Sourpuss McCain; Illiquid Forbes
            

            ELLEN:

            I don't think the killers of Matthew Shepard had the brains to even perceive
of teaching anyone a lesson.

            I still disagree with you about TV's coverage of Columbine. Yes, of course,
there is the massive hypocrisy of the American public when they say in polls
that the media is scum: They love all the coverage, love the Lady Di and Royal
Family hagiography, etc. And of course a large mass murder at a high school,
especially with the Nazi and goth and geek overtones, resonates with the
public, and media, more than day traders in Atlanta, but the coverage was
mind-numbing. It was telling to me that CNN spent four hours of airtime on the
funeral of the black boy who was killed. That smacks of patronization to me.
And you have to admit that the coverage of JFK Jr.'s death was over the top:
Newsweek and Time milked it for two top-selling issues. Walter
Isaacson's personal remarks about Kennedy were embarrassing. Douglas Brinkley
has ruined his career as a historian by rushing to every TV studio to talk
about his good friend John. His case reminded me of when Eric Burdon suddenly
became Jimi Hendrix's best friend after he O.D.'d in '70.

            Well, we've both been admonished from the 
                  Slate
                chieftains for
straying from the news of the day. My heart says: Fuck them, let's talk about
what we want. However, since they were kind enough to invite us to the table, I
do have a few things to say about today's "news." I know you're not as
fascinated by electoral politics as I am, dismissing it all in a Ralph Nader
sort of way, but I cannot for the life of me understand the Beltway media's
continuing love affair with Sen. John McCain. McCain is sleazy: Talk to any
reporter in Arizona (which no Washington pundit does) and you won't hear about
what a "maverick" he is. Instead, they'll draw a picture of a sour,
press-hating scumbag who's not very nice to women and has shady business
dealings to boot. People forget he was part of the Keating Five. In today's
Wall Street Journal , Gerald Seib writes the same story about McCain that
we've seen for months: He's unpredictable, angers Republicans with his campaign
finance and tobacco stands (making him an honorary Democrat with that sort of
lunacy), but is fiercely pro-life. And of course his POW résumé. I wish boomer
pundits would get over the guilt of not serving in Vietnam: They were right. It
was a stupid war and not worth fighting and dying for. Get over not having that
"experience."

            The New York Post , and other papers, reports today that Steve Forbes
isn't quite as "liquid" as everyone thought and is going to have to sell some
assets to compete with Bush. I wonder how his family feels about his quixotic,
and ultimately selfish, presidential campaign? If I were one of his five
daughters, I'd be sort of pissed. But Forbes has caught the presidential
aphrodisiac. Instead of dealing with Bush, and getting a plum position in his
administration, or running for senator from New Jersey, where he'd stand a
better chance than Christie Whitman, he's enriching the television stations in
various states to get out his message. I like his message, but I read it every
day on the Journal's editorial page.

            I'll get to the Voice's redesign next time, which is handsome, but
I'll close with a tidbit in today's New York Observer by Carl Swanson,
the under-30 media critic who writes like George Will. The Voice has
added a new biweekly column called "Pucker Up," about anal sex. Swanson writes
in his sniffy Observer way: "Nobody ever said the Voice was all
about the high road" and objects to the headline of the column "I Am Butt Girl,
Hear My Ass Roar!" He then asks editor Don Forst if that isn't a bit too much.
Jesus, what prudes we have in the media! Anal sex in the Voice , or
NYPress , is the norm. I'm sure readers won't raise an eyebrow.

            Best,
RUSS