We're all angry with Ann Coulter for recently calling John Edwards a "faggot" at the Conservative Political Action Conference (video can be seen here). People all over the media have been up in arms at Coulter's brazen use of the homophobic slur, effectively giving her a monopoly over recent gay issues-related coverage. She has been painted in an increasingly unfavorable light (like that's anything new) but she's been all over the news nonetheless.
Now, I'm not defending Ann Coulter by any means. I agree with most of the stuff I've read about her recently, except for one thing: the actual coverage. Look, Ann Coulter is a notorious attention-grabber. She seems to be willing to do or say anything that will garner her media attention (which is why she usually sets the bar really low). We are doing exactly what she wanted us to do - write and rant and rave and link and talk about her constantly. The blogosphere as well as mainstream media has been blowing up with anti-Coulter articles. Isn't this just egging her on? She feeds off this attention and if we cut her off from it, wouldn't that be much more effective than talking and talking and talking? By writing about her and discussing her, we are granting her legitimacy, something that she definitely does not deserve. Her opinions and arguments are un-thought out and unresearched and explicitly meant to make us angry. If we do just the opposite of what she wants us to do, ignore her, I think that would be a much more effective course of action. Let's take a cue from how the Associated Press tried to deal with Paris Hilton: stop covering her!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment