I've mentioned on a couple of occasions that I've only had one piece turned down flat by the Huffington Post; that would be the one I wrote a couple of years back skewering Jenny McCarthy for her militantly ignorant stance on the supposed connection between childhood vaccines and autism.
Well, as of this morning, that number has gone up.
The HuffPo team says it's passing on the Sarah-Trig Palin column I published here yesterday. Why, I'm not quite sure -- and I didn't bother to ask since I know I'll get a nebulously deflective answer. But I'm putting this out there only because I'd be curious to see if you, dear readers, have any thoughts on it.
Obviously, the Huffington Post can publish whatever it wants; I'm not the least bit upset over this and I understand if the HuffPo brain trust -- which appreciates the notion of liability far more than I do and therefore is less likely to light everything on fire just for the hell of it -- considers the topic of the Sarah and Trig Palin rumor some kind of third-rail. But it did leave me wondering if I struck the right tone with what I wrote, given that I in no way meant to imply that there's validity to the Palin birth conspiracy theory, only that when considered relative to the Obama birther myth it would have been as worthy (or not worthy) of media scrutiny.
So, opinions? And should I now circulate the piece everywhere I can under the heading of "THE ARTICLE THE HUFFINGTON POST DOESN'T WANT YOU TO SEE"?
I kid.
No comments:
Post a Comment