Welcome to blogs.sfweekly.com
Blogs
  • News
  • Music
  • Calendar
  • Restaurants
  •  
  • Arts
  • Movies
  • The Ads
  • Classifieds
  • Blogs
  • Columns
  • Best Of
  • Bars/Clubs
  • Archives
  • Reader Recommendations
  • Promotions
  • Coupons

Top

blog

Stories

  • Queer

    Does This Dog Hate Gay People?

    By Patrick Connors

    1
  • Sports

    Baseball's Worst Fashion Faux-Pas

    By Joe Eskenazi

    2
  • Tech

    Palo Alto To S.F. By Bike -- In 150 Easy Steps

    By Peter Jamison

    3
  • Media

    Traumatic Childhood Houseboat Memories

    By Matt Smith

    4
  • Politics

    Republicans' Smutty Twitter Habits

    By Joe Eskenazi

    5
  • Government

    Planning Department Porn Scandal Gets Weird (NSFW)

    By Joe Eskenazi

    6
  • Animals

    Did Boat Strike Dead Whale In Bay?

    By Joe Eskenazi

    7
  • Marijuana

    Former San Jose Top Cop Makes Case For Legal Pot

    By Joe Eskenazi

    8
  • Law & Order

    Cops Shut Down Kids' Lemonade Stand

    By Joe Eskenazi

    9
  • Tech

    Jailbreak!

    By Joe Eskenazi

    10
  • Politics

    Diane von Furstenberg's Hideous Nancy Pelosi Bag

    By Peter Jamison

    11
  • Animals

    Golden Gate Park's Killer Frogs Threaten California

    By Matt Smith

    12
  • Politics

    Alioto-Pier's $50K Legal Tab May Be Paid By S.F.

    By Joe Eskenazi

    13
  • Marijuana

    Oakland Pot Factories Churning Out Weed By 2011?

    By Joe Eskenazi

    14
  • Sexytime

    Gay Porn Star Brawl Erupts At Drag Contest

    By Lauren Smiley

    15
 
Laser-Guided Awesome

Equation: The Difference Between Girls and Guys

By Alexia Tsotsis, Fri., Jan. 29 2010 @ 4:50PM
Comments (63)
Categories: Laser-Guided Awesome
equation1.jpg
Click to enlarge
​
In an homage to Beckhap's Law, the SF Weekly's Audrey Fukuman created the following infographic, representing the differences in how men and women rate each other when looking for a potential mate.

Follow us on Twitter at @sfweekly.

Tags:

Audrey Fukuman, battle of the sexes
Comments (63) Write Comment Email to Friend Print Article

Comments (63)

Navin Ale says:

It is funny.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 11:18AM
The Lab says:

A few problems with this equation. First, the best possible score should be the same for men and women. However men top out at 4 whereas for a woman it is 2. Second, there is already a well-established ten-point scoring system. Third, this scoring system suggests that a man finds a "perfect 10" woman with average intelligence and humor as attractive as a "5" with perfect intelligence and humor. Considering how popular gorgeous women are regardless of their intelligence, I'd say this is not true. Cute concept but a could use some work.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 11:27AM
Hasty Generalization says:

Rubbish. Women are equally superficial, and this is just a man-hating infographic based upon nothing except some urban legend about women and men based upon poor observations and biased situations.

In other words, this is good for entertainment, but nothing else, because this is NOT how women and men work.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 11:27AM
Steve says:

I would change that to:

looks * (1 + intelleignec + humor)

(That way a good looking woman can score high, even if she's not the sharpest or funniest tool in the shed.)

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 11:33AM
Nate Solomon says:

It seems like the equation for "How guys rate girls" is missing the crazy variable. Please reference the Barney Stinton's "Hot, Crazy Scale".

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 11:34AM
Bob says:

Really? These men VS women infographics are getting so old. Same with stand up comedians that point out meaningless differences between men and women.

This isn't 1993 anymore.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 11:50AM
Slaton says:

So guys can score up to a 4 while girls can only score a 2?

Interesting.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 11:53AM
tgibs says:

There is only one problem with this equation... note that addition and multiplication do not work the same way... i.e.

.5*.5=.25 where as .5+.5=1....

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 12:04PM
RUKiddingMe says:

Hahahaha. Intelligence and Humor???? Multiply with 0 you get 0! Looks + Attitude + Fun

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 12:10PM
Thomas says:

I would say for guys : (looks * (intelligence + humor) + money)

If a stupid ugly girls is really rich, she might be attractive for some (most) of us :p

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 12:23PM
Doyle says:


It's 2010 and we're still making jokes like this? "Nah, but seriously, it's like, guys and girls are TOTALLY different."

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 12:25PM
Tom says:

Awesome!
Another chart that digs into the established fact that men are oafs just looking for a hot woman to marry and that women are perfect beings (who marry men fully knowing that all they care about is whether his wife is hot).

This made my day and was just as funny as when my friend said, 'working hard or hardly working?...man, we laughed and laughed at that one.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 1:06PM
Todd says:

Oh my god, why are people taking this so seriously? It's just a joke, which is pretty funny.

Lighten up people.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 1:19PM
Jeff says:

Actually, the equation you put together (looks x (intelligence + humor)*) implies that if a girl is neither funny nor smart, it doesn't matter HOW hot she is. While I'd tend to agree, that's sort of the opposite of the point you're supposedly making.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 1:25PM
Rob says:

There's a good reason for guys to prefer good-looking women. Healthy women make healthy babies. Why use more sophisticated criteria?

Women, on the other hand, have to find a man who will bring home the bacon no matter what. Diversification of strengths is usually more important than maximizing any one. However, I would say that already having money is a pretty good indication of fitness. So money weighs more highly than any other factor.

It's nice to pretend otherwise, but it's just not as often true. Guys want looks, girls want security. It's not shallow, it's just how we take care of real needs.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 1:41PM
Mike says:

I'm pretty sure that for men rating women, looks^2 or looks^3 is more appropriate.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 1:54PM
Thomas says:


This is not an equation.

These are two formulas.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 1:57PM
Get Real says:

Yeah, thta is so 1993, this is 2010, Here is the facts ....
For guys it is all about;
Does the girl look hot? is she in shape? does she have great BQQBs? how about a smooth vag, tight rear ? can ii park in back? wiishe/can she give a deep throat BJ? will she swallow? will she do the dishes and clean house? Is her family rich? will she get a X2 paying job so I can play video games? Will her sister do me too? how about her mother? how about her brother too?

Yeah that graphic is just stupid.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 1:58PM
Chance says:

What... ever happened to being able to giggle at something and move on? Constructive criticism is welcome, and while flaming is anticipated, it doesn't change you from being less of a douche about it...

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 1:59PM
Real Man says:

Yeah, that is so 1993, this is 2010, Here is the facts ....

For guys it is all about;
Does the girl look hot? is she in shape? does she have great BQQBs? how about a smooth vag, tight rear ? can I park in back? will she/can she give a deep throat BJ? will she swallow? will she do the dishes and clean house? Is her family rich? will she get a X2 paying job so I can play video games? Will her sister do me too? how about her mother? how about her brother too?

Yeah that graphic is just stupid.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 2:03PM
Arthur Dent says:

Women are just as shallow as men when it comes to looks. Sometimes more so. This graphic is inaccurate.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 2:12PM
Anonymous says:

^
A bunch of queers.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 2:18PM
Anonymous says:

This makes no sense, other than to further the stereotype that women are poor at mathematics.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 3:44PM
Some guy says:

I don't see how this infographic disparages men. It simply states that, generally, men aren't as critical about women as women are about men. By adding $ as a factor for women, the infographic could also be stating that women focus too much on money alluding to how stereotypically superficial women are. That construction would make more sense because men are stereotypical about looks, and thereby can be construed as an equal knock back at men.

I completely agree with the infographic. Intelligence doesn't mean anything unless there's a sense of humor to highlight it.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 3:52PM
DNA says:

This chart is a mathematics FAIL.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 3:56PM
Milo says:

First off, nice work on the graphic...very entertaining.

Second, I am a dating coaching (yes, people pay me for it) and I've written pretty extensively on this subject matter.

To make this formula useful for comparing between the sexes and not simply within each sex, we're going to want four variable on each side.

Making this adjustment does not pose too much of a challenge if we simply equate money with social status, our respective positions in the social hierarchy. If we make that substitution, we can easily see this is something that is valued by the other sex as well

For example, if you take two women and, all other things being equal, one is a celebrity (e.g. snowboarder Torah Bright) while the other is not, a man is probably going to find the celebrity woman more attractive.

And just as men place a disproportional weight on looks in their attraction response, women tend to value status much more highly than the other variables.

So the new "equation" becomes...

Women want: Status x (Intelligence + Humor + Looks)

Men want: Looks x (Intelligence + Humor + Status)

Now everyone go get laid! :]

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 4:01PM
Alex Hunter says:

Actually it is biologically accurate. Women use traits to make sure they have beneficial genes passed onto their child as their criteria. This includes money (does he have enough resources to raise a child).

The man looks for the best possible mate (looks) then considers other factors such as intelligence.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 4:07PM
wtf says:

There is way too many cunts posting here...

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 4:21PM
adele pace says:

Another devolution in the Venus/Mars debate.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 5:22PM
Joe S. Pack says:

Perhaps the woman's equation for assessing men should read:

money * (intel. + humor + looks)

Or perhaps this is just rather dumb altogether.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 6:07PM
john says:

It seems like humour isnt given enough credit on the womens equation. Studies have shown tht a sense of humour is often the first thing women look for in men, followed by wealth.
Also the equation doesnt mention any sort of X-factor. I'm sure we've all met ppl we've been totally bowled over by who havent scored tht highly on this graph and also met ppl we'd score highly who we were largely indifferent to. You cant forget that x-factor that makes ppl fall head over heels for someone without really being able to explain why.

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 6:58PM
Fayetteville Video says:

I love Jimmy more now than I ever did!

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 8:14PM
Anon says:

Isn't anything to the 0 actually 1?

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 8:38PM
danny says:

Or as a coworker of mine used to say:

beauty x brains is a constant

Posted On: Saturday, Jan. 30 2010 @ 9:26PM
Alex says:

Anyone pay attention to the author of the above infographic's last name???

Kind of obvious that someone with the last name of "Fuk-u-man" might have issues with men...

plus you're all taking this way too seriously.

Posted On: Sunday, Jan. 31 2010 @ 3:11AM
Sven says:

It's funny because it's true :D

Posted On: Sunday, Jan. 31 2010 @ 3:55AM
noumena says:

will she do the dishes and clean house?

http://www.fuartv.org/

Posted On: Sunday, Jan. 31 2010 @ 4:03AM
NoName says:

What's "mate" mean? Someone to screw tonight or someone with whom to live the rest of my days with? I assure you that those two scenarios activate very different calculations.

Posted On: Sunday, Jan. 31 2010 @ 4:41AM
fb says:

I agree, this isn't realistic. The typical man-hating mentality is indeed captured above, but from what I've seen in the last couple decades put most emphasis just on looks for women. If they did care so much about intelligence + humor + money, I know a lot of guys who would be getting laid like rock stars, but because they lack in the looks (=confidence) category, they are jerking off most nights.

The world doesn't work like what we list above, at least not in the US. (in some places like Japan your resume seems to be sufficient, at least in my experience) It's unfortunate, just like that nerdy guy in Van Wilder said: "Unfortunately, having best GPA doesn't get you laid."

Posted On: Sunday, Jan. 31 2010 @ 6:14AM
eric says:

men's pov should be:

5x Looks + 0.25x Intel + 0.25x Humor -
30x Makes more money than you

Posted On: Sunday, Jan. 31 2010 @ 7:19AM
anti buzz killington says:

HEY PEOPLE IT'S SUPOSED TO BE FUNNY DON'T TAKE IT LITTERAL JUST FUCKING LAUGH CAUSE YOUR ONE OPINION DOESN'T COVER THE WHOLE GODDAMN WORLD WETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT GUYS LIKE TITS AND HOT CHICKS NOT THE BRAINS THAT COME WITH THEM AND GIRLS LIKE THE MONEY AND ATTENTION THEY GET FOR CATCHING A HOT GUY IT'S COMMON AND YET FUNNY DON'T TRY AND SIMPLIFY THIS CONCEPT JUST GO WITH IT

Posted On: Sunday, Jan. 31 2010 @ 9:27AM
Reece says:

"I would change that to:

looks * (1 + intelleignec + humor)

(That way a good looking woman can score high, even if she's not the sharpest or funniest tool in the shed.)"

Did you graduate from 2nd grade? 0 times anything equals 0. 0 looks ( 1 + 0 intelligence + 0 humor) = 0. It'd have to be 1 + looks (etc...)

Posted On: Sunday, Jan. 31 2010 @ 11:23AM
Sam Burrell says:

actually
the average male does not look for humor in women.
Humor has been masculinized and is considered more or less a pretty feather in the mating ritual, which is why the class clowns are always little boys. They are realizing that humor is a good way to be noticed, and they then begin to refine it. This is also why the biggest names in comedies are of men, and why they are geared towards men.
intelligence too has been masculinized throughout history. Because of gender roles and males being in more competition for higher paying jobs, society has come to consider intelligence a masculine quality.

As a result of these two:
Smart women intimidate men.
Funny women tend to be considered as "one of the guys"

Posted On: Sunday, Jan. 31 2010 @ 2:14PM
Gonzobot says:

You nerds need to stop arguing about the variables of the equation and FUCKING GET LAID.

The joke is that it is far harder to entirely please a woman, and men simply either will or will not fuck her. Christ you guys are pale, go get some sun or something!

Posted On: Sunday, Jan. 31 2010 @ 7:07PM
fail says:

Men rank women on 1-10 so you fail there. Women rank men on two scales depending on their age. Young women rank on looks. Once a woman hits a certain point in her life money becomes number one followed by looks.

Posted On: Monday, Feb. 1 2010 @ 8:15AM
blahhh says:

This was clearly created by a woman.

Posted On: Monday, Feb. 1 2010 @ 8:17AM
heh says:

@Gonzoboy

I bet you're ripped, could fight in MMA and make a lot of money amirite?

Posted On: Monday, Feb. 1 2010 @ 8:21AM
clay says:

Oh, so girls are better than boys, I get it.

My experience has been that in school, there was always a better looking guy. I always ended up in the "friend zone" and it was made clear to me that my intellect, talent and humor did not matter. The horror stories my girl "friends" told me about the good looking guys they dated apparently weren't bad enough to make them overlook their superior physical appearance.

When I got out of school, there was always a guy who dressed better or had a better car, etc. I didn't have any female friends: I was invisible to them. I was a starving artist and looked the part. The best reaction I could get from a woman was a sneer.

When I began my career, suddenly I was surrounded by available women who all found me to be smart, funny, gifted and intelligent. Go figure!

Posted On: Monday, Feb. 1 2010 @ 9:14AM
Badger says:

I think people are forgetting these things are purely for humour, and do not represent any "eternal truths".

JUST THROWING THAT OUT THERE

Posted On: Monday, Feb. 1 2010 @ 1:01PM
(1@&1|\|3&!)31337 says:

Ummmm, there is a much more accurate scale out there. It is the Tucker Max Female Rating System:
http://www.tuckermax.com/archives/entries/the_tucker_max_female_rating_system.phtml

Posted On: Thursday, Feb. 4 2010 @ 5:54PM
Ein's Friend says:

Equation to rate women should be "(Look + Humor)/Intelligent" We need no smart women whose control over men.

Posted On: Thursday, Feb. 4 2010 @ 10:18PM
Takuya says:

guys Max 4
girls Max 2

Posted On: Saturday, Feb. 6 2010 @ 11:40PM
EpicLOLZ says:

I can’t believe you people are arguing about this. Classic. I think the comments are funnier than the picture. +1 to the idiot society for completely missing the point.

Posted On: Tuesday, Feb. 9 2010 @ 9:37PM
Pinoy Big Blogger says:

ahehehe..this is usually true...:-)

Posted On: Wednesday, Feb. 10 2010 @ 8:13PM
Betsy says:

Stupid sexist title ...

it should be

difference between girls and BOYS

NOT girls and GUYS

Posted On: Sunday, Feb. 14 2010 @ 9:01PM
Josh says:

yeah, it should be: looks * (sanity + humor + intelligence)

Posted On: Wednesday, Feb. 17 2010 @ 7:37AM
Liz1388 says:

For those claiming women are as "superficial as men" in judging the opposite sex? Totally NOT true.

I ask only one thing: which sex is *more likely* to marry or even date a disabled person?

I rest my case.

Posted On: Friday, Feb. 19 2010 @ 7:03PM
maniacal engineer says:

interesting comments - but obviously all made by a bunch of liberal arts majors or inummerates.

men rate women as :
((intelligence + humor)/(maintenance+psychosis))^looks!
with all quantities on a 1-10 scale. for you liberal arts folks, the '!' is the factorial function, and the '^' is exponentiation.

women rate men as:

(logr(his income/ her income)*(intelligence +humor + looks))+i*rnd(10)+ sqrt(2)
where logr is a log to a random base, i is the imaginary number. the log term goes negative if he makes less than her. 'rnd(10)' means a random number between 1 and ten. this makes a woman's rating of a man always complex and irrational.

I think that the above equations, while slightly more difficult to use, are more reflective of reality and will disabuse anyone of the clearly false idea that they can actually have any idea of what goes on in a woman's mind

Posted On: Friday, Feb. 26 2010 @ 9:55AM
Eric says:

hmmm

Posted On: Saturday, Feb. 27 2010 @ 5:29AM
g to the v says:

the men's equation is backwards, the woman's is missing the "crazy" factor and both are missing the "alcohol factor" but totally hilarious otherwise.

Posted On: Saturday, Feb. 27 2010 @ 11:32AM
You Are All Idiots says:

YOU ARE ALL IDIOTS!

I've read through the comments and, NO ONE has got it...

IT'S A VISUAL JOKE PEOPLE!

The woman's "equation" lines up with his genitals (size of penis) and the man's make the visual of 2 breasts.

The penis size is then made fun of with $ closest to the body and intelligence furthest away. The hotness + breasts is a throw to the cliche that it is just hotness that matters, intelligence and humour are just incidental.

Incidentally who among you isn't from the good ol' US of A? I'm especially disappointed in you...

Don't wanna be an American Idiot...

Posted On: Sunday, Mar. 14 2010 @ 9:50PM
Colleen says:

WOMEN BE SHOPPIN!

Posted On: Friday, Apr. 2 2010 @ 11:25PM
Prak wieght loss says:

Who ever has the balls to turn that in is my hero. LOL man.

Posted On: Monday, Apr. 12 2010 @ 1:12AM

Write Comment


Comments may not show up immediately after submission. Please wait a minute after posting a comment for it to appear.

All reader comments are subject to our Terms of Use. By clicking "Post," you acknowledge that you have reviewed and agree to these Terms.

Most Popular Stories

  • San Francisco Cops Shut Down Kids' Lemonade Stand (PIC)
  • Porn Motherlode Unearthed From San Francisco Work Computers (NSFW)
  • Republicans Following Porn on Twitter (NSFW)
  • Plastiki Prepares to Set Sail from Pier 31
  • San Francisco Cops Shut Down Kids' Lemonade Stand (PIC) (63)
  • The Loathsome Campaign Against Pension Reform (16)
  • Republicans Following Porn on Twitter (NSFW) (13)
  • United Airlines Forgets Young Passenger Julien Reid, Force-Feeds Him McDonald's (13)
  • Will San Francisco Overlook Target's Ties to Gay Hate? (12)
  • Baylinks: Safety Tips, Beach Bummer, iPorn
  • Chronicle Slashes Subscription Rates for Weekend Delivery
  • Tom Ammiano Mangles Profane Spanish at Unique Immigration Rally (PICS)
  • Joseph Swim, Stabbed in Buena Vista Park, Is Homicide No. 29
  • California a Bit Crazy, Survey Finds
  • More Recent Entries...
Sign up for free stuff, news info & more!

San Francisco Classifieds

  • buy, sell, trade (5,683)
  • musician (511)
  • rentals (3,729)
  • jobs (2,126)
  • personals (9,198)
  • adult entertainment (6,918)

Slideshows»

  • July in SF Weekly Photos
  • Pie or Die @ SF Food Wars
  • All Shook Down Festival in North Beach Part 1
  • More Slideshows >>

Tools

Search The Snitch


Follow us on:

Services

  • Ketama

    Ketama

    View Ad | View Site
More >>

Twitter Feed

Follow sfweekly on Twitter

More Twitter >>

VVM on Digg

  • 1
    diggs
    '30s Texas History Textbook As Racist As It Is Hilarious
  • 6
    diggs
    WA Governor's Office Calls Pot Legalization Legitamite Idea
  • 88
    diggs
    Top Five Delicious Foods (With Disgusting Ingredients)
  • 69
    diggs
    Robber Cuts Ahead of Cops In Line at Starbucks
  • 1
    diggs
    The 10 Coolest Pac-Man Cakes
  • 350
    diggs
    Congress May Double Penalties For Pot Brownies
  • 861
    diggs
    SB 1070: How to Dress Like a Legal Immigrant
  • 161
    diggs
    Artist Break Dances and Raps For Funding
  • 883
    diggs
    We're Winning! Poll Shows CA Pot Legalization Ahead 52%-36%
  • 431
    diggs
    Man Turns 14-Year-Old Girl Into Dominatrix, Gets 25 Years
  • 8786
    diggs
    Legalization of Marijuana Bill in California
  • 5799
    diggs
    Guess Who is Facing 21 Years in Prison?
  • 5051
    diggs
    Guys Dates Several Prostitutes. No Sex. Just Regular Dates.
  • 4605
    diggs
    Get Up, Stand Up: Ammiano Introduces Marijuana Legalization
  • 3761
    diggs
    Guy Dumps His Cheating Girlfriend Live on Radio (Audio)
Shopping foam order.com
  • Memory Foam Mattress
  • Cushions
  • Tempur-Pedic Mattress
  • Folding foam
  • Neoprene

Links

Linkage

  • Hype Machine
  • Creep Machine -An Art Blog
  • Alameda Daily News
  • Alameda Musings
  • Anil Dash
  • Athletics Nation
  • Bagel Radio
  • Barbarian Blog
  • Beast Blog
  • Beetle Beat
  • Berkeley Bubble
  • Blogging Bayport Alameda
  • Chowhound
  • Curbed SF
  • Current Blog
  • Daily Kos
  • Dellums Watch
  • East Bay SPCA Shelterlife Blog
  • Fecal Face
  • Good Morning Silicon Valley
  • Grand Lake Guardian
  • Grasping Reality With Both Hands
  • Halfway to Concord
  • Laughing Squid
  • Live365
  • New West Notes
  • NovoMetro
  • Oakland Focus
  • Oaktown News
  • Pandora
  • Peninsula Press Club
  • Political Blotter
  • Radio Paradise
  • San Francisco Cityscape
  • San Leandro Bytes
  • SFGate Culture Blog
  • SFist
  • Silicon Valley Watcher
  • Silicon Valley Wire
  • Slashdot
  • Spot-On
  • Stretcher
  • TechCrunch
  • Techdirt
  • The Daily Dirt
  • The Hayword
  • The Heuristic Squelch
  • TourFilter.com
  • ValleyWag
  • VentureBeat

Newspapers: Daily

  • Alameda Times-Star
  • Argus (Fremont)
  • Contra Costa Times
  • Daily Review (Hayward)
  • East Bay Daily News
  • East County Times
  • Los Angeles Times
  • Oakland Tribune
  • San Francisco Chronicle
  • San Francisco Daily Journal
  • San Francisco Examiner
  • San Jose Mercury News
  • San Mateo Daily Journal
  • San Ramon Valley Times
  • The Daily Californian
  • The New York Times
  • The Sacramento Bee
  • The Wall Street Journal
  • The Washington Post
  • Tri-Valley Herald
  • Valley Times
  • West County Times

Newspapers: Other

  • Alameda Journal
  • Chloe Veltman
  • Asian Week
  • Bay Area Reporter
  • Berkeley Daily Planet
  • Berkeley Voice
  • Concord Transcript
  • Contra Costa Sun
  • Danville Times
  • Danville Weekly
  • East Bay Business Times
  • El Bohemio
  • El Latino
  • El Observador
  • El Tecolote
  • Livermore Independent
  • Metro (Silicon Valley)
  • Montclarion
  • Nichi Bei Times
  • NikkeiWest
  • Oakland Globe
  • Oakland Post
  • Piedmonter
  • Pleasant Hill/Martinez Record
  • Pleasanton Times
  • Richmond Globe
  • Rossmoor News
  • San Francisco Bay Guardian
  • San Francisco Business Times
  • SF Weekly
  • Silicon Valley/San Jose Business Journal
  • Singtao Daily
  • The Irish Herald
  • The Journal (Albany, El Cerrito, Kensington)
  • The San Leandro Times
  • Valley Sentinel
  • Vietnam Daily News
  • Walnut Creek Journal

Other Local Publications

  • 7x7
  • Alameda Magazine
  • Bay Area Parent
  • Bay City News
  • BeyondChron
  • Bitch
  • Cafe Magazine
  • Cal Law
  • Chloe Veltman
  • California Lawyer
  • California Magazine
  • Catholic San Francisco
  • CNet News.com
  • Colorlines
  • Common Ground
  • Diablo
  • Dwell
  • East Bay Monthly
  • El Cerrito Wire
  • Environmental News Network
  • Hi Fructose
  • Hyphen
  • India Currents
  • India West
  • Indybay
  • IndyMedia
  • J the Jewish Newsweekly
  • JPG
  • Kitchen Sink
  • Lip Magazine
  • McSweeney's Internet Tendency
  • Mother Jones
  • New American Media
  • News From Native California
  • North Gate News Online
  • Oakland Magazine
  • Philippine News
  • ReadyMade
  • Red Herring
  • Salon
  • San Francisco Magazine
  • SF Gate
  • SF Station
  • Silicon Valley Daily
  • Sunset
  • The Believer
  • The Wave Magazine
  • Tikkun
  • Tri-City Voice
  • Tri-Valley Magazine
  • Wholphin DVD Magazine
  • Wired
  • Wired News

Web Sites: Politics

  • Cal Berkeley Democrats
  • California Conservative
  • California Progress Report
  • California Secretary of State
  • California Voter Foundation
  • Calitics
  • Flash Report
  • League of Women Voters
  • Political Muscle
  • Rough & Tumble
  • The California Majority Report

Radio

  • 89.3 KOHL
  • KALW 91.7 FM
  • KALX 90.7
  • KCBS 740 AM
  • KCEA 89.1
  • KCSM 91.1 FM
  • KDON 102.5
  • KDYA 1190 The Light
  • KFAT Online
  • KFAX 1100 AM
  • KFJC 89.7
  • KFRC 610 AM
  • KGO 810 AM
  • KKUP 91.5 FM
  • KLIV 1590 AM
  • KMEL 106.1
  • KNBR 680/1050 AM
  • KNDL 89.9
  • KPFA 94.1 FM
  • KPIG 1510 AM
  • KPOO-FM 89.5
  • KQED 88.5 FM
  • KRCB 91.1 FM
  • KSCU 103.3
  • KSFO 560 AM
  • KSJS 90.5
  • KSMC 89.5
  • KSUN 91.5
  • KUSF 90.3 FM
  • KVCH 104.1
  • KZSU 90.1 FM
  • Live 105
  • The Bone 107.7 FM
  • WILD 94.9
  • Youth Radio

Television

  • BETV
  • CBS 5 KPIX
  • CCTV
  • Current
  • KFTL
  • KGO 7 ABC
  • KICU 36
  • KQED PBS 9
  • KRON 4
  • KTEH 54
  • KTSF 26
  • KTVU Fox 2
  • NBC-11 KNTV
  • PCTV 26/28
  • The CW Bay Area
  • TV 30
  • TV 50 KFTY
  • Your TV20
About Us | Work for SF Weekly | Esubscribe | Free Classifieds | Advertising | Privacy Policy | Problem With the Site? | RSS | Site Map
©2010 SF Weekly, LP. All rights reserved.