Want to see "morning magazine" hosts bark like poodles? Discuss your broadcast fantasies in the Media area of Table Talk

___________________

Search barnesandnoble.com for all your media needs!
___________________

And a little scumbag shall lead them
By James Poniewozik
Did a sex-mad tabloid media hijack the public discourse in 1998? We should be so lucky
(12/22/98)

- - - - - - - - - -

BROWSE THE
MEDIA CIRCUS
ARCHIVE

"FIRING LINE" CEASES FIRE | PAGE 1, 2
- - - - - - - - - -

Brill bashing on the rise

"If the puffed up Mr. Brill reads his own publication, we feel sorry for him. Only someone as profoundly solipsistic as Mr. Brill could have invented Brill's Content, which sounds like a hair cream ... In fact, if you happen to use hair cream, then you just might like this dull, humorless, self-important magazine." This from an editorial in the Jan. 11 New York Observer that slams Brill, Zuckerman and Ed Kosner as the embodiment of "all of the media's narcissism."

After the laurels and trumpetry that attended the launch of Brill's Content, some journals have begun to turn on the magazine and its creator. The Observer editorial page, which publisher Arthur Carter personally oversees, savages Content as "a stunning display of arrogance and pomposity," whose conceit offers "a revealing glimpse of Mr. Brill's absurd pretensions."

Asked what he thought may have provoked Carter's invective, Brill -- who claimed not to have seen the editorial -- said he and Arthur Carter are friends, or used to be friends. "Maybe he's still angry because we hired [former Observer media columnist] Lorne Manly."

Meanwhile, what a Vanity Fair staffer calls an "emperor-has-no-clothes" piece about Brill is in the works at the fat glossy. Predicated on the notion that if you run around telling people you're going to have a million readers and then fall astoundingly short of that, people will eventually notice, the piece was set to run early this year.

Brill says Vanity Fair writer Jennet Conant, who wrote a gushing piece about Brill prior to Content's launch, called and said she'd heard Content's circulation was lower than expected. Brill says he produced the numbers, told Conant what was what, and when he was through, she decided to can the piece. (Brill claims Content's circulation is 225,000.)

Conant, however, says that the piece is scheduled to run in the May or June issue. "At Brill's request," she says, "Vanity Fair postponed the article until Content is a year old, at which time Brill will have firmer circulation numbers."

Sharks circling? "I don't perceive that at all," says Brill. "There is nothing to circle."

Star editor to Drudge: Have you no decency, sir?

"I just wish we could shut Drudge up," says Phil Bunton, editor in chief of the Star magazine. "He muddies the water. People find some things in the Drudge site that are true -- maybe 50 percent of what he's got is accurate. But he's dealing mostly in barroom gossip and wild speculation."

Bunton refused to say what Drudge got right and what he got wrong in his report on the Star's would-be exclusive report on Bobbie Ann Williams, the black Arkansas prostitute who claims President Clinton fathered her 13-year-old son, Danny. On Jan. 1, Drudge reported that Star reporter Richard Gooding had obtained DNA samples from Bobbie Ann and Danny Williams and planned to compare them with "previously obtained" presidential DNA samples.

Previously obtained? Bunton laughed at the notion that the Star kept a refrigerator full of presidential DNA on hand. Bunton insists the Star did not leak the Williams tale to Drudge. In fact, Bunton says, the Star asked Drudge to hold off until they nailed the story down. "Initially he said he'd wait," says Bunton, "then apparently he decided the hell with it, let's get some hits." Bunton refused to comment on the DNA test results or the Williams story's progress.

Icy water and fiery prose revisited

The last Media Circus included an item about Out magazine editor James Collard and writer Michelangelo Signorile. The item noted that after a much publicized spat that included flying water glasses, Collard and then-Out contributor Signorile parted ways in August. Signorile subsequently appeared on the Advocate masthead and, in his first contribution to that magazine, attacked Collard and Out. The item quoted an Out insider who said, "We were expecting this. James fired him. This is [Mike's] way of getting back at James."

Signorile rightly objected to the fact that he was not given an opportunity to answer Out's claim that he was fired. "That wasn't the case at all," says Signorile. "In fact, James Collard wanted me to work it out but didn't want me to add my commentary and opinion because, in his view, commentary is passé. I chose to leave rather than write in a juiceless, lifeless, diluted way."

Collard is still on vacation but Out spokesman Al Rojas had this to say on the matter: "The company's policy is not to talk about personnel changes but we are extremely happy with the situation as it is now. We wish Michelangelo and his editor the best of luck."

Just keep the glasses on the table.
SALON | Jan. 7, 1999