The Arizona Daily Star is dropping Ann Coulter's syndicated column:
In a column announcing a wide range of changes in the paper's opinion pages Monday, Editor and Publlisher (sic--you'd at least think a site named Editor and Publisher would use the former before sending it to the latter--Scott) David Stoeffler revealed that the paper was dropping Coulter's syndicated column.
"Many readers find her shrill, bombastic, and mean-spirited. And those are the words used by readers who identified themselves as conservatives," the recently appointed Stoeffler wrote.
Coulter may be shrill, but people like Mr. Stoeffler are generally known as "pussies" where I come from. I wouldn't shed a tear for Ann, she generates more revenue from books than Stoeffler does from his paper (which is right up there [link in PDF] with those other Pulitzer winning rags the Morning Call in Allentown, PA and the Post-Standard in Syracuse, NY) . Editor and Publisher has talked of Ann before and it seems that this is another stunt to generate some interest in a sorry, sinking tabloid.
Update: Is MoDo not shrill? Helen Thomas?
Monday, August 29, 2005
Coulter Denied Free Speech
Sphere: Related Content
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
I find Coulter shrill, bombastic and mean spirited and I don't think she ever adds anything useful to political debate.
I also take exception to the idea that someone not wanting to publish someone elses work is denying them free speech. This is an argument usually used by the left, and it is just as wrong when used by the right. Coulter is free to speak all she wants, but no one is obligated to listen or to publish her.
Whether or not any other journalist are shrill has no bearing on this question.
Don't sell Coulter short. She is an Ivy Leaguer who clerked for a Supreme Court Justice. Furthermore, if you read any of her books, she lays down her points with copious backup.
Sure the editor of the paper has the right to not print Coulter, but the same paper has a disclaimer saying that they could no longer run NY Times pieces. Pieces by Dowd and Krugman, two who truly add nothing to the debate.
As for being shrill, that is the reason the editor used for not running Coulter, so yes it indeed does have bearing.
Post a Comment