If You Write for a “Right-of-Center” Magazine Perhaps You Shouldn’t Dis Right-of-Center Magazines

If you write for a right-of-center magazine perhaps you shouldn’t dis “right-of-center” magazines. Just sayin’.

Take a look at this post at American Spectator by Matthew Walther. The post is about intelligent design. I have some thoughts on intelligent design, but they are complicated and more than I want to go into now. My point here is about this offending paragraph, which I just couldn’t let go.

Nagel’s book was published under one of the world’s best university press trade imprints, Oxford UP; Meyer’s, on the other hand, has been brought out by a house whose biases are, for good or ill, so well known that their titles go virtually unreviewed outside the right-of-center press. Where Nagel’s book is a work of popular philosophy, Meyer’s is, or purports to be, one of science. (emphasis mine)

Ummm… dude, you’re writing this post on American Spectator. And to make it more ironic/clueless, the post is about a review of said book. Perhaps if you think the right-of-center press is so lowly and inconsequential then maybe you should look for a different venue for your thoughts.

delicious | digg | reddit | facebook | technorati | stumbleupon | chatintamil

5 thoughts on “If You Write for a “Right-of-Center” Magazine Perhaps You Shouldn’t Dis Right-of-Center Magazines

  1. Matt Weber

    I don’t know, seems like a good thing that the right-wing media is picking up on its own ghettoization. The quote makes it sound like he is lamenting the fact that the book will not get wider attention.

  2. RedPhillips Post author

    Matt, if the right-wing media is indeed ghettoized, then the appropriate response for a right-winger is to decry the conditions that led to the ghettoization in the first place, meaning the overwhelmingly left-wing nature of the MSM and the publishing industry. (FTR, I don’t concede that we have a right-wing media any more than we have a right-wing major party. We have a media that is less social democrat and less socially liberal than the other media, but they reliably come around to the liberal side after 10 -20 years or so.)

    That said, read the post that the quote is from. He is clearly not an ID supporter and is clearly dissing the credibility of ID books by dissing the respectability of right-wing presses.

  3. Matthew Walther

    RedPhillips,

    Two points:

    1) “If,” to borrow from your headline, “You’re Going to Criticize a Writer, You Should Probably Learn What His Name Is”: there is no “s” is my surname.

    2) It should go without saying that thousands of books by or about conservatives get published by respected mainstream publishers. Who published Philip Larkin’s letters or the authorized biography of Margaret Thatcher? Regnery? The existence of “conservative” media–I am thinking especially of publishing houses, not so much of newspapers or magazines: a rather different question, I think–is itself lamentable. It has all but turned conservatism into a kind of consumer-driven subculture–something similar has happened to American Protestantism with the rise of “Christian rock” and so on–rather than the rather common disposition that I take it to be. And the low editorial standards of some of these publishers, to say nothing of the monomaniacal humorlessness of the dynamic Reaganites whom some of them are publishing, do conservatives no favors when these books are noticed.

    Anyway, I would continue but I suspect that we would end up talking past one another. For what it’s worth I agree with many of the contributors to your website, especially about immigration.

  4. RedPhillips Post author

    Spelling fixed. Sorry.

    I have some thoughts about your other points. I basically disagree with your underlying premise. But it’s an important discussion so I am going to make a separate post about it.

  5. Matt Weber

    Matt, if the right-wing media is indeed ghettoized, then the appropriate response for a right-winger is to decry the conditions that led to the ghettoization in the first place, meaning the overwhelmingly left-wing nature of the MSM and the publishing industry.

    This is way too passive. It’s not a good strategy for rightists to rely on the left to suddenly decide to be magnanimous. The problem with the ghettoization of the right-wing media comes from it having failed to establish itself as a contender among the vast unaligned portion of the populace. So liberals go to the MSM axis, conservatives go to the FOX axis, and those who don’t know/care go to…the MSM axis. Because that’s the “real news”.

    That’s what you need to change, and it won’t happen because of the left.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>