Friday, April 15, 2011

A Womb With No View


I've mentioned on a couple of occasions that I've only had one piece turned down flat by the Huffington Post; that would be the one I wrote a couple of years back skewering Jenny McCarthy for her militantly ignorant stance on the supposed connection between childhood vaccines and autism.

Well, as of this morning, that number has gone up.

The HuffPo team says it's passing on the Sarah-Trig Palin column I published here yesterday. Why, I'm not quite sure -- and I didn't bother to ask since I know I'll get a nebulously deflective answer. But I'm putting this out there only because I'd be curious to see if you, dear readers, have any thoughts on it.

Obviously, the Huffington Post can publish whatever it wants; I'm not the least bit upset over this and I understand if the HuffPo brain trust -- which appreciates the notion of liability far more than I do and therefore is less likely to light everything on fire just for the hell of it -- considers the topic of the Sarah and Trig Palin rumor some kind of third-rail. But it did leave me wondering if I struck the right tone with what I wrote, given that I in no way meant to imply that there's validity to the Palin birth conspiracy theory, only that when considered relative to the Obama birther myth it would have been as worthy (or not worthy) of media scrutiny.

So, opinions? And should I now circulate the piece everywhere I can under the heading of "THE ARTICLE THE HUFFINGTON POST DOESN'T WANT YOU TO SEE"?

I kid.

19 comments:

Adrienne Saia said...

Your closing line in that piece alone should be enough for them to run it. The article was scathing (obviously - it's yours), but not excessively so. This story - whether you buy into the conspiracy or not - serves as the catalyst for myriad debates on how "news" is selected, and how race and gender factored in to this story's coverage.

I guess when the media want to sweep something under the proverbial rug, they're serious about doing so. It's also possible that no one was surprised that Sarah Palin had a retarded baby. (I'm going to hell for that one)

Chez said...

I actually never even mentioned that fact that Trig has Down Syndrome because it's largely irrelevant to the point I'm making (although some argue that since it's apparently difficult for a teenager to have a child with DS, that helps to prove that Trig is Sarah Palin's kid).

The Bacon said...

While the two conspiracies are both equally unfounded, there is a difference in consequence.

If Trig was really Bristol's kid, it doesn't amount to much more than gossip fodder and family shame. However, if Obama was born outside of the United States (and the circumstance not warranting any sort of exemption) he would have been constitutionally ineligible for the presidency.

I think that, rather than some sort of fear of being labeled "liberal" might explain the media taking the time to debunk the Obama conspiracy yet leaving alone the Trig conspiracy.

Anonymous said...

It's okay to pick on a black man about his birth. It's not okay to pick on a retard about whether or not they had a kid. Duuuuhhhhh, everyone knows that.

If someone takes offense to the R word above watch "South Park The F Word"

Adrienne Saia said...

I already want to take my last paragraph back. I blame my poor taste on the altitude.

Anyway, a commenter elsewhere posted that 1 in 2,000 live births for someone of Bristol's age give birth to a baby with Down Syndrome. You're right - that's not the key issue here.

Sure, the impregnation time line is problematic. However, the real issue the media's refusal to investigate this rumor further is what infuriates me the most (especially with all of the time given to birthers).

Jody said...

Post it. While I sometimes don't agree with your politics, you nevertheless make me question things after reading your thoughtful writings. Palin is a conceited pariah to the conservative movement and will be the most responsible for Obama getting re-elected. Please feel free to publish anything that will discredit her and reveal this self-centered dolt for what she truly is. (Besides, I share your somewhat juvenile sense of humor and can't wait to see what you have to say!)

Dan said...

It is odd that they're shying away from it even though you never imply that the allegations about Trig are true.

I've "recommended" your original article through StumbleUpon to help it get some traction. If others do the same, it could help it get some more publicity. With the help of your fanbase, it could do some good.

Best of luck.

IBG said...

Chez-- I've been blogging on Huffpo for 3 years. Over that time I've had one or two pieces turned down because they were over the line in terms of taste and it was always explained to me as such. And I accepted it. However, I've sensed a shift in editorial policy beginning before the merger and continuing after it. I've gotten some posts up but more have been rejected, the last via a somewhat curt and patronizing email stating "it's not for us." The rejected post was no different in tone or sensibilities than those I've put up in the past. My sense of this has been that, with this merger, they are shifting into starfucker mode featuring posts by big-name experts and, of course, celebrities. I may take another shot with them but if it's rejected I'll stick to throwing them up on my own blog. Money changes everything, I guess.

Anonymous said...

The problem is most of the line of reasoning on the Trig thing is based on "what kind of crazy politician would do that?" Go back and watch the speech on the lawn where Palin resigned from her job as Governor. Now tell me that this woman is bound by the normal rules of politics, society and common sense. Most everything she's done in her years in the spotlight adds up to the kind of nut that would fake a pregnancy to maintain the illusion of a perfect Republican Christian family. I mean, who else would attack critics by insinuating that they have pervy designs on her teen daughter? Her ethic is much closer to Desperate Housewives than Meet the Press.

CNNfan said...

Why would anyone in the press take an author seriously who published himself with his head photo-chopped onto an image of a baby boy in his mother's arms?

trish said...

That doesn't make sense at all. I don't think you said anything offensive or even controversial. In fact them not publishing your piece kind of proves everything you say.

Becky said...

Post it. I've always been intrigued by the controversy, not so much because I believe that it's true but because there were some very odd details that emerged surrounding it and it boggled my mind that journalists didn't do anything about it. (A 20 hour leisurely flight home while she was in labor? Give me a break.)

Chez said...

Oh, it's already posted. I put it up here yesterday then submitted it to HuffPo. They turned it down. Not big deal, really -- I was just curious as to whether I stepped over some kind of line I wasn't aware of.

drater said...

I haven't been shy about calling you out for picking on Trig, and I don't see anything wrong with that piece. Maybe the new management at HP doesn't like people pointing out that the liberal media ain't so liberal. I quit going there after the Breitbart fiasco, so I don't know if there's been much change.

Chez said...

Anon 11:01 kind of hit it on the head. Part of the reason the Palin-Trig thing is worth slightly more than an immediately brush-off is precisely because of the kind of crap we've come to expect from Palin. I honestly believe the woman is capable of anything, no matter how underhanded, hypocritical, overly ambitious or self-serving. No, this doesn't prove she did something as obscene as covering for her daughter's teen pregnancy to essentially cover her own ass, but I simply wouldn't put anything past her.

Anonymous said...

There are lots of people who claim that Trig couldn't be her grandson because he's got down's syndrome. Sorry, but I had a friend who got pregnant in 11th grade. Her son has down's syndrome. It might be more common in older mothers but that doesn't exclude the possibility for younger ones.

I'd have a lot more respect for the Palin Family's privacy if they weren't such a load of fame whores. I hope someone does force her to produce the birth certificate. If this had happened to me, I'd show the birth certificate and tell everyone to STFU. Why the secrecy in this one tiny place? It's not surprising people assume she's trying to hid something.

That said, I'm sure this is all a lame conspiracy (and that's why the HuffPo thinks they need to distance themselves from it) but anything that twists Palin's knickers would actually make me more likely to visit HuffPo. Just sayin.

littlebitoffeisty said...

hahahahahahahaha!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1377079/Is-picture-proves-Sarah-Palin-did-birth-baby-Trig.html

;o)

Benoit from Ottawa said...

No, Chez, your treatment was not over the line; the piece was and is quite moderate in tone. For you anyway.

I really liked anon's last thought, up there (changed a tiny bit):

"Her ethics are much closer to Desperate Housewives than Meet the Press."

NoxiousNan said...

I'm answering this one before I read the rest of comments.

I think they didn't print it because it hits too close to home. you laid out reasons why the press and/or individual journalists would deliberately ignore a story for selfish reasons, that might keep legitimate news from the public. They don't want their readership to consider that.

I don't think they'd have any problem at all publishing the story if it had been questioning the identity of Trig Palin's birth mother.

Now on to comments...