David Talbot's decision yesterday to step down as editor-in-chief of Salon may have come as a surprise, but the subsequent handover to longtime deputy Joan Walsh seemed a natural move. Mediabistro's David S. Hirschman spoke with Walsh today about the website's proposed redesign, and whether Salon will be the next web acquisition by a major media company.

Mediabistro: Will it be hard to take over from David Talbot, who did so much to shape and promote the site? What have you learned from him that you plan to use? How much do you share in the "messianic vision" to which he referred in today's Times article?

Walsh: David created a culture that was an absolute meritocracy—an intern walked into an editorial meeting with a good idea and walked out writing a cover story. He was never afraid to be challenged. He had utter confidence that the best idea would and should win. My top goal is to maintain that culture. I'm so proud of it.

I would probably never use the term messianic myself. But I know the secret to our success is that we all wake up every morning knowing that we make a difference, and that we have a lot of fun doing it. Nothing will ever change that at Salon.

Mediabistro: Do you have any major changes in mind? Will you place more emphasis on specific coverage, or are you happy with the current mix of daily content?

Walsh: I don't plan major changes in coverage, but I'm trying to preside over a redesign that unwraps Salon, shows the world the amazing diversity of content we have every day. I remember during the height of the election season, we had a week-long series around the Salon TV awards, and most days the great coverage was buried under important news stories. I thought, God, why are we hiding so much of what we are? So we're trying to look at a design that gets away from that one, top-heavy cover story—that lets you see more of what we're doing in a glance. There will always be a story that you know is most important, and most days it likely will still be news, but you should be able to graze and see that we've got amazing TV coverage, a kick-ass sports columnist, a brilliant advice columnist.

Mediabistro: As a left-leaning site that incorporates both news and opinions, what have been the major issues arising from George Bush's reelection? Some liberal commentators say the election was positive in that the second Bush term will provide ample fodder for essayists and pundits to riff on.

Walsh: I was depressed after the election that so many of us liberals, and many in the media, were surprised that Bush won. If we were doing our jobs better, we would have seen it coming. I think, though, there's plenty of room for smart critical coverage, both of the Bush administration and its hubristic overreaching on Social Security and Iraq and the deficit, as well as of the battle for the soul of the Democratic Party. I'm excited about the year ahead.

Mediabistro: Writing for the web is clearly a different thing than writing for print publications, both in the use of links as well as in the ways that people read the text itself. Is there a certain philosophy or style you look for when considering submissions? What is different about the way writers approach writing a piece for Salon, rather than something similar for a print magazine?

Walsh: I think we still run a lot of great long-form magazine journalism, but our most popular daily features are the shorter items with a voice—War Room, the Fix, etc. We do look for things that are webby and viral, but most of all we look for what's not being said that needs to be. Theda Skocpol talking back to David Brooks after he misused her work this week was completely Salon.

But nothing's made me prouder recently than Rebecca Traister's amazing feature yesterday on the vital debate in the women's movement over how to talk about abortion. It was 5,000 words. It had amazing voices. It could have run anywhere and yet in a sense it could only run on Salon. I tell our writers, "Surprise me. Tell me something I didn't know."

Mediabistro: People have been sounding Salon's death knell for years. Why do you think the site has been able to stay afloat, and what do you think are its greatest strengths?

Walsh: There's no doubt our readers kept us alive by subscribing. It gave us revenue and also gave our investors hope that we were about to create a real business model. And we did. Everyone said no one would pay for web content, but we had content you couldn't find anywhere else and people wanted it. We've got 88,000 subscribers now. Then we evolved into the current model where you can either subscribe, or click on an ad to get a site pass and read Salon for free, which both readers and advertisers love. We were nimble and entrepreneurial but most of all we just refused to die! The threat of extinction served to concentrate the mind and we invented a business model I'm proud of.

Mediabistro: Both the Washington Post Company's recent purchase of Slate and Dow Jones's acquisition of Marketwatch have created speculation that Salon might be ripe to be picked by a similar suitor. Do you think Salon would benefit from joining up with an established old-guard news organization?

Walsh: We're not looking to be acquired. We're having a lot of fun being independent right now. If the right partner came along and was able to help us reach more readers—our goal in 2005—we'd take it seriously. But we're not shopping ourselves, at all.