From the TPM Archives: Horses Mouth

Questions For The President Of Ann Coulter's Syndicate

By Greg Sargent|March 08, 2007

Okay, we've now got four newspapers and counting that have now given Ann Coulter the old heave-ho for her "faggot" comment.

So now the time has come to direct a few questions to Lee Salem, the President of Universal Press Syndicate, the outfit that distributes Ann Coulter's column. I've now emailed him a bunch of them. Let's see if he answers.

As noted here yesterday, UPS is getting pummeled by demands that it toss Coulter. Yesterday, the company told me that they wouldn't be dumping her; by way of explanation they sent over the form letter that Salem emails out to readers who complain about her. That letter is here.

After I put in a request for an interview with Salem in search of more clarification, UPS' assistant vice president of communications, Kathie Kerr, said he wouldn't be available. But she later added that he might reply to emailed questions.

So here's a slightly edited version of the questions I sent him:

Dear Mr. Salem,

I'm a reporter for Talking Points Memo, the national political blog. Given the large amount of concern there is out there over Universal Press Syndicate's continued carrying of Ann Coulter's column, I was wondering if I could ask you a few questions via email and give you a chance to address those concerns.

1) In the letter you have been emailing out to readers who have expressed concern about Coulter's description of John Edwards, you write that the company has no "legal interest" in what writers do outside the relationship with you. I take this to mean that Coulter's use of the anti-gay slur outside of her column has no relevance to whether you'll continue to publisher her.

Allow me to ask this, then. What if she went on TV and said that the Holocaust hadn't happened or that slavery was the best thing to happen to Africans? Would you still continue that relationship? What if she described African Americans as "niggers" or if she described Jewish people as "kikes" in a TV interview? Would you continue distributing her column in such a case?

In other words, is there anything she might say in public outside her column that would induce you to stop giving her the platform your syndication grants her? If the answer is no, why not? And if the answer is that there are in fact things that she could say that would cause you to sever the relationship, why wouldn't her use of the terms "raghead" and "faggot" induce you to sever it?

As best as I can gather here, only one of two things is possible. Either she can say literally anything outside her column without any risk that you'll sever the relationship; or, alternately, slurs directed at some groups would cause you to end the relationship but slurs directed at other groups won't. Which of these is the accurate characterization?

The rest of the questions after the jump.

Here are the rest of the questions:

(2) In your letter to readers, you also write: "Whether the words she chose in referring to John Edwards were misplaced humor or outright bigotry, we would not have distributed them in her column." I take this to mean that if there are bigoted remarks in her column, you would not distribute that column, or you would edit out those remarks.

Why, then, has UPS distributed past Coulter columns containing clear examples of bigotry against other groups?

On Dec. 3, 2006, Coulter wrote: "What did we do to the Arabs? I believe Americans are the victims in that relationship. After the attacks of 9/11, profiling Muslims is more like profiling the Klan." On August 19, 2006, in a defense of ethnic profiling of Arabs, Coulter wrote, "I think a plane full of Arabs would attract attention -- except from people who had recently completed a government training program teaching them not to notice anyone's appearance." These are clearly bigoted. A five minute search turned these up; doubtless there are more.

Why would your company continue to grant a platform to someone whose obvious M.O. is to practice bigotry -- both in and outside of her column -- as a means to profit? Why help distribute the work of someone who's happy to hurl childish and bigoted insults at people and regularly debase our discourse simply because it's putting money in her pockets?

3) You mention in your letter that Coulter is "not an employee and we have no legal power to `fire' her." Does this mean that there's literally no mechanism at all by which you could stop distributing her columns if you so chose? I was wondering if you could clarify that point

I sincerely hope you take a moment to answer these questions, Mr. Salem. They are being asked by many, many people across the country right now.

We'll see if he answers.

To visit the homepage of this blog, where you can see many more posts, click here.