Advertisers Abandon Ann Coulter, as do Some Newspapers

The list of advertisers that have abandoned Ann Coulter’s website is growing at a steady rate. Net Bank, Verizon, Washington Mutual, AT&T/Cingular, Dollar Rent-A-Car, SmileTrain.org, University of Phoenix, Sallie Mae, LasikPlus, Power Chord Academy, Gulf Shores.com/Alabama Gulf Coast Convention and Visitors Bureau, Ulta.com, and Yellow Pages.com have all abandoned the right-wing pundit’s site following her hateful remarks at the CPAC conference, according to Daily Kos.

CoultergeistSome papers have begun to drop Coulter’s column as well. The Lancaster New Era, a daily paper, told readers it “halted publication of Ann Coulter’s syndicated column following her crude characterization of presidential candidate John Edwards as a homosexual at a public appearance on Friday. Coulter’s use of name-calling, sarcasm, and overstatement in her columns too often detracts from the arguments she seeks to make. …Lancaster County residents of whatever political view — conservative, moderate, or liberal — deserve intelligent discussion of issues. Ann Coulter no longer provides that.”

Michigan Liberal reports that the Oakland Press also says they’ll no longer carry Coulter’s column.

Andrew Sullivan received an email from the American Conservative Union. Sullivan reports that the group won’t say they’ll disinvite Coulter from speaking at CPAC next year, and won’t condemn her comments:

“ACU and CPAC leave it to our audience to determine whether comments are appropriate or not. “Ann Coulter is known for comments that can be both provocative and outrageous. That was certainly the case in her 2007 CPAC appearance and previous ones as well. But as a point of clarification, let me make it clear that ACU and CPAC do not condone or endorse the use of hate speech,” said David A. Keene, ACU Chairman.”

As Sullivan notes: “Why can he not just say so and disinvite her in the future? The answer: because the base would explode. Coulter is central to a core element of the conservative movement today.”

The Human Rights Campaign finally piled on yesterday, calling on folks to “remove Ann Coulter from public discourse” by contacting Universal Press Syndicate, the world’s largest independent newspaper syndicate. They’ve provided a handy webpage to do just that.

you may have missed…
Ann Coulter calls John Edwards a “Faggot” [tr]

Comments

  1. says

    Ann Coulter dot com is getting a helluva lot of hits or has been (temporarily?) yanked – I can’t access it. Before I get flamed, I was hoping to see what other newspapers publishes her column…

  2. Zeke says

    The site has been down all morning.

    I wanted to check out PeterParker’s alert that the United Negro College Fund was advertising on her site before I fired off an email to them. I can’t believe that they would advertise on this hateful, racist, homophobic character actor’s website.

  3. Luke says

    Dang, how is she now going to get that Adam’s apple fixed so she can look like a real woman, LOL! Love her or hate her, she is trashy and hateful, just like any of the GOP’ers and quite a few of the Dem’s, they only pander for votes and get nothing done anyways.

  4. Dan says

    “Remove Ann Coulter from the public discourse”? Not to be a contrarian here, but isn’t that turn of phrase a little frightening? Removing her from legitimate political discourse is one thing–and fortunately, things seem to be moving in that direction–but I would think/hope that control of *public* discourse would be out of anyone’s hands.

  5. BeeDee says

    Thank God HRC has stepped up and is actually doing the work that GLAAD claimed to be doing all these years with HRC’s campaign to to get Universal Press to drop Coulter. She stepped over the line by injecting hate-filled epitaphs into her discourse.

    Battle on HRC!

  6. MT says

    As much as it makes me want to choke to say it, I think Andrew Sullivan just crystallized the whole argument for me. He says the whole base would explode if Coulter were disinvited by the ACU. If she is such a core element of the movement that just proves that the entire conservative movement is without substance. LIke Coulter herself, the entire conservative movement is based on unsubstantiated personal opinion and has no basis in fact, logic or simple common sense and when attacked resorts to school yard bullying tactics like name calling. It’s time the majority of Americans woke up to the fact they are sheep and are all too willing to be because they don’t want to make the effort to form their own opinions so they just stick with knee-jerk reactions and call it “a belief system” and “moral values.”

  7. paxx says

    I can’t help but feel that all of this is a huge farce. In the past, Coulter could rhetorically bash gays day in, day out – nobody cared. Look at all the companies that used to support her.
    And now that she calls one measliy straight politician “gay” – now that is suddenly deemed an intolerable insult?
    This whole affair is nothing to celebrate from a gay rights perspective. If this was about gay rights, Coulter would have been dropped from newspapers much sooner. This is actually an insult to gays and lesbians, since Coulter calling a straight man “fag” is apparently so appallingly insulting that she has to be silenced. It’s bizarre…

  8. John says

    I agree with Paxx. But change will take generations.

    Nevertheless, Coulter appeals to a lowest common denominator and if this is a way to delegitimize her, I think its prudent to let her feel the sting and get her off television and out of newspapers.

    If she says such things, and then is invited to appear on HBO and in your local newspaper, somehow it makes what she says part of an acceptable conversation which it is not.

    One battle at a time.

  9. Adam says

    Paxx,
    You are right. She has said much worse things about gay people before.
    But I think this incident and its aftermath are good for us. The difference here with this story isn’t Ann Coulter, it’s that the political climate has changed. This kind of stuff is no longer getting a free pass like it would have even a half year ago. I really think all the news stories concerning Washington, Hardaway, and Snickers has help change what is appropriate discourse about gay people in our favor. We are not going to have gay marriage in Arkansas anytime soon but every little bit helps.
    Many Republicans and even some Evangelicals are even abandoning Ann Coulter now and that’s a positive thing for us.

  10. anon says

    I see the election is heating up early. Yes, politics is about the millions of personal, ill-considered opinions of rubes and bores, not the high-minded, well considered elite opinion of the NYT Op-Ed pages, which is why it “is based on unsubstantiated personal opinion and has no basis in fact, logic or simple common sense and when attacked resorts to school yard bullying tactics like name calling”. Hold up a mirror and Ann’s face staring back at you. She’s only saying what millions want to hear.

  11. mark m says

    “This is actually an insult to gays and lesbians, since Coulter calling a straight man “fag” is apparently so appallingly insulting that she has to be silenced. It’s bizarre…”

    I see your point, but where Coulter is concerned, I’m not looking a gift horse in the mouth.

  12. Da says

    What do you mean it’s a “farce”?

    There’s a breaking point and a day of reckoning for everyone. Ann Coulter used anti gay rhetoric in the past, yes, but that was before Isaiah Washington and Tim Hardaway, who have both learned the hard way that using anti-gay rhetoric can be very costly for an individual. (I’m the first person to say Isaiah paid way too much in comparison to the Dan Savages and Rush Limbaugh of this world, but that’s the way it goes sometimes)..

    Point is, Ann Coulter miscaculated her move this time. But that wasn’t it, the WORST part of it all is that she went back to Fox and tried *redefine* the word ‘faggot’ as being a schoolyard taunt meaning wuss. That’s the sinister part of her joke. Cause make no mistake about that, it was a very deliberate (and dare I say evil?) effort on her part to send a message to others that the word can mean anything they want to, so everyone should feel free to use it. – HRC saw through her game, and decided that it’s time to take action against her: which is to counter her where it matters; her bank account and her mainstream tribune of hate.

    That’s how effective, legal boycotts are run. And they work.
    http://www.con-suming.com/Keys_of_successful_boycott.htm

    Ann herself will not being silenced. She’ll continue to spew all the hateful jokes she wants, and attempt to spin them on Fox or her youtube account, however companies paying her bills will be made accountable by the public (us) for endorsing and paying her for her hate speech. – Can’t think of a fairer resolution than this.

    So I hope you guys stop being so squeemish and apologetic about the reaction to Ann Coulter, just because she’s a woman. A pale blond woman. She’s just the ‘angelic’ facade to something much more sinister. Don’t be this easily fooled! This is not about her, but what is right. Period.

    Pass along the HRC link to all your friends, and write. This is our very chance to fight back, let’s not let HRC down!!

  13. Jack! says

    “But that wasn’t it, the WORST part of it all is that she went back to Fox and tried *redefine* the word ‘faggot’ as being a schoolyard taunt meaning wuss. That’s the sinister part of her joke. Cause make no mistake about that, it was a very deliberate (and dare I say evil?) effort on her part to send a message to others that the word can mean anything they want to, so everyone should feel free to use it.”

    I completely agree.

  14. Kurt says

    ZEKE: The United Negro College Fund was not directly advertising on Coulter’s site. It had a PSA banner ad placed there by the Ad Council who design/run public service announcement ads on behalf of many groups/causes.

    I sent a comment to the Ad Council website about the placement. I’m not sure if the Ad Council pays to place banners on Coulter’s site, or if the website posts them as a ‘charitable’ donation. Either way, it would be a great place to post a PSA on hate speech.

  15. paxx says

    Sorry, Adam, but I really don’t see that change in our favour – that is, not in this instance. What do you think would have happened if someone like Coulter had called a politican a “faggot”, say, 20 years ago? She would have been shunned by the public just the same – because of the “insult” to the politician…
    But I do agree with John – as in, of course this backlash may improve our standards in public debate (a little). Which will benefit anyone – gay and straight.
    The HRC, in my humble opinion, should save its powder for the inevitable next instance, in which it is actually a GAY person that was insulted by the likes of Coulter.

  16. Da says

    Jack! that’s exactely it.

    And it’s about stopping people from making a lofty profit and gaining political influence from using hate speech against gays.

  17. Leland says

    As much as I criticized DA in another thread, and hate to disagree with my brother Ezekiel, I am pleased to agree that this is much to our favor, and see it as, potentially, the top of a “tipping point” we have reached for reasons that are hard to document.

    Nine years after the fact, there is still discussion about why, after years of brutal murders of gays that never got much attention beyond the local news, if at all, the murder of Matthew Shepard reverberated around the world. I don’t think the answer can be documented. And while far too little good than we’d hoped came out of the world’s attention, I think we are better off than we were, and, peace reside with his sweet soul, the words “Matthew Shepard” carry great power to instantly communicate what the results of irrational hatred can be.

    At the same time, I believe that the TR Knight/Isaiah Washington and Tim Hardaway stories led less to the reaction to Cuntler’s latest horror that benefitted themselves by some intangible shift in general attitudes. Sorry, Paxx, you are sadly wrong about 20 years ago and even 20 MONTHS ago. The same thing and worse SHOULD have happened last year when she “fagged” Al Gore (and, effectively, Bill Clintong) and “dyked” Hillary, but the nongay world (and much of the gay world) yawned in the faces of those who protested.

    Whatever the combination of reasons that people saw THIS time as crossing the line, going too far, whatever, I am grateful for. And, at least as far as I’ve seen, there has been remarkably less, “what a horrible thing to say about someone”—that is, “yes, faggots are disgusting but this straight person is not.” And, I’m unaware of Edwards feeling the need as so many do to add, “I’m not gay but….” (versus Mark Foley, years ago, who not only was but added that it was disgusting to suggest such a thing).

    I am convinced that it all moves us closer to the day when there will be zero tolerance for the F-word and others like it as an epithet AND toward the understanding that the state of being, the people that it refers to are not the subhumans so many still imagine us to be.

    While racism still permeates our society, trust me when I say it is light years better than it was when the average person threw around the word Nigger like rice at a wedding, long after it had disappeared from “official” “public discourse.” What changed? SOME people, indeed, had their consciousness raised by the Black civil rights movement. SOME got the message that segregation and open racism was simply bad for business, either day-to-day or, more formally, being denied local, state, and federal contracts if there was any evidence they discriminated. And, the reduction of its public manifestation with impunity changed the way most white kids grew up thinking about people of color.

    There is such a thing as doing the right thing for the wrong reason. Whatever is involved in this case, anything that penetrates Cuntler’s force field and hastens the day when she has to resort to blowing sailors for protein bars gets my vote.

  18. Da says

    As much as I criticized DA in another thread, [..] I am pleased to agree that this is much to our favor.
    Posted by: Leland |

    Thank you Leland. And as much I may have disagreed with you in the other thread, you’re one of the people on here I have the greatest admiration for (ok, time to cue that cheesy music..but it’s true).

    There’s nothing more to add to your eloquent post. You summed it all.

    We are the midst of a shift for gay rights, as we’re slowly moving from the peripherial discourse to the mainstream one. Sure there are a lots of people who are going to resist it, but it’s happening in spite of their misguided efforts, partially thanks to web 2.0 which gives equal opportunity for gay voices to be heard. It’ll no longer be tolerated for people like Ann Coulter to spew ignorance unchallenged. And I welcome the opportunity to be placed on an equal field with some of those big shot facists who used to hide behind their advertising-sponsored bibles to spew hate at homosexuals. Ms Coulter is now free to join Towleroad’s comment section if she wants to defend herself against what I have to say about her.

  19. jimmyboyo says

    I agree 100% with mark M

    I see the point but i will also gladly not look a gift horse in the mouth

    On HRC….A little late to the party! Anybody surprised on how long it took them to act?

  20. peterparker says

    Coulter’s site is up…it’s just running very slowly…maybe that’s because advertisers are abandoning her left and right…hehehe!

    And Zeke, Kurt is right…the United Negro College Fund probably did not directly place their ad on Coulter’s site, but instead contracted with an advertising company who then turned around and placed it there…but they need to be alerted that their ads are running on the site of an offensive, bigoted harpie.

  21. peterparker says

    Oh yeah…one more thing…of all the companies that have abandoned Coulter, Google apparently remains onboard…and remember Google is the company whose motto is “Don’t be evil.”…if you click on ‘photos’ on the left side of Coulter’s webpage, you’ll see at the top of the photos page, in small print, ‘Ads by Google’. So I suppose that means Google is still doing business with Ann…but the really funny thing about her photos page is that a ton of photos wouldn’t open…instead they just displayed a questiion mark in place of a photo…I’m guessing Ann was forced to remove pictures of her with celebrities.

  22. Gabriel says

    if you click on ‘photos’ on the left side of Coulter’s webpage, you’ll see at the top of the photos page, in small print, ‘Ads by Google’. So I suppose that means Google is still doing business with Ann

    Posted by: peterparker | Mar 7, 2007 5:38:46 PM

    Actually, ANYONE can take part in AdSense, Google doesn’t monitor these “partners” at all. That is part of the reason why “content sites” such as Ann’s (or even Towleroad) don’t convert many sales. So, as much as I hate Google, don’t blame this one on them.

  23. Da says

    Why aren’t I surprised about google? Ever since they’ve aquired youtube, all their gay-themed groups started dissapearing from the main lists in the community section.

  24. Leland says

    Check the update at

    http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/3/6/13130/17765

    for the growing list of advertisers dumping her. It’s a good idea to e-mail THANK YOUs to them, too.

    Such quick action brings a smile to a crusty old cynic like moi, but now that the tide SEEMS to have turned in our favor regarding our public demonization we must demonstrate ZERO TOLERANCE for the next Washington/Hardaway/Coulter who throws the F-bomb or other words of hate. They CAN think and feel and believe what they want, but they have no right to manifest it without—at least—mass condemnation.

  25. yoshi says

    ya know leland – you had me until the last sentence. Coulter has every right to think, feel, and SAY what she did. But she has been skating on a thin line for a while and finally crossed it. What happened is what is supposed to happen – condemnation. This is a good thing. Lets not continue to pass laws that suppresses everyone’s speech rights when you feel bad when a naughty word is said out loud.

  26. sean says

    sorry but i think i’ll pass on sending a thank-you note/email to any advertisers that have dropped out of the coulter vortex. the fact that they once DID business with her considering her long history of hate/intolerance pretty much sums it up. why should i thank someone who NEVER should have done biz with her in the first place. “uh, verizon, yellowpages.com, et al, thanks for no longer doing business with a woman who has peppered her language with hatespeak like i pepper my salad. thanks for finally seeing the light. you’re the kinda peeps i really want to continue doing business with. keep up the good work.” uh, no. i’d rather chip away at golf balls.

  27. Dr. Pat says

    Let me quess, what companies will get good press by dropping Ann the slam. And how many companies will get on the band wagon now that Ann is getting press (bad or good)it’s print that she would never get if she didn’t have her gums flapping.

    Just a thought.

Leave A Reply