July 27, 2004
Interesting comparison.
You may have heard that Ann Coulter's column about the Dem Convention for USAToday was spiked. Now they've replaced it with one by Jonah Goldberg.
In this case I don't think it was liberal bias. Jonah is just as conservative, but wrote a more thoughtful and clever column. Ann's piece was more nasty and sneering than witty. Or so I think, you can compare them:
Coulter's column is now here. Goldberg's is here.
(Thanks to Betsy Newmark)
Posted by John Weidner at July 27, 2004 07:21 AM | TrackBackHuman Events has the Ann Coulter column complete with comments from USA Today's editors.
What struck me was:
First, did USA Today ever read a Coulter column before hiring her? What they got was classic Coulter, for better or worse.
Second, they were mystified by jokes and references that would be self-evident to conservatives, or to anyone who reads conservatives, or to anyone who knows anyone who knows a conservative.
Posted by: lyle at July 27, 2004 11:57 AMMy guess is that they had no idea what they would get from Ann. and did some hasty self-education or research to come up with Jonah.
But Ann suffers from a sort of tone-deafness. Her column was just like one she would write for TownHall.com. Those inside-jokes were not appropriate for the USAToday audience or editors. Johah's column could be understood by anybody.
Posted by: John Weidner at July 27, 2004 01:52 PMIt made be even worse than tone-deafness. Coulter loves a fight. She gets energized in the presence of perceived enemies.
Remember the interview where she said the 9/11 bombers should have flown an airliner into the New York Times? The interviewer gave her a chance to reconsider, and she emphasized it.
She knew exactly how it would outrage her enemies. That's why she said it. She wasn't angry. She was giddy.
There's a touch of that same giddy black humor in the banned column. You get the feeling she was daring them to fire her.
Posted by: lyle at July 27, 2004 04:07 PM
