Crooks And Liars’ John Amato, in his first Huffington Post piece, puts conservative commentator Ann Coulter under the microscope.
Amato (whose constantly updated blog is a must read since it started off as a great read and gets better and better each day) is particularly irked over Coulter’s suggestion that New Yorkers are somehow cowards.
Read the entire post — but here’s what is of special interest to yours truly. It’s when he writes this:
Ann has made a nice living trashing liberals, war veterans, and President Clinton over the years and turned it into a highly paid profession for a lot of other wannabes like Bernard Goldberg. Being offensive is her gift, and she’s parlayed that into book deals, speaking events (25K a pop) and numerous talking head appearances. Much of what she says is vaudevillian in nature, and I point it out quite regularly, but her latest effort to smear the good people of New York really got under my skin.
There is a bigger issue here than an Ann Coulter (who enrages the left and some in the center) and a Michael Moore (who enrages the right and some in the center). The issue is the deterioration of public discourse in our country — and Coulter is symbolic of it.
Somewhere along the line it became fashionable and in the eyes of some intelligent to simply dump on political opponents. Blast them. Insult them. Demonize them. Suggest that they rub the palms of their hands in glee, with a mad look in their eyes, and seek to destroy the country.
Perhaps it’s due to the general trend in America since the turn of the 20th century where entertainment moved from appealing to broader segments (vaudeville, early movies, radio, early TV) to smaller and smaller segments (cable, the explosion in the number of cable channels, the birth of the Internet and weblogs that seemingly appeal to specific ideological communities).
The tone of news and entertainment started to change by the late 80s and 90s — where the Cult of the Outrageous Statement Or Act (best typified by John Belushi’s character in “Animal House”) took hold. The thoughtful, more reflective “on the other hand” commentary or personality became ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ in this new age. News was impacted by both competition from tabloids (so news became more tabloid) and the spilling over of the talk radio culture (where confrontation and controversy became the overriding goal) into the way news was presented to consumers. The person who was outrageous or made outrageous statements soon ruled.
So Coulter’s critics may denounce her, some papers may dump her. But she has an audience among those who believe issues MUST be black and white, good and evil — and that there’s no in between (certainly not people who may differ on policy but not necessarily be evil or corrupt people).
There have been various articles in the news recently (and a post on this site) about speculation that polarized, highly ideological talk radio may be on the wane. If so, that would indicate that Coulter’s schtick may be getting old. If so, it is definitive, conclusive proof that there is a God in Heaven….
But Coulter will continue to have an audience — since this style of hurling verbal atomic bombs, denigrating and demonizing still has a huge audience. Because there are still some who feel it’s the sign of someone who’s smart — versus someone who may simply be a smartass.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.