In defense of publishing "that woman" aka Ann Coulter
CLICK THIS TEXT TO VISIT THIS BLOG'S CURRENT SITE
I haven't counted or searched on Ann Coulter within WLST, but I know I've typed it a lot lately. The thing is, as a media phenom, the issue of whether a paper does or does not drop her column, after her offensive reference to Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards at the country's largest gathering of conservatives, fascinates me.
Why does it fascinate me?
Because I love studying the logic behind the decisions to dump her (which could be seen as flying in the face of freedom of speech or even promoting censorship) as well as the decisions to continue to run her column. Take this example from Editor & Publisher (which obviously is staying right on top of the decisions as well, including calling up editors to learn why they didn't dump Coulter):
David Hampton, editorial director of The Clarion-Ledger [circulation: 97,000] in Jackson, Miss., reported that his newspaper received about 3,000 e-mails since last night due to the MediaMatters.org listing. "It's the most mail I've ever gotten on anything," he told E&P, adding that he has also received some calls from local readers criticizing Coulter.
Like Walworth, Hampton is not a Coulter fan. "I've never agreed with anything that woman has uttered or written," he said. But Hampton is keeping Coulter, at least for now, because he wants a wide variety of commentary in The Clarion-Ledger. "She's loved and hated by many people in our region," Hampton added.
Hampton did emphasize that Coulter's use of the word "faggot" was "terrible, offensive, and out of line" -- and that her column is "really on the edge" of what his paper accepts. "We do monitor her column closely -- more than our other columns," he said, resulting in some of her past pieces either being spiked or edited.
"I think her popularity will continue to wane," concluded Hampton. "I believe ideas rise and fall on their merits, and I haven't seen much depth in hers."
Emphasis mine.
Now, should editors have to work that hard? Is there really no one else out there who can offer analysis through conservative lenses without resorting to name-calling, and we're not talking resorting - who can remember anything substantive Coulter has said? I'm sure she has - right? Well, I don't actually know. But I would hope so. And if not - all the more reason to dump her. Does anyone really learn anything from reading a column that possesses no specifics and only schoolyard taunts?
Frankly, I would think readers would realize how wasted their money is, word for word, when used to purchase a Coulter column by a paper. But hey - if editors feel that their newspapers are strong enough to let a bunch of nasty adjectives pose as an op-ed, more power to them.
Here's another editor's reasoning for why he's not dumping Coulter:
The Associated Press reported that another Coulter client, the Elko (Nev.) Daily Free Press, decided Friday to keep the columnist after soliciting the opinions of readers.
On Thursday, the Free Press had posted a note reporting that it received thousands of e-mails generated by the HRC campaign, but said none of the e-mails were local. So the paper asked local readers to weigh in.
"As of this morning we had received nearly 60 phone calls or faxes, and about nine out of 10 wanted us to keep running Ann Coulter," said Free Press Managing Editor Jeff Mullins, as quoted in a Friday story in his paper.
Mullins added: "Many callers said they thought Ann Coulter had a right to express herself, and they did not want us to be swayed by those seeking her removal."
What might the demographics be of the readers in Elko, Nevada? I don't know anything about Elko. I don't imagine Coulter does either, except that they want to allow her to express herself. The Free Press's circulation is listed as just over 5,000/day in 2005 (for comparison's sake, the Plain Dealer's daily circulation was listed as 776,000 last Fall). Here's some of Elko's Wikipedia entry:
1. Elko has a population of about 20K with a per capita income of $19K.
2. Elko is home to at least five casinos.
3. Elko is home to legal prostitution and five brothels. Per the entry, "Under Nevada law, any county with a population of less than 400,000 is allowed to license brothels if it so chooses." I bet there are a lot of those size towns.
Gambling, brothels and Coulter. Well, whatever.
Listen, Elko - Jackson - I can think of at least two conservative female bloggers who do a superior job to Coulter. If any newspapers are looking for talent, I suggest they take a stab at the 'sphere. There's a lot to wade through, but there's certainly places to go where you won't find a grandstander whose time has come and gone - at her own hand.
Why does it fascinate me?
Because I love studying the logic behind the decisions to dump her (which could be seen as flying in the face of freedom of speech or even promoting censorship) as well as the decisions to continue to run her column. Take this example from Editor & Publisher (which obviously is staying right on top of the decisions as well, including calling up editors to learn why they didn't dump Coulter):
David Hampton, editorial director of The Clarion-Ledger [circulation: 97,000] in Jackson, Miss., reported that his newspaper received about 3,000 e-mails since last night due to the MediaMatters.org listing. "It's the most mail I've ever gotten on anything," he told E&P, adding that he has also received some calls from local readers criticizing Coulter.
Like Walworth, Hampton is not a Coulter fan. "I've never agreed with anything that woman has uttered or written," he said. But Hampton is keeping Coulter, at least for now, because he wants a wide variety of commentary in The Clarion-Ledger. "She's loved and hated by many people in our region," Hampton added.
Hampton did emphasize that Coulter's use of the word "faggot" was "terrible, offensive, and out of line" -- and that her column is "really on the edge" of what his paper accepts. "We do monitor her column closely -- more than our other columns," he said, resulting in some of her past pieces either being spiked or edited.
"I think her popularity will continue to wane," concluded Hampton. "I believe ideas rise and fall on their merits, and I haven't seen much depth in hers."
Emphasis mine.
Now, should editors have to work that hard? Is there really no one else out there who can offer analysis through conservative lenses without resorting to name-calling, and we're not talking resorting - who can remember anything substantive Coulter has said? I'm sure she has - right? Well, I don't actually know. But I would hope so. And if not - all the more reason to dump her. Does anyone really learn anything from reading a column that possesses no specifics and only schoolyard taunts?
Frankly, I would think readers would realize how wasted their money is, word for word, when used to purchase a Coulter column by a paper. But hey - if editors feel that their newspapers are strong enough to let a bunch of nasty adjectives pose as an op-ed, more power to them.
Here's another editor's reasoning for why he's not dumping Coulter:
The Associated Press reported that another Coulter client, the Elko (Nev.) Daily Free Press, decided Friday to keep the columnist after soliciting the opinions of readers.
On Thursday, the Free Press had posted a note reporting that it received thousands of e-mails generated by the HRC campaign, but said none of the e-mails were local. So the paper asked local readers to weigh in.
"As of this morning we had received nearly 60 phone calls or faxes, and about nine out of 10 wanted us to keep running Ann Coulter," said Free Press Managing Editor Jeff Mullins, as quoted in a Friday story in his paper.
Mullins added: "Many callers said they thought Ann Coulter had a right to express herself, and they did not want us to be swayed by those seeking her removal."
What might the demographics be of the readers in Elko, Nevada? I don't know anything about Elko. I don't imagine Coulter does either, except that they want to allow her to express herself. The Free Press's circulation is listed as just over 5,000/day in 2005 (for comparison's sake, the Plain Dealer's daily circulation was listed as 776,000 last Fall). Here's some of Elko's Wikipedia entry:
1. Elko has a population of about 20K with a per capita income of $19K.
2. Elko is home to at least five casinos.
3. Elko is home to legal prostitution and five brothels. Per the entry, "Under Nevada law, any county with a population of less than 400,000 is allowed to license brothels if it so chooses." I bet there are a lot of those size towns.
Gambling, brothels and Coulter. Well, whatever.
Listen, Elko - Jackson - I can think of at least two conservative female bloggers who do a superior job to Coulter. If any newspapers are looking for talent, I suggest they take a stab at the 'sphere. There's a lot to wade through, but there's certainly places to go where you won't find a grandstander whose time has come and gone - at her own hand.
JBlog Me
6 Comments:
Deciding not to run Coulter's spewing is not censorship. Publishers have every right to pick and choose their columnists. They get to set the over-all tone. A Coulter column is more like vomit than writing. It's pure bile and meant to inflict harm. If that is the tone the publisher is going for, then I won't be buying that publication. Don't think I've ever read a Coulter column, and if it weren't for her attention-seeking ways that get her nastiness publicized all over the media, I'd never have heard of her.
In lieu of a trackback...
http://wendellrobinson.com/wenBLOG/2007/03/10/obsessed-with-ann-coulter/
Yes, it's always interesting to me when a publication or publisher that is always picking and choosing from among material is accused of "censorship" for something that doesn't fit their needs or wants. Every day, newspapers choose not to publish more things that are available to them than they do publish. So failure to print Coulter's unenlightening and hostile rants can't fairly be called "censorship" unless you take the view that every column, article, op-ed or letter submitted and not accepted is being "censored."
And I'm sorry but I don't think argument by name-calling has any place on the editorial pages of newspapers, and won't be buying the PD until Kevin O'Brien, locally the worst offender, is gone.
Village - that's a great observation re: not being censorship. Funny how readers forget or simply don't think about or realize how much gets censored - or EDITED as we more commonly think about it. But yes - you are so right.
Wendell - I'm flattered by your Separated at Birth tribute. Wait til you see my hair now.
When I see name-calling in anything, that's usually when I stop reading because rarely does anything after it have logic - it's just venting or too personal and doesn't add to the conversation. And with all the conversations to keep up with these days, there's just no time for name calling if you're really interested in moving forward on anything.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home