Slate V is bad. Here are some reasons why:

1. Crudely sketched "animations" to go along with letter writers to Dear Prudie.

2. Along those same lines, video content is different than print content. Just repackaging print content for video doesn't work at all. When I'm reading something, whether it's about cell phone cameras or dogs in a relationship, I can skip past the boring paragraphs. When someone is VERY stiltedly reading their clunky prose out loud, I just have to close the video and not watch anymore.

3. The ads. I mean, come on. The site always has ads, and they're always annoying, but when a pop up comes up and goes behind my browser and then makes me look at it for a half second while I'm finding the x box to close the window, that's fine, and it doesn't dilute my enjoyment of the content. Having to watch a five second countdown while there's a poster image for Infiniti? I'm not sure which is more misguided, the idea of Slate thinking that their content is soooo crazy awesome and fascinating that on the first day of their launch they can expect me to sit through that image while I'm waiting for a video to load, or Infiniti for thinking that such a bland and annoying ad could do anything to try to improve their brand identity instead of just mucking it up. Ad revenue is obviously necessary, and ads aren't always bad, but they can't be integrated into the video like that unless you have some exclusive content that's absolutely amazing - like Jon Stewart quality.

4. That iTunes kbps joke that went on forever.

5. NewsLit. I know, that's been around for longer than the Slate V, and I get it, you're trying to make something kinda like Best Week Ever, but for real news stories instead of just Lindsay Lohan. And that's a good idea. But you should hire Michelle Colins to do it, cause your team right now is uninspired and bland.

6. So many more reasons, but I've vented my frustrations now and the whole thing is just kind of boring. But BORING would be a good reason 7 - 1,893.

I agree, this new Slate V thing sucks. I have slow internet speed, and it took forever to load the new video, and let's just say, it wasn't worth it. The text takes only a few seconds, and i don't have to put up with any stupid animated characters reading me the articles. Did Slate even do any research about how it's readers would react to this I wonder? The new video function seems like it's trying to reach out to the preteen crowd,and how many of them read this site anyway? Slate, stop catering to a differnt crowd and start catering to your current one. At least give us the option to still read the text, instead of wating for the video to load.

My problems are more basic: I have a hard time reading it:

1. The cutesy titles are of no use (beyond atmosphere) compared to the short descriptions on regular Slate. Here the short descriptions are gone, so it's nearly impossible to tell what any video is about at a glance.

2. Hovering over the videos gives the short description, which is very tedious because I have to hover over each image, wait for the popup, and then read. It makes it impossible to scan for keywords that catch my interest, like I do on every other site. (Other sites get away with it, but they have descriptive headlines instead of cutesy ones. Slate has changed the purpose of the headline but not obviated the need for the information it traditionally provided. The atmosphere of cutesy headlines is nice and adds a cheeky atmosphere, but I rarely read them because they don't help me choose which articles to go to.)

3. The descriptions are in the smallest font possible (at least in Firefox). I have 25:20 vision (better than normal) and I'm straining to read them. I originally switched to RSS because the descriptions had become so small on Slate, and now they're even smaller. Sleek design is cool but unfortunately here it's not very functional. Gotta have the necessities before the frills.

4. RSS, please! I'm betting a large chunk of your readers use RSS because this is not their only news source. I just don't check sites that don't have RSS anymore. Some people do both, but adding RSS these days gives you access to a chunk of readers that you won't have otherwise. I'm guessing you just don't have it set up yet... hoping it's not a design decision.

5. Playing through to the next video is very handy so you don't have to constantly attend the computer. It would be nice if there were a button on the video player to skip to next so that you don't have to search through the videos on the right if you don't like a particular one.

I think you've tapped a great potential market here.