Scarborough agreed with NY Post reporter that "the big media companies" should "look at" Coulter's work for potential plagiarism
On the July 5 edition of MSNBC's Scarborough County, host Joe Scarborough agreed with New York Post reporter Philip Recchia's assertion that "the big media companies, the publishers, the syndicates" should "look at" evidence that right-wing pundit Ann Coulter committed plagiarism in her book Godless: The Church of Liberalism (Crown Forum, June 2006) and several syndicated columns.
From the July 5 edition of Scarborough Country:
SCARBOROUGH: Is there going to be any backlash for Coulter? Obviously, the controversy only fuels sales for her book. But do you think publishers are going to be a bit more wary in the future if, in fact, these charges of plagiarism linger?
RECCHIA: I think they'd have to, really, and the new revelations that we reported recently, two days ago, were that not only in Godless, in her book are there several alleged instances of plagiarism, but in her syndicated columns there were two more flagrant examples, if you will. One in the Los Angeles Times, in one of Coulter's columns from 2005, she had talked about Supreme Court Justice David Souter and she had -- there are, I think, six passages of 10 to 48 words each that appear in the same order in her column that also appeared in the Los Angeles Times, 15 years earlier. Is that a coincidence? Who knows? But, again, you look at numbers like there's a 100 million-to-one chance that would have occurred. So I think that, you know, the big media companies, the publishers, the syndicates are going to have to, at some point, look at this and take it under their responsibility for, you know, checking for plagiarism, not leaving it up to the author.
SCARBOROUGH: I think you're right. Hey, Philip, thank you so much for being with us.
Media Matters: The right-wing media's election analysis just ain't that good
The Friday Rush: For conservatives, $400 million buys defeat at the ballot box
The myth of Fox News' ratings spike
Is he changing?
JOEY: Obviously, the controversy only fuels sales for her book.
Does it? While controversy can surely help sales ("I'm going to get the new Coulter just to see what crazy stuff she says"), I'm not so sure that this particular type of controversy will ("I'm going to get the new Coulter to see what crazy stuff somebody else said").
I wouldnt by her horrible book for a penny.
She will be an unknown by 2008.
controversy doesn't even do that. It's more like "I'm going to take the new Coulter book out from the library to see what crazy stuff she says" or "I'm going to browse it in a bookstore to see what she says."
I don't shell out money for books like that, in general. If I don't really want it, or don't know whether I want it, I take it out from the library first.
Occasionally he strays from the reservation and says something sensible, only to jump right back in again and spew Right Wing Talking Points with the rest of them.
It's hard to tell exactly where he's coming from.
or his dead female intern problem may come back and bite him...
Egads...I'm a plagiarist!
Seriously though, your characterization of Joe was spot on. He's a curious one. Is he a conservative who's simply disenchanted with current "Republicans?" Does he suffer from DID? Does he march to the beat of a different drummer or just have bad rhythm?
..rather than just parrot them for cash. Thus, when the talking points don't line up with common sense, every now and then he'll be worried about it.
The ones who just recite scripts, like O'Reilly, can't be shaken.
In WalMart the other day, I was browsing the new releases, hardback, and there was Ann's book, taking up four slots (like the other supposedly "top sellers").
Of the top ten, many were down to two or three copies on the shelf, others with less than half of their original number (about 30 displayed). Ann's stacks were still full. Four complete unmolested stacks.
Now, it's possible they sold out and had to restock, and did so just before I arrived.
More likely, though, is that her book is not selling like the hotcakes the Rightwing would prefer. They wouldn't lie to us about the books sales and popularity, would they?
A quick internet search shows the following top 5 nonfiction on the NYT Bestseller list.:
HARDCOVER NONFICTION Top 5 at a Glance 1. GODLESS, by Ann Coulter 2. WISDOM OF OUR FATHERS, by Tim Russert 3. MARLEY & ME, by John Grogan 4. DISPATCHES FROM THE EDGE, by Anderson Cooper 5. THE ONE PERCENT DOCTRINE, by Ron Suskind
In contrast, Sam Sedars new book F.U.B.A.R is currently #957 on Amazon. Just FYI.
I'm sure there is point in there, but I don't see it. What you posted has absolutely nothing to do with the story. It reminds of when people were defending the guy who wrote "A Million Little Pieces". So I guess your argument is her book is number one so it shouldn't matter if she is a plagiarist.
Of course after the author of "A Million Little Pieces" was found out his book quickly slid to obscurity. I also like that you take a shot at liberals by pointing out Sam Sneder's book, but I guess you forgot Al Gore's book is in the top 5. Whoops
Not to mention that if Seder was on every media outlet known to man, he'd sell a lot more books.
I was responding to the following comment: More likely, though, is that her book is not selling like the hotcakes the Rightwing would prefer. They wouldn't lie to us about the books sales and popularity, would they?
Now, my posting her book at #1 on NYT was meant to be a refutation of that comment. If you require further explanation, please let me know.
I plan on purchasing Suskind's book, but I'm curious why did you mention Sedar's book? Is it a conservative bashing book ala Coulter's Liberal bashers? If so the fact that it's in that position says something positive about the mindset of liberals. I would love if they could create a list of the top 10 books purchased among people who identify specically as Progressive and those that identify as Conservative. Taste in books say a lot about one's personality. I would be curious to see that.
I posted Sedars book position purely as a public service announcement that an up and coming star in the progressive wing has a new book out called F.U.B.A.R and since he decided not to include Rush Limbaugh or FOX News in the title of his book nobody really knows about it and he needs a little help. So I suggest you all go into Amazon and buy the book and he might crawl out of the 900's. Your welcome, Sam.
didn't answer my other question which was is Sedar's book one of those mean spirited I hate this group of people because of their plitical afiliation and wish they would die books like all of Ann's? If so it's very telling that it isn't doing that well among us libs. We are more likely to purchase books that have been well researched and supported by fact than one consisting of page after page about how much you hate someone supported by lies to justify the hate. Besides, I doubt that most people don't even know who Sam Sedar is. I've never ever seen Sam on one televison show. The media has given Coulter a platform to promote herself and the hateful books she writes. More evidence of media bias. A liberal could never do what she does and get one minute of air time.
you don't consider Bill Maher or Al Franken liberal.
What color is the sky on planet wing nut? You do know that people who live in the real world know there are NO famous pundits on the left that are even remotely comparable to your little hate spewing dominatrix Annie. She scares me Leather, I'm frightened. A woman who could make a peace loving person like myself want to bitch slap them is evil. Jesus is probably saying I can’t believe I died for her.
But if it's anything like his radio work, then it won't be as funny or insightful as he thinks it is.
Then again neither do you. The book IS funny as for insightful I dont think that was what the book was aiming for.
I already not only bought the book but have already read it and it is right now on my computer desk
It sounds like you enjoyed the book so it was money well spent. You are the target audience for his stuff not me which makes me wonder why I endure his radio nonsense on a daily basis. I guess I'm a glutton for punishment. Eventually I will get smart enough to just turn the station, either that or AAR will fold, one of the two.
I really enjoy Jerry Springer on the radio, Al Franken, and even mouth all mighty Rhandi Rhodes. You're a right of center kind of guy, I'm curious - why do you listen to AA? Tired of wing nut radio that dominates the air?
I used to work in the book biz. The NYTimes bestsellers list is misleading as it is based on orders by bookstores. This is why you'll see "best sellers" in the bargain bins a few months after release. It's because bookstores and chains like Borders and Barnes and Nobles, and yes WalMart will order thousands of copies hoping to sell them. To the times, those count as sales. So it doesn't necassarily reflect actual individual book sales by consumers. Also it's important to remember that publishers will give deals to these chains to buy the titles in massive quantities and preorders to make it appear that the books are more popular than they really are.
Another factor is BULK SALES. Rightwing organizations bought up boxes of Coulter's earlier books, to make it seem as if she had a large eager audience. Then they tried to give the books away free to "supporters".
She got tagged for that fraud, when the NYTimes placed an asterisk beside "bestsellers" made so by such bulk sales.
Is from bulk buying by Richard Mellon Shiafe? Every other time I have seen her name on the NYTimes best seller list it has that dagger there that indicates her sales are boosted by bulk buying.
Isn't this guy a democrat though? Or only in the same sense that Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman are?
No. He's not. He's a conservative Republican ex-Congressman from Florida.
"And that is all I have to say about that." -- Gomer Pyle (I believe. I would hate to be called a plagiarist.)
Forrest Gump. You've got your dimwitted Army soldiers mixed up.
Scarborough is more centrist than most of the right wing mouthpieces. That is why he is on MSNBC, not Fox. I especially enjoyed him raking the feds over the coals during Katrina. He is a Pensacolan, and took offense to the FEMA fiascos, and was very critical of the administration. He does parrot the moralistic high grounds, like Shiavo, gay marriage, etc. But he does not make many statements that I would consider outrageous like the Faux news morons.
Scarborough does seem like one of the few (actually, I can't think of another right now) conservative media figures who's capable of independent reasoning.
I'm not talking about ideology, but his thinking process. He actually seems to have one, in that he appears to use reasoning instead of kneejerk responses. When the herd of rightwing media bots automatically goes A, B, C, leads to D, occasionally Scarborough applies logic to come out with E or F.
Best two examples that come to mind: Hurricane Katrina, as the poster above said. Scarborough actually quoted Joseph Stalin, shaking his head and saying "Joe Stalin said one death is a tragedy, thousands are a statistic that people can ignore."
And after Tony Blair's joint press conference with Bush in the White House, while the rest of the right wing news figures (and not so right wing, too) were idiotically comparing Bush to Lincoln and making other absurd statements, Scarborough started talking about how much better Clinton would have done. He spoke about Blair's eloquence and said he couldn't help but think of Clinton's greater gravitas and ability to rise to world occasions.
Now, he wasn't talking about ideology, which makes it an even better example of real, not parrotted thinking. Scarborough was separating ideology from simple facts, a distinction that gets lost way too often (and is really one of the reasons MM exists) and observing that Clinton sounded better talking to world leaders than Bush does.