Citing reader support, several papers will keep publishing Coulter
Two newspapers that publish Ann Coulter's syndicated column -- the Casper Star-Tribune of Wyoming and the Las Vegas Review-Journal in Nevada -- announced recently that they have no plans to drop Coulter's column, and Editor & Publisher quoted the editor of a third -- The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mississippi -- saying that the paper would continue publishing Coulter. To date, eight newspapers have dropped Coulter's column since her March 2 speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in which she referred to Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards as a "faggot."
Clark Walworth, the editor of the Casper Star-Tribune, published a signed editorial March 11 stating that his newspaper would continue to run Coulter's column despite "dozens" of messages* urging him to drop it. Walworth said that while he found Coulter's comment about Edwards "abhorrent," he did not believe it merited her removal from his paper's op-ed pages. In explaining his decision, Walworth wrote, "In the America that I love, we don't silence disagreeable viewpoints." He also noted that "lots of Wyoming conservatives relish" Coulter's diatribes.
The Las Vegas Review-Journal published a March 10 article announcing that it would not drop Coulter's column despite "more than 2,000 e-mails calling for the column's demise." In an article headlined "R-J not joining trickle of papers dropping Coulter," the newspaper said that editorial page editor John Kerr would continue to treat Coulter's columns "as he always has-by reading and running them on a case-by-case basis."
Editor & Publisher reported on March 10 that The Clarion-Ledger would continue to run Coulter's column despite receiving "about 3,000 e-mails ... due to the MediaMatters.org listing." The article quoted David Hampton, the editorial director of the paper, as saying that while he found Coulter's anti-gay slur "terrible, offensive, and out of line," Coulter is "loved and hated by many people in our region."
Two other newspapers, the Elko Daily Free Press of Nevada and the State Journal-Register of Springfield, Illinois, have solicited reader feedback on whether or not to keep publishing Coulter. A March 9 Daily Free Press article reported that "[r]eaders have sent a clear message to the Elko Daily Free Press: Keep printing Ann Coulter's opinion column." The article quoted managing editor Jeff Mullins as saying, "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," in response to the paper's call for reader comments on Coulter.
The State Journal-Register -- a newspaper that carries Ann Coulter's column but was not on Media Matters' original list -- published an editorial March 11 asking readers to weigh in on whether or not it should continue to publish Coulter. The editorial noted Media Matters' item on Coulter, saying, "MediaMatters [sic] missed us, thank goodness, so we have not been deluged with anti-Coulter e-mails from across the country."
Despite calling Coulter's slur against Edwards "an idiotic, sophomoric statement," the editorial expressed reluctance at pulling Coulter from the paper's roster of columnists without receiving more feedback from its readers first. "We would not have run Coulter if we did not believe she held value for at least some of our readers," the editorial stated.
In the same article that discussed The Clarion-Ledger's decision to continue running Coulter's column, Editor & Publisher also reported that The Florida Times-Union in Jacksonville would continue to run Coulter's column
"Clark Walworth ... noted that 'lots of Wyoming conservatives relish" Coulter's diatribes'".
In other words, lots of Wyoming conservatives relish using the word "fa**ot" to describe gays. Walworth agrees--and even signs it.
Unless, of course, he does the silencing. From his own editorial:
I guess that's his right, but it seems a bit inconsistent.Casper Star-Tribune: We censor, you submit.
Down at Folsom Prison, their newletter features a column by serial killers. Sure, it gets graphic, offensive, and obscene, but hey, the inmates seem to LIKE it, so we's give, 'em what they wants!
That, friends, is the JOURNALISTIC INTEGRITY practiced by those papers that still carry Coulter ... because the dregs of society, filled with hatred and bigotry, "LIKE" to read her stuff. Great.
So if you read Clark Walworth's, (editor of Casper Star-Tribune) article From Ann to Zumbo, he argues that since Coulter made the remarks outside of his newspaper, their paper has less responsiblity; and if she did make the F comment in their paper, he would have just deleted the remark, yetpaid her to continue her comments.
"We're reluctant to sack a columnist over something she said outside the pages of the newspaper"
"If she had ignited her F-bomb in a column, we would have deleted it."
Hate still sells, sad.
So what? That's 8 for us, 3 for them. Clearly proves there are more right wingers than liberals in America! nyuk! nyuk! nyuk!
They may just be scared of her. She may have pictures or info they wouldn't like their family to see or the industry to know.
"an idiotic, sophomoric statement," the editorial expressed reluctance at pulling Coulter from the paper's roster of columnists without receiving more feedback from its readers first. "We would not have run Coulter if we did not believe she held value for at least some of our readers," the editorial stated.
So if Ann Coulter makes "idiotic ans sophomoric statements" but she shares the values of some your readers, then thereefore some of your readers' values include condoning "idiotic and sophomoric" statements slurring gays and John Edwards.
At least this efitor is honest in admitting that some of his readers are idiotic and sophomoric. They must comprise a significant enough percentage of his readership, however, if he was afraid to lose them.
[has] some of your readers' values
Attention advertisers! You too can reach this fine demographic!
And they'll buy just about anything.
Apparently they will even buy coffee mugs from Bill O'Reilly and "CLUB GITMO" shirts from Rush Limbaugh. There's indeed a market out there that targets fools... Can't wait for the Ann Coulter talking doll that spews hateful slurs when you pull its string.
Good. Another victory for free speech and another defeat for liberalism. Hopefully we won't have a liberal Democrat as President, and conservative voices won't be silenced by the anti free speech liberals.
There is no free speech issue involved here. Your comment is inane. IF she gets arrested for what she says or if she is told she cant say these things on a steetcorner you will have a point until then you have NO point. There is no freespeech guarantee that newspapers MUST buy her product or she is being silenced. If that were the case I could demand they buy whatever I write or they would be silencing MY free speech rights. The rightwingers that keep talking about Coulters free speech rights being denied in this instance know less about Free speech than my cat knows about quantam mechanics and he is DEAD
"The rightwingers that keep talking about Coulters free speech rights being denied in this instance know less about Free speech than my cat knows about quantum mechanics and he is DEAD"
I normally just lurk at this site, but I had to pop up just to say that that was hilarious. Thanks for the laugh - and for making your point so succintly. ;-)
Yeah, sure. In one universe.
No speech is free.The more Ann and her kind spew, the more it becomes apparent that the GOP is infested with bad people with bad ideas. The rational will stand back and wait for sanity to return and in the mean time the Dem's will have more and more sucess. In short the cost is votes and $ support for the GOP. Thew GOP has barley sqieaked by in the past elections. They can afford no mis-steps.
I agree with the rest... this has nothing to do with free speech. It's about economics and what is considered acceptable public behavior of celebrities.(She has traded any credibility she might have had as a political analyst to be a celebrity.) Even Tom Cruise is having problems as a result of some of his public remarks and behavior over the past year or so. Rosie O'Donnell has probably worn out her welcome too. Ann Coulter is just a witch (the kindest descriptive term I could think of). Except for some die-hard right wingers who would probably like to see all minorities (except their maids, of course), gays and liberals disappear from America entirely, most (rational) people have grown tired of Ann Coulter's antics. She is nither funny nor incisive in her comments. She's just mean.
Ann Coulter is free to say whatever she wants... she just might not be paid as much for her biting comments in the future.
NONE of the newspapers discussed in this article will print my column. When is Rino going to decry the way my freedom of speech has been stomped by the lefties?
I don't understand why any liberal would want to see Coulter drpped or censored. She does an admirable job of sabotaging herself. Just let her talk, Each time she raises the bar for herself. Each time she has to be more and more outrageous. Each time more and more people grow sick of her foulness.
Well yes and no. Her type of speech needs some controls, any responsible newspaper should realize this.
Plus as you threaten her income, she may just have a Weiner-breakdown, and start ranting about gay websites and people stalking her (see mr. weiner's (savage) rant about MMFA in a earlier thread). Its fun to watch these hate filled cons self implode. When ann does I will pop big bowl of popcorn and sit back and enjoy.
(and if any cons think I'm being hatefully towards ann, realize she started it and I'm 99% less vile towards her, as she is towards me.)
WAL: I had similar thoughts, too. As despicable and annoying as Ann Coulter is I wish her face was plastered next to evreything that read "REPUBLICAN".
I have "issues" with the voters who elected George W. Bush... from the Evangelicals to the suburban soccer moms. Nevertheless, as unwise as their votes were, there are still among them some voters who can either be swayed away from the Republican Party (provided the Democratic Party presents an acceptable option) or become so unenthusiastic about the Republican Party that they may decide to sit out the 2008 election.
My point, though, is that Ann Coulter has gone so over the top that she's offending even some Republicans. I think that she will continue to speak out but her audience will begin to shrink until the extremist right wing will be her primary source of business. And the extremist right wingers will want to hear more and more outrageous garbage from her. I think while her audiencee will suffer attrition her attention-grabbing attacks on Democrats will escalate which, hopefully, will further alienate the Evangelicals and the soccer mom Republicans.
I think it's good to take her out of the mainstream (newspaper columns) and marginalize her... but I hope she continues talking and making even more offensive remarks. Go Ann... keep'em coming!
This is always the great inconsistency here - do liberals really want Ann to stop her brand of offensiveness, or do they want her to continue?
Often times when I say just ignore these shock pundits, I am scolded and told that this brand of speech needs to be confronted and admonished so she will hopefully stop. Yet I see like posts like this egging her on and deliciously hoping for more red meat.
Make up your mind, what do you really want Ann to do?
An Coulter is annoying and offensive to me, to put it mildly, and it woul take too long to list the reasons. I would rather not hear or read her hateful, spiteful comments. Nevertheless, if her continued behavior can help defeat the extremism of the Republican right wing by turning off voters to right wing Republicanism then to Ann I say "Keep talking, baby..." (I'll deal with the annnoyance it causes me personally.)
"Make up your mind, what do you really want Ann to do? "
What I want Ann Coulter to do is irrelevant, since is it not my business, nor is it in my control, to tell another human being what to do with his or her life. We can't control what other people do, however we can control what *we* do.
If she continues her hate-mongering and vile diatribes, then I will continue to speak out against her. But to tell other newspapers to drop her column? I would say no - let her say whatever she wants, as long as we can continue to denounce her views in return. She will eventually be recognized for the unhappy, suffering person that she is.
Still...what I would *like* to see her do is repent and practice the tolerance and compassion of Jesus, if she were the Christian that she alleges to be.
My two cents, of course.
And, I'm sure that all of our Conservative comrades who feel compelled to weep and wail about Ann's free speech were equally outraged at what befell the Dixie Chicks. Right? Yeah, right.
What "befell" the Dixie Chicks? So their products were "boycotted" by some. The tradeoff was increased popularity amongst other segments of (worldwide) population.
The Chicks' free speech was in no way abridged, any more than when people opt to not pay Coulter for her product(s).
It's called the Free Market.
I agree and said as much about the Dixie Chicks. I didnt like what was done to them but it wasnt a free speech issue. Clear Channel used its power in a way I didnt like but it was power GIVEN them so I didnt throw a fit. The same with Coulter no free speech issue is involved. I also figured, correctly as it turns out that they would not suffer any longterm effects since their talent, not my cup of tea but apparant, would in the end win out. The same with Coulter her essential irrelvance will I believe eventually win out.
The Beatles were likewise villified for Lennon's comments that they were bigger then Jesus, you know. ;) And as you may have noticed, the Dixie Chicks have just won five Grammy awards for a song critical of President Bush...despite being branded pariahs by the pretty much the entire country music industry.
True, they were unjustly maligned for speaking out against him, but in the end, they emerged as winners. Kudos to them, BTW, for having the guts to continue in the face of adversity.
Annie is upsetting her own kind..the little Japanese girl that spews hate is pissed at her. Annie brings true conservatism out of the closet and it shows the real face of the CONS.
Of course, a wrestling match between these two ladies would serve us all well. They can advertise in that Casper paper..which, I'll bet is printed on extreme "white" paper. \\\\\ Where the hell is Casper wy.
Could it be that the Troglodytes have gotten a little cocky over the last 6 years? They seem a little more willing to take off their masks and display the xenophobic, selfish bigot that lives inside so many of them. The good thing is that this provides a contrast for those conservatives that aren't bigots or theocrats. We can only hope that these reasonable conservatives can take back their party from the Neanderthals who control it now.
Of course readers support Ann Coulter's column. They use it to wrap fresh fish.
I find it rather funny that so many here thing Ann speaks for Republicans. The lack of reasoning is what I like to call "liberal logic".
Consider this: If Ann speaks for Repbulicans, then one can say with equal validity that Bill Maher speaks for Democrats.
Of course we know that Bill and Ann have their own views. To try to extrapolate that to everyone in their respective parties is silly.
It is like saying that YSbadd and Princeof and the others here who toss off the same tired insults time and again are the voice of all progressives.. Hey wait? Maybe they are? ;-)
..as usual, I cannot spell. The first sentence should read.. "Its funny so many here think Ann speaks for Republicans."
Sorry for the confusion... (Contrary to popular belief around here, I only spell for myself and not everyone who is a conservative.)
Liberals will speak out against their own...Where is there any outrage about Annie's "jokes" about ONLY liberals? Not one politician has spoken out...they like for her to spread her nonsense hoping it will help them. Name one Senator, Rep., who will speak against her...obviously, the Right sees no problem with her, ergo, she speaks Repub-Speak.
It's because politicians are by nature, spineless. Some of them don't dare touch Coulter, either to endorse or denounce what she said, because they risk alienating her audience - of supporters or detractors.
There is a segment within the Republican party that agree with every word she utters, no doubt. So certain Republicans don't want to piss them off. Unless she becomes so unpopular, then they will feel safe.
Coulter is a lightning rod, she has her followers among the right........just as extremists on the left have their followers. It's no different.
Extremists :D I find it a funny choice of words to use. Let's compare the two extremes shall we?
One the left, you have people advocating for freedom for all, and compassion and looking out for everyone in society. On the far right, you have a group of people who want to silence and oppress those they do not agree with on social issues. Sounds like comparable extremes. lol
The Right are degenerates.
I see the Clarion-Ledger is working hard to maintain Mississippi's well-earned reputation.