on what the goals of the person are. The conservative hard right message resonates with a particular audience. This generates sales of books, maybe a tv show, and successful webadvertising dollars. Capitalism is great and I have no complaints with it, but am concerned about “cults of personality” influencing the opinions of those who feel they only need one source.
    Like you the name calling totally puts me off.

    voiceofreason63 (cfae0f)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2375 secs.