Posted on 10/28/2002 1:44:18 PM PST by Richard Poe
REMEMBER that regional newspaper editor who made a big show of "firing" super-pundit Ann Coulter last month? Well, the guy is now out of a job.
The moral of the story: Don’t mess with Ann.
Actually, Bob Unger did not fire Miss Coulter, because she never worked for him. He simply stopped running her nationally syndicated column.
However, he did so in such an abusive and public manner, that people were forced to take notice. Unger announced his move with an open letter accusing Miss Coulter of "hate."
"[W]e don’t welcome haters, Ann, and that’s what you are…," wrote Unger. "Ann, you’re mean – vicious, really – which is why we do not believe that you in any way serve the public good."
What exactly had Miss Coulter done? Unger explained that her most recent column had "crossed" the "line." He cited two passages. Here’s the first:
"[T]here is only one thing wrong with liberals: They're no good."
I kid you not. Unger says that calling liberals "no good" is "over the line."
He also blew a gasket over Miss Coulter’s description of the Kennedy clan as "a family of heroin addicts, statutory rapists, convicted and unconvicted female-killers, cheaters, bootleggers and dissolute drunks…"
Ho-hum. So what else is new? Even people who like the Kennedys don’t bother disputing those facts. Unger feigns outrage nonetheless.
It seems obvious that Unger’s open letter was a cheap publicity stunt. But it backfired terribly.
You see, the paper Unger once edited – the Centre Daily Times in State College, Pa. – reaches a largely rural audience in the God-fearing, patriotic American heartland, where people love Ann Coulter and despise liberal weenies such as Unger.
Not surprisingly, Mr. Unger’s two-and-a-half-year stint as executive editor came to a sudden end last week.
"Axing Coulter Didn’t Cost Me My Job," said the headline in Editor & Publisher Online (E&P) on October 22. "I don’t think that had anything to do with it," Unger told the interviewer.
Well, of course he would say that. As Otto von Bismarck warned, "Never believe in anything until it has been officially denied."
Unger says that he stepped down after reaching a "mutual" decision with publisher Henry Haitz, based upon a "difference in style and objective."
Note the word "objective." A publisher’s objective is to sell papers. Could it be that Mr. Haitz decided that bashing Ann Coulter was not conducive to that objective?
Unger insists that his decision to drop Miss Coulter’s column was popular. But popular with whom?
On September 18, Unger told Bill O’Reilly of Fox News, "I’ve heard from about 6,000 people… About 90 percent of them… said… "`You're right, We're tired of hate speech.’… [Ann Coulter] is at odds with the majority of the American people."
After his termination, however, Unger changed his tune. He still told Editor & Publisher on October 22 that his mail was supportive; "80-85%" of his 5,000-odd e-mails supposedly applauded his decision.
But, curiously, Unger added, "I know that doesn't represent the general population, but it represented the people who wrote me."
Now wait a minute. If Unger’s mail supported him, how does he know that the "general population" does not? ESP?
I strongly suspect that Unger is lying about his e-mails.
In a September 6 column, I noted some problems with Unger’s figures. For instance, he implied in a September 3 E&P interview that only about 15 of the 500-odd e-mails he had then received supported Ann Coulter. Yet, the FreeRepublic.com forum had been targeting Unger for two days with a massive, pro-Coulter e-mail campaign. What happened to all those Free Republic e-mails?
My column also revealed that the extremist Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) – which resents Miss Coulter’s stand against Muslim terror – had broadcast an e-bulletin, urging supporters to "Send a note of thanks to Bob Unger at runger@centredaily.com."
No doubt, sympathetic Muslim jihadists from many countries e-mailed Unger – but surely not enough to account for the disproportionate numbers Unger cites.
I think he is lying, plain and simple. And I am shocked that Dave Astor of Editor & Publisher and Bill O’Reilly allowed Unger to cite these flimsy statistics without challenge.
Centre Daily Times publisher Henry Haitz announced on October 22 that the paper would "immediately begin a nationwide search for [Unger’s] replacement."
Imagine that. Haitz terminated Unger without even bothering to find a replacement first. He must have wanted Unger out of that office fast. And who can blame him?
No doubt, Mr. Haitz has been getting some mail of his own.
_________________________________
Richard Poe is a New York Times bestselling author and cyberjournalist. His latest book is The Seven Myths of Gun Control.
Buh bye, Bob
There's nothing so slimy as first-naming somebody you don't know and haven't been introduced to, while you are in the process of insulting them.
That's "Miss Coulter" to you, buddy. [As Richard Poe understands and calls her in his comments on this disgraceful editorial attack.]
Seriously, we've passed a few e-mails over the last 2 years and I've enjoyed those contacts. Would love to have her join in 'girls night out'!!
You didn't miss much. It was a love fest between O'Reilly and Unger. Not something you wanted to see on an empty stomach.
Here' s my analysis of the interview, if you're interested. It's called, "Et Tu, O'Reilly?."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.