|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
< BACK TO Fresh Intelligence VF's Carter Batters, Eats the Press SKLAR BOMB Carter, Rachel (inset) Fielding questions from the audience at an American Society of Magazine Editors luncheon to promote Spy: The Funny Years on Thursday, Carter called on Rachel Sklar, a fellow Canadian and editor of the Huffington Post's Eat the Press blog. Clearly piqued by Christopher Hitchens's essay in the January issue of Vanity Fair, "Why Women Aren't Funny", Sklar inveighed against Hitchens's thesis, wrapping criticism in curiosity about Carter's "process" of "greenlighting" such an article. "I don't have an answer for you," Carter replied, brusquely. Sklar pressed on, accusing Hitchens himself of unfunniness, prompting Carter to demand, "And who are you?" She identified herself. "And you write something funny for the Huffington Post?" Sklar offered to send him links to her stories, but he dismissed her. "I thought [the piece] was very funny. And you've proved my point." (Surely he meant to say Hitchens's point?) The exchange, in its confrontational tone, differed markedly from the others of the afternoon—notably those initiated by a table of Vanity Fair staffers, who floated several softballs across their boss's plate and those of his co-authors, Kurt Andersen and George Kalogerakis (whose mic was mysteriously dead for part of the Q&A). At one point, Carter even answered a question from his own publicist about Spy's brilliant skewering of the New York Times. Afterward, a somewhat nonplussed Sklar came perilously close to apologizing for setting Carter off. "You do sort of throw down the gauntlet when you publish a piece called 'Why Women Aren't Funny,'" she explains. "I'm looking forward to disabusing Graydon of that when I'm published in Vanity Fair, which should no doubt be very soon." She adds, "I was genuinely interested in what he might have had to say about the behind-the-scenes of publishing that essay. I didn't mean for it to come out as rude. Canadians are very polite, as you know." Well, some of them, anyway. For more on the Sklar wars, visit The New York Observer's Media Mob. 
clearly, Hitchens doesn't get out much ... i remember that obsessive article he wrote about blowjobs and you could just tell he doesn't get any... Posted by: GZLives on December 7, 2006 8:09 PM yawn... her behavior (and poor reporting skills) illustrates the major problem with the much-ballyhooed democratization of the media that has been brought about by the blog revolutiion--anyone with internet acess is now a "reporter." The definition of "press" is now so wide that it's meaningless. Everything she writes seems designed to do nothing apart from one thing: Gain attention for herself. The Hitchens piece, however ill-conceived, was well written and, moreover, well defended. Asking that question in a room full of editors was the equivalent of her handing out her resume to every table. It's obvious, ambitious, careerist and a tad pathetc. How sad that in the week that George W.S. Trow passed on we have the minor ascendency of such a mediocre media force. Within the context of no context, indeed. Posted by: dilettante on December 8, 2006 8:40 AM In a business known for egomania, Carter stands out. He long ago morphed into that which he mocks. A little less Moet and filet might enable his performance of the autofellatio he so obviously craves. What a buffoon. Posted by: agingcynic on December 9, 2006 11:32 AM The fact that Graydon Carter found the article funny and published it was enough to make me cancel my subscription. He's an ass. Posted by: killersmile on December 11, 2006 5:10 PM Advertisement |
    
 |
|
 |
|
 | ||||
Back
Bush's Lady In Red Cloned ... Twice