The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Kathleen Parker, Clever Girl Columnist

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Kathleen Parker, Clever Girl Columnist

By Robert Stacy McCain on 3.16.09 @ 6:30AM

Little Miss Know-It-All has a column blaming Rush Limbaugh for the deterioration of the newspaper industry. Jennifer Rubin and Kevin Williamson provide rebuttals. My initial reaction to the overweening arrogance of Parker's lecture is NSFW, as the bloggers say. The part I can reprint:

"Newspaper columnist" used to be a gig that you had to work a long time in the news business to get. The late, great Lewis Grizzard, for example, started out as a brilliant young sports reporter, and nonetheless was past 30 -- and had already served as executive sports editor of the Chicago Tribune -- before he became a columnist for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution in 1977.
Then in the 1980s and '90s, as cable news and USA Today started encroaching on the turf of the metropolitan dailies, there was this big push for "diversity" and "youth," the chief result of which was a lot of Clever Girl Columnists wasting newsprint. (Hello, Rheta Grimsley Johnson! Hello, Maureen Dowd!)
Kathleen Parker was one of the better Clever Girl Columnists who got the affirmative-action leg up in that manner. But she succumbed to the Elite Media Syndrome of thinking that working in the news business makes you somehow superior to the guy who drops 50 cents in the newsbox, and her insufferable elitism is an apt metaphor for what went wrong with the business.

The privileged position of the pundit (or, in Parker's case, pundette) has been rendered obsolete by the blogosphere. In her desperation to remain relevant, Parker swung out wildly at Limbaugh. Rush has 20 million listeners and if he deigns to take notice of the insult, his rebuttal will be heard by way more people than read Parker's snooty little column.

BTW, I'd can't wait to see what Quin Hillyer has to say about this.

View all comments (9) | Leave a comment

Kitty| 3.16.09 @ 6:53AM

KP is trying to up her readership using Rush Limbaugh. The tactic is about 20 years old now. Whatever you're selling, find a way to mention Rush's name because Rush sells.

...

Aaron| 3.16.09 @ 7:27AM

Bingo Kitty, hit the nail on the head.

stu.b.con| 3.16.09 @ 8:05AM

I read Ms. Parker's column yesterday, what a load of tripe. The decline of the local and national fishwraps is the result of essentially two factors, the explosion of alternative news sources and their overwhelming leftist bent. These left wing "journalists" are so inbred that they cannot see that the crap they print provides further impetus for movement to alternative news sources.

Basil Plumley| 3.16.09 @ 8:44AM

Isn't this the same Parker who had her "bony-ass" fired for stealing an idea? Blaming Rush for her industry's demise is a rather old idea.

Memo to Parker and her ilk; if the people want to read fiction, they can read a book or read the Lefties' posts on this board. It is their choice.
Oh wait, choice is only allowed to terminate a beating heart.

Ran| 3.16.09 @ 8:57AM

Kitty,
Ditto axis of adulteration leader Dave Frum. If KP or DF have something to sell that conservatives want, the tactic might just work.

Jack Bauer| 3.16.09 @ 9:16AM

With apologies to Dorothy Parker (no relation).

Parker is snarkier,
but Frumer is dumber.

Dorinda| 3.16.09 @ 11:49AM

Blaming Rush for the demise of newspapers? I thought I would fall over when I read that. You always think a left wing nut job couldn't come out with anything dumber than what was previously been belched up, but they prove you wrong again. But then again left wing and dumb are synonymous aren't they? Newspapers are losing their market share because NOONE WANTS TO READ THEM. That's like asking why did the Edsal go out of business? Because the consumer chose another product. It's that simple. The honest analysis takes place when they question asked is WHY was another choice made? Here is my answer speaking for myself and all others who agree: Because the press in America is not an objective organization but are left wing activists. Their readers are lied to, insulted, castigated, looked down upon, and for that, payment is demanded. All Rush Limbaugh did was give voice to what many people thought were thoughts only they held. We soon found out we were in agreement with millions of other like minded souls. The ironic thing is those at the papers have to know what is driving people away. They have championed every Marxist cause for the last 70 years and the audience who is the recipient of their love fest for the most part ARE TO DUMB TO READ or care about the news. Their natural audience who posseses the critical/intellectual/verbal/ skills necessary to plough through a daily paper of any merit, not to mention the cultural curiosity to undertake the task is so turned off. But that make no matter. They would rather feel the seawater swirl about their clay feet and go down with the ship before they would ever contemplate a change of course. They call that IDEOLOGICAL ZEALOTRY. I cannot wait until the NYTimes shudders its last. It would be a fitting end for a paper whose outright vile lies has had a hand in the death of millions for their monstrous support of Castro and Stalin. I hope the devil defecates on their remains.

blacknsquid| 3.16.09 @ 9:01PM

"But the greater truth is that newspaper reporters, editors and institutions are responsible for the boots-on-the-ground grub work that produces the news stories and performs the government watchdog role so crucial to a democratic republic."

I'm still laughing...