About soundoff


Member Since:
June 21, 2006
Last Signed In:
February 26, 2008
Profile Views:
3501
Blog Views:
25053
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
Was review of Nikki's Smoking BBQ off base?
Shooting headline missed the mark
Going to question new firefighter OT in Southern California, too?
Famoso coverage great, but what about ... ?
The wonders of Kern and casual bikini tops
Changes at newspaper, can you try being better?
Forget the weather, what's with that page?
Did you have to detail dog's destruction?
Ann Coulter, TV Guide and dead dogs
Newspaper didn't put Ann Coulter in context, reader says
Archives
June 06
July 06
August 06
September 06
October 06
November 06
December 06
January 07
February 07
March 07
April 07
May 07
June 07
July 07
August 07
September 07
October 07
November 07
December 07
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
More Archives
May 06
April 06
March 06
December 05
November 05
October 05
September 05
August 05
July 05
June 05
May 05
April 05

Blog Roll


Ask The Californian
Editorials
Entertainment
Eye of Bakersfield
Faith Forum
Fired Up!
Inside Sports
Neighbors
Right Thinking
Sound Off
Talk of the Town
Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL
soundoff - > Sound Off -> Newspaper didn't put Ann Coulter in context, reader says
Newspaper didn't put Ann Coulter in context, reader says

Sound Off for July 1, 2007

| Saturday, Jun 30 2007 6:20 PM

Last Updated: Saturday, Jun 30 2007 6:23 PM

Reader: By printing a recent Associated Press story, The Californian has participated in a great distortion. The story in question, published in Thursday's edition, quotes Ann Coulter as wishing John Edwards would be killed in a terrorist attack.

The truth is Ms. Coulter never said that. What she did was compare reaction to some of her recent comments to those of Bill Maher who did state that if an attack on Dick Cheney had been successful, the world would be better off. There was no outcry over Mr. Maher's comments. Ms. Coulter then said, and I quote directly "So I've learned my lesson. If I'm going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination."

The context obviously changes the entire meaning of the statement. However, the author of the story never mentions that and probably never even checked into it. The Californian, meanwhile, blindly prints the story without verifying its accuracy. It is no wonder so many people are flocking to other sources of information besides newspapers.

When newspapers return to reporting news rather than hyping non-stories, circulation may once again increase. That is unless their credibility is so tarnished it can never recover.

-- Wil Bergen

Jenner: Not so fast.

The AP story did not include Coulter's reference to Bill Maher's comments about Cheney. I agree that it should have.

But Maher's statements about Cheney weren't funny in the first place. And they certainly did provoke a significant outcry at the time he made them.

Further, how do Maher's comments excuse Coulter's remarks about Edwards? Do two wrongs make a right? Her statements were no more funny or appropriate.

The story we published Thursday was about how the Edwards campaign is responding to -- and even capitalizing on -- Coulter's comments.

It was not the most momentous story in the paper, but it's hard to see how you can call it a "non-story."

Reader: Your story about Tuesday's accident at 18th and H streets left me wondering. Information regarding the accident is attributed to a person named "Pflugh."

He or she is not previously identified. Is this the person who e-mailed Californian staffers with identities of your employees or a police officer? I have found this kind of editorial oversight to be far too consistent.

If you want to be recognized as other than a so-so local daily blab you should make a better effort to eliminate the type of error reflected in this article.

-- Mac Anderson

Jenner: The person referred to is Bakersfield police Sgt. Matt Pflugh. Certainly the story shouldn't have made it to print without his first name and rank.

We will strive to eliminate errors such as this. We want to be known as a great local daily blab, not one that is simply "so-so."

Reader: I just read that "despite their calls, the number of complaints convinces me that our research was correct." What research are you talking about? Jenner, you are a liar! There is no research. What did you research? The people of The Californian.

No, my friend, you are a liar and you just made a big mistake and you compound your mistake to add insult on the injury. On the weekends you decided that nobody wants to watch TV until 7 p.m. That's both Saturday and Sunday. Don't you realize that we want to know what's going on Saturday from 9 a.m. on and Sunday from 9 a.m. on?

No, Jenner, you are a liar and I'm very disappointed in you and The Californian.

-- Bill Kingsley

Jenner: The research was done by American Opinion Research of Princeton, N.J.

That company has used a combination of telephone interviews and mail surveys to conduct multiple readership studies for us since 2000.

Every time this organization has surveyed readers we insisted that they ask about the TV section. And every year, fewer readers have said they depend on the section.

As I've said, we know it's terribly important to a small segment of our readers.

I believe we've heard from most of those readers in the two weeks since we discontinued the weekly section.

Despite their heartfelt entreaties, we don't plan to reinstate the weekly section.

I'm truly sorry we disappointed you -- but I wasn't lying about the research.

Posted in these Groups:
Topics:
posted by soundoff on Monday, July 2, 2007 at 09:08 AM
Report a Violation
Viewed 531 times
29 comments from 13 users

1

posted by ProgressivePete2 on Jul 2, 2007 at 10:20 AM
Whether or not your biased opinion of Maher's joke was funny or not, he's considered a comedian. The guy has played in comedy houses, and is partially known for his stand-up. It's OK for him to make jokes even if they are mildly offensive. Ann Coltier is not a comedian, and is barely considered a writer. When she says the same thing, it's not a joke, especially because she's actually serious. She is a hateful attention starved person that hates everything this country stands for. I feel sorry for her. The less attention she gets the more she lashes out at undeserving people. She brings nothing but hatred and division to the political discussion. Kind of like some of the nasty trolls around here that are just looking to insult others and start arguments and name calling sessions rather than discuss anything of importance.
posted by kortneeluv on Jul 2, 2007 at 10:21 AM

Ann Coulter is obviously off her medication again, why do these "news" programs have her on anyway? who is she? all she does is spew hate filled craziness. why does this woman warrant so much t.v. air-time and space in the newspapers? i notice she is never quoted saying anything remotely sane, she is just a publicity hound.

posted by mattloch on Jul 2, 2007 at 10:23 AM
Here's Coulter's entire quotation, in context:

CHRIS CUOMO (co-host): Some tough words for you by the three top candidates in response to what you had said. Some were calling it a homosexual slur, you said it was a taunt. They all came out when you were talking about John Edwards and said, "This was wrong. We must deny it." Fair criticism of you or a shift towards the tolerant among the GOP?

COULTER: No, no. There were -- I was denounced all over. All over. I think the one that hurt the most was from I'mALittleGirlInAPinkPartyDress.com.

CUOMO: Why?

COULTER: Very upsetting.

CUOMO: You --

COULTER: Though about the same time, Bill Maher said -- and by the way, I did not call John Edwards the F-word. I said I couldn't talk about him because you go into rehab for using that word.

CUOMO: You say you were joking.

COULTER: About the same -- oh yeah. I wouldn't insult gays by comparing them to John Edwards. Now, that would be mean. But about the same time, you know, Bill Maher was not joking and saying he wished Dick Cheney had been killed in a terrorist attack. So I've learned my lesson. If I'm gonna say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot.

posted by randomfactor on Jul 2, 2007 at 10:23 AM
In order to put Coulter's writing "in context" the Californian would have had to contract with a septic-tank-pumping service.
posted by ProgressivePete2 on Jul 2, 2007 at 10:24 AM
Hardball is one of those opinion shows that everyone thinks is actual news. Where they make some wild accusation and put a question mark at the end so they can get a way with it.

Does the Californian make the newspaper out of sludge from LA?

You heard it here folks.
posted by mattloch on Jul 2, 2007 at 10:26 AM
And, of course, Maher's entire quotation, in context:

Maher: What about the people who got onto the Huffington Post – and these weren’t even the bloggers, these were just the comments section – who said they, they expressed regret that the attack on Dick Cheney failed.

Joe Scarborough: Right.

Maher: Now…

John Ridley: More than regret.

Maher: Well, what did they say?

Ridley: They said “We wish he would die.” I mean, it was (?) hate language.

Barney Frank: They said the bomb was wasted. (laughter and applause)

Maher: That’s a funny joke. But, seriously, if this isn’t China, shouldn’t you be able to say that? Why did Arianna Huffington, my girlfriend, I love her, but why did she take that off right away?

After some discussion about why Huffington should or shouldn’t have taken these comments down, the following occurred:


Ridley: It’s one thing to say you hate Dick Cheney, which applies to his politics. It’s another thing to say, “I’m sorry he didn’t die in an explosion." And I think, you know…

Maher: But you should be able to say it. And by the way...

Frank: Excuse me, Bill, but can I ask you a question? Do you decide what the topics are for this show?

Maher: Yeah, I decide the topics, they don’t go there.

Frank: But you exercise control over the show the way that she does over her blog.

Maher: But I have zero doubt that if Dick Cheney was not in power, people wouldn’t be dying needlessly tomorrow. (applause)

Scarborough: If someone on this panel said that they wished that Dick Cheney had been blown up, and you didn’t say…

Frank: I think he did.

Scarborough: Okay. Did you say…

Maher: No, no. I quoted that.

Frank: You don’t believe that?

Maher: I’m just saying if he did die, other people, more people would live. That’s a fact.

posted by mattloch on Jul 2, 2007 at 10:39 AM
So to sum up, Maher was talking about bloggers commenting on the bombing attempt on Cheney, and making an observation that Cheney's actions have directly and indirectly cost people their lives. Maher was not making a joke, and has never claimed otherwise. He never said he wished Cheney was killed. ("Don't get me wrong: I've never joined the Dick Cheney Fan Club. But what I said Friday -- and what I believe -- is that the Vice President has presided over a bungled execution of a war in which thousands of our bravest continue to die. And I believe that were he not in power, our troops would likely come home sooner. But I don't wish him dead.")

Coulter is making a "joke" by taking Maher's comment out of context and directing it against someone who's actions have in no discernable manner cost people their lives. Then someone comments that her quotation was taken out of context.

Irony much?

The fact that the writer claims that the newspaper is hyping "non-stories" while defending Coulter (the queen of distraction and ad homonym attacks) is just the icing on the cake. The delicious, sweet, irony cake.
posted by GrpThink on Jul 2, 2007 at 12:02 PM

why do these "news" programs have her on anyway?

Because people are sick of hearing about Paris Hilton and they need a new dumb blonde to fill the airways.

posted by randomfactor on Jul 2, 2007 at 12:04 PM
Mattloch, that "cake" has the distinct smell of astroturf to me...
posted by GrpThink on Jul 2, 2007 at 12:04 PM

This guy has the right idea:

 

Bill,

Next time just call Cheney a faggot, for some reason that word is not the least bit offensive and considered a perfectly appropriate name for politicians according to the right wingers.

posted by sagefever on Jul 2, 2007 at 12:05 PM
Mattloch~Thank you for posting that.I really think annie is dangerous~I even said "Give me a shovel,I feel a mercy killin coming on".Me the princess of nice...it was tasteless, and a joke.But she can make me crazy real quick with her "sarcasm" that is just thinly veiled hate..and not even that really.I do not believe she has enough substance in her to hold a real opinion about anything.
posted by Hardliner4freedom on Jul 2, 2007 at 01:10 PM

Actually, Annie serves a very useful purpose -- helping us distinguish the good-hearted conservatives with character apart from the deeply malicious, conscienceless ones.

The deeply malicious ones are the ones who defend her at all costs.  We owe it to her for making the separation of wheat from chaff a much easier task.

 

posted by randomfactor on Jul 2, 2007 at 01:12 PM
Hardliner, by that rule of thumb are there any "good-herted conservatives with character" hosting cable-news shows these days?
posted by Hardliner4freedom on Jul 2, 2007 at 01:14 PM

I don't know.  I seem to remember Joe Scarborough frowning on it.

But I see your point.  A decent conservative -- let alone a liberal or libertarian -- has a much tougher time getting and keeping a job in the national opinion media.

posted by Hardliner4freedom on Jul 2, 2007 at 01:16 PM

Slight change of subject:

It's nice to see that Hugh Hewitt, himself a far-righter, holds a very low opinion of Dinesh D'Souza's latest hate-spewing.

 

posted by sfinboston52 on Jul 2, 2007 at 01:20 PM

Why cant they just put Ann Coulter back working on the street corner like they found her.

posted by steveeswenson on Jul 2, 2007 at 01:30 PM
sfinboston,

So now you're calling Ann Coulter a cheap whore?

Whoops.

My bad, you never said cheap.
posted by randomfactor on Jul 2, 2007 at 01:31 PM

Hardliner, I don't read that into Hewitt's column at all.  What he's saying (IMHO) is that yes, we need to hate teh gay and the liberal Hollywood elite are despicable slime (but gimme that blockbuster summer movie anyway) *BUT* just agreeing with the Islamoramofascists won't keep them from killing us all.  Oh, and their idea of America is decades out of date, from the Good Old Days when gays and nigras and wimmin knew their place, dammit.  Hewitt doesn't need the threat of Islamaramadingding to hate libruls, he's got his own reasons. 

.

Sure, he throws a bone towards unity--but that's because the country *IS* unified.  He's just on the wrong side.

posted by Hardliner4freedom on Jul 2, 2007 at 01:34 PM

Random, you're forgetting that to wander just a step or two off the thin red line of opinion conformity risks being labeled a traitor.

 

posted by mattloch on Jul 2, 2007 at 01:35 PM
I'm with Hardliner on this one..... she has her own purpose. I just wish more people took her with a grain of salt. Or a shaker of salt....

Did anyone else catch her confrontation with Elizabeth Edwards?
posted by mattloch on Jul 2, 2007 at 01:40 PM
Steve, did the paper report about the investigation into Coulter's voting fraud, and the FBI investigation into abuse of power and intimidation that caused the charges to be dropped?
posted by ProgressivePete2 on Jul 2, 2007 at 01:41 PM
Mattloch, I think you meant

Did anyone else catch her getting pwn3d by Elizabeth Edwards?

There, fixed it for ya.  ( ;

(I couldn't figure out how to do the strikethrough)
posted by mattloch on Jul 2, 2007 at 01:43 PM
Pete, I have to cut-and-paste back and forth from a word processing program to get that. (A pulldown menu of font options would be a nice tool to have. Anyone want to suggest it in the weekly fix blog?)

Thanks for the fix, though.

Coulter has no business complaining about personal attacks by "the left" or anyone else. Hypocrisy FTW.
posted by jasonsperber on Jul 2, 2007 at 03:01 PM

Matt and Pete, just for you (heh), we'll add a strikethru to the RTE, next to bold, italicize and underline.  (Don't ask me when, though, but we'll do it.)

But re: your suggestion, the RTE does have 6 fonts in a pull-down menu, plus a size menu and a format menu, plus a color palette and the aforementioned styles (bold etc.).  What else did you want?  :)

posted by ProgressivePete2 on Jul 2, 2007 at 03:04 PM
Right on Jason. You deserve a raise.

So, when is this happening?      &nb sp; (JK)
posted by redkernhero on Jul 2, 2007 at 03:33 PM
I resent that, Ann Coulter is not cheap!
posted by sagefever on Jul 2, 2007 at 03:53 PM
Cheep Cheep ~like in chicken headed!
posted by NancyII on Jul 2, 2007 at 04:48 PM
Jason..while on this topic when will the part be fixed that keeps me from posting without signing in?  Email on it's way.
posted by nkoby3 on Jul 17, 2007 at 05:48 PM
The major difference is that the world really would be a better place if Dick Cheney were killed.  I'm not so certain if the same holds true with John Edwards.
1

Leave a Comment
Ground Rules for posting comments:
  • No profanity or personal attacks.
  • Please comment on the subject of the post itself.
If you do not follow these rules we will remove your comment. Please keep it civil.

To protect users from spam, we need you to prove that you're a human being.
Please enter the text from the image at left.