friends don’t let friends wear seafoam green
jasonThe Times took several minutes out of my day with a piece about Katherine Harris’ photo op at MacDill Air Force base with President Bush. The fact that she was there to be seen with Jeb and Dubya was barely mentioned because they couldn’t help themselves from devoting a whole “feature” article to condemning her choice in suits. Hey, I dislike Katherine Harris as much as the next guy, but I can’t really say I think much of blasting the chick for her choice in clothing.
They talked about its tightness. Its greenness. Its laciness. And those shoes. They talked about how it might have been a lovely getup for a wedding. Or a garden party. Or perhaps a nice private dinner out.
This story reads like a note being passed about at the back of class instead of a newspaper article. In fact, the Times wrote an editorial then dressed it up as news and set about to make the woman look ridiculous. And does she really need help in that department?
Instead of a written version of “What Not to Wear” maybe they could have detailed reasons we should be worried that a woman known for recieving illegal campaign contributions, who has said that she will try to “win back America for God”, and who goes through staffers like an “industrial wood chipper” is managing to bully her way to a leadership position with the GOP. Petty fashion critique should be left to those freaky Rivers girls.
Two other issues I have with this editorial:
But she was appearing at an official function at a time one might have thought she was seeking to convey gravitas, not girlishness.
What the writer means is that this is her opinion but she can’t say that without admitting that this is an editorial attacking Harris in the guise of news. And finally,
Katherine Harris attended a ceremony with the president of the United States at MacDill Air Force base in Tampa.
I know we love lower case titles here at sticks of fire but when part of a title, the word “President” should always be capitalized - even this Florida high school graduate knows that.
Now, I don’t nessesarily agree with Michelle Malkin when she blasts everybody who has ever made fun of Katherine Harris. And if Jeb Bush had shown up at MacDill in a green dress it would have been news. He didn’t, and it wasn’t. Maybe the Times should leave humor to Saturday Night Live and focus on being a serious newspaper again.
Tags: newspapers, politics, tampa
Loading ...
May 17th, 2006 at 1:36 pm
I started to read this article when it came out and lost interest after the first paragraph. The Times stooped to a new low in judging a candidate by their fashion sense. I’d rather read more about the issues you mentioned here, not about what’s hanging in her closet. What’s next… an article about her skin care tips?
You’re 100% right about their need to focus more on serious issues instead of this BS.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:55 pm
Guys, it was a FASHION column cleared labeled as such and written by the Times FASHION columnist. And it appeared in the features section. Not a news section. (Every other news angle mentioned has already been covered ad infinitum by the Times, Trib and national press.)
Also, the word “president” is NOT always capitalized. It’s only capitalized at the beginning of a sentence or before the person’s name. Otherwise, it’s lower case. Read ANY newspaper and you’ll see.
Thanks for playing.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:58 pm
Robin Givan of the Washington Post tried the same thing last year, writing about Dick Cheney’s use of a parka instead of a dour black mourning coat while attending a state funeral overseas.
Givan won the Pulitzer for criticism this year.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:38 pm
The suit is fine. It’s well-cut through the shoulders and waistline. The bust and sleeve muscle are tight but the lapels and placket still lay properly and her range of motion isn’t restricted. The sleeve hits absolutely perfectly. The trim is consistent and balanced. The skirt acommodates movement while retaining its silhouette.
Further, the shoes aren’t “open-toed.” They’re peep-toed and even if they are slingbacks, they’re still quartered, which means they’re fine for professional activity especially since she’s wearing them with a purposefully noticeable pantyhose, avoiding the look of bare legs.
And since when are pearls only for evening? Haven’t these people ever met anyone who went to prep school? Or lived in Connecticut?
This *is* a terrible article, but only because not once did anyone recognize the subjectivity involved. Frankly, I think it’s an ugly suit, too, but that has nothing to do with the fact that it’s a matter of *taste* not actual design principles.
And did no one notice Jeb! is wearing monk straps?! And his sleeves are too short!
So, really, just get over it, Fink. None of them have the greatest taste and we shouldn’t really care.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:46 pm
It was a column. It doesn’t require subjectivity. Do we need to give some basic journalism classes to the masses here?
May 17th, 2006 at 3:46 pm
Err, I mean “it didn’t require objectivity.” A column CAN be subjective. Though obviously it doesn’t HAVE to…
May 17th, 2006 at 4:44 pm
Notice all the “anonymous” responses being written by people who are obviously defensive journalists! Ain’t it ironicthat any crackbacks against their critics could cost them their jobs.
May 17th, 2006 at 4:45 pm
file ‘katherine harris,’ any and all angles, under topics about which i cd care less, though obviously the idea-starved local press cant stop writing about her. zzzzzzz. and this is not a gop or dem rant. i really really dont care.
May 17th, 2006 at 4:47 pm
Of course any piece of writing in any medium can be as subjective or objective as it likes. My point in listing everything objectively right with the suit is to draw attention simultaneously to its pointless unkindness and the fact that there’s no contract with the audience. We’re told in the online verion that it’s a feature, but it isn’t and, even at that, the fact that it isn’t doesn’t really become clear until the end.
So, basically, the piece is mean-spirited and shows poor exposition. Yes, sounds like a class *is* in order.
May 17th, 2006 at 4:47 pm
dear mr/mrs bamaroller:
er, the name ‘bamaroller’ does not make you not anonymous, a cloak with which you seem to take issue often.
May 17th, 2006 at 4:48 pm
True, bama. “Anonymous” now more often than not means “Stetson student” or “Times employee.” Oh, the humanity!
May 17th, 2006 at 4:58 pm
I figure Bamaroller is probably an ex-Times or ex-Tribune wannabee who was driven out of the biz for being some untalented hack and now works for a psuedo-publication like the Planet, Business Journal or - god forbid - in PR.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:03 pm
“President” in AP Style, which newspapers use, has “president” in lower case, except when used at the beginning of the sentence or as a specific title. Even when referring to the President of the United States (it is capitalized in that formal title, however). Of course, “anonymous” has already pointed that out.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:04 pm
Oh, and in the list of pseudo pubs, don’t forget tbt*
May 17th, 2006 at 5:07 pm
I have a real job, pinhead! My cousin is a journalist so I think I know enough.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:14 pm
bama: you are living proof of the old cliche that a little knowledge - i mean, next to nothing - is a dangerous thing.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:27 pm
My cousin is a socialworker. Does that qualify me to make expert commentary on his field? Ha. Give us a break, Bamaroller. I think everyone’s grown sick of your pointless media bashing.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:38 pm
Hmmm … if I said that a newspaper like the Times or something was a “pseudo” pub, I guess that would mean that I’m jealous of it. I don’t, however. The Times is a good paper, not one I would care to ever work for, but all the same, I still read it every day, and have no need to call it childish names.
I guess I’m just not as insecure.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:50 pm
Not everyone, Anon — which one are you?
May 17th, 2006 at 9:04 pm
On the Times web site, the Katy Harris article was featured right up there. Maybe it was filed under fashion, but to the quick and casual observer, it looked like a major story until you read the chief complaint. I was not impressed. The Trib is clearly under orders to knife her in the back as it is’
May 18th, 2006 at 12:58 am
Tommy has a point. When we try to do humor we sometimes end up with a mess like this. And no one wants that.
May 18th, 2006 at 3:23 pm
Don’t kid yourself. Harris knifes herself in the back. All the media does is write it up.
May 18th, 2006 at 6:29 pm
All media is intelligent, factual, reliable, honest, useful, and worthwhile - especially The Times.