Ann Coulter & Me
By Jeff Cohen
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Wednesday 27 September 2006
As an MSNBC in-house pundit in 2002, I had a time slot each afternoon for one-on-one
debates with a roster of right-wingers, including GOP members of Congress, Rev.
Jerry Falwell, National Review editor Rich Lowry, and buckraker Armstrong Williams
- who went on to pocket nearly a quarter-million dollars from the Bush administration
to promote its "No Child Left Behind Act." When I repeatedly debated
Williams at MSNBC, I had no inkling about Team Bush's No Pundit Left Behind
program.
In June I was set to debate Ann Coulter, who was on tour promoting a book called
Slander. Coulter was firmly established as the top shock
jock of cable news. I knew from hanging out with too many conservative pundits
in too many greenrooms that her TV stardom was the source of envy; they groused
that she used her legs, miniskirts and sleek blond hair to gain unfair advantage
over other right-wing yakkers. I heard this complaint mostly from men over 50.
I'm willing to believe Coulter when she publicly proclaims that she's not anorexic
or bulimic. But I did wonder if her unfair advantage was some sort of diet/pep
pill. Not that drugs would excuse her of personal responsibility for muddle-brained
comments - like referring to Tipper Gore as "gaudy white trash." Or
talking about "the benefits of local fascism." Or calling for public
flogging of juveniles, because it wouldn't be cool "in the 'hood"
to be flogged.
I wondered if she was sober in 1997 when, as an MSNBC contributor, she debated
Vietnam veteran Bobby Muller about landmines. Discussing Vietnam, Muller said:
"In 90 percent of cases that US soldiers got blown up - Ann, are you listening?
They were our own mines." At which point Coulter interrupted to say, "No
wonder you guys lost." She said that to a man who took a bullet in Vietnam,
leaving him paralyzed from the chest down.
I suspect that the happy-pill hypothesis persists because, as cable news viewers
know all too well, Coulter is so often laughing inappropriately while spouting
her odious commentary.
To me, Coulter is something of a cross between Joan Rivers and Eva Braun. Now
I have a general rule against Eva Braun comparisons, ever since my pal Randy
Credico, a comedian, got banned from the Tonight Show 20 years ago - after he
quipped that whenever he saw America's UN ambassador Jean Kirkpatrick on TV,
he had to wonder "if Eva Braun really died in that bunker in 1945."
I've made an exception in Coulter's case. (In Slander, she
called Katie Couric "the affable Eva Braun of morning television.")
I looked forward to my Coulter debate, which had been scheduled a week in advance.
I read chunks of Slander (for which I deserved combat pay)
and prepared questions. But I wasn't sure whether the book was serious or self-parody.
Its thesis is that liberals engage in name-calling because they can't engage
in logical, factual debate. This from an author who doesn't limit her insults
to Democrats like Hillary "Pond Scum" Clinton; she called the Republican
EPA chief Christie Todd Whitman a "bird brain" and former GOP senator
Jim Jeffords a "half-wit." When the right-wing editors of National
Review rejected a Coulter column urging enhanced airport vigilance against "suspicious-looking
swarthy males," she called the editors "girly-boys."
On page 2 of her book, I learned that liberals have "a hatred of Christians"
- and, a few pages later, that "liberals hate America" and "hate
all religions except Islam." On page 5, I read, "New York Times columnist
Frank Rich demanded that [Attorney General] Ashcroft stop monkeying around with
Muslim terrorists and concentrate on anti-abortion extremists." This claim
was sheer invention and offered almost a textbook example of slander, the apparently
un-ironic title of her book.
With my questions ready, I got into makeup, put in my earpiece, and headed
to the set as I did around that time each day. But just before airtime, my producer
informed me, "She won't debate you."
I was incredulous: "This was set a long time ago. I'm ready to go."
"She's not," replied the producer. "She claims she knew nothing
about a debate."
I was a network staffer ready to debate the contents of a book. The author
was a guest, unwilling to debate. Which of us do you think went on the air?
Ann Coulter, of course - appearing with an anchor ill-prepared to ask tough
questions.
If MSNBC were following the codes of journalism, an author unwilling to debate
her controversial book would not be given a free ride. But MSNBC follows the
codes of conformity and show biz: Coulter is a draw, so she dictates the terms
of debate ... or nondebate.
So much for "The Liberal Media."
Page 1 of Coulter's book referred to "the left's hegemonic control of
the news media." The more she and her brethren bluster about bias, the
more they dominate a corporate media system only too happy to oblige them.
--------
Jeff Cohen is the founder of the media
watch group FAIR. For years he was a pundit on CNN, Fox News and MSNBC - as
well as senior producer of MSNBC's primetime Donahue show, until it was terminated
three weeks before the Iraq war. This is adapted from his new book, Cable News
Confidential: My Misadventures in Corporate Media.
-------
Jump to today's Truthout Features:
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.
Print This Story
E-mail This Story