08/17/2007
Anderson Cooper: Love Notes from the West Village
A reader sent in this photo. He writes:
"I was walking my dog this morning and came across this bit of graffiti scrawled on the West 10th Street side of the Jefferson Market Library. I thought is was rather amusing given what it says about 'manic Anderson Cooper.' I also thought it was funny since it's just down the block from the former Ninth Circle Bar where Edward Albee supposedly encountered 'Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolfe' scrawled on a bathroom mirror giving him the inspiration for the title of his play of the same name. Perhaps one day we'll see the Broadway production of 'I Love Manic Anderson Cooper.'"
UPDATE: Apparently it's the graffiti artist that's a bit manic (or named "Manic"). Another reader, Ben H., writes in that the graffiti has been going up all around Chelsea, and sends us these shots he's been taking of it. Not a lot of context but I appreciate the use of color.
Posted 12:20 PM EST by Andy in Anderson Cooper, New York, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Anderson Cooper is a worthless piece of shite. I'm nauseated by his coyness. This a-hole writes a book detailing his brother's suicide, etc., appears on Oprah discussing this VERY PERSONAL stuff, yet he refuses to acknowledge he's gay and any questions pertaining to this are considered too personal and off limits. Ugh. Yeah, he's cute but why gay men continue to fawn over him in light of the aforementioned facts... well its just too damned depressing.
Posted by: JOHN IN MANHATTAN | Aug 17, 2007 12:35:29 PM
"yet he refuses to acknowledge he's gay and any questions pertaining to this are considered too personal and off limits:
once again, it's nobody's business but himself to choose to come out or not and no one should be judging him for that - just dumb queens like you who think that being gay is everybody's business...shut up!
Posted by: again... | Aug 17, 2007 12:40:14 PM
Gothamist pointed to a whole flickr stream of these tags yesterday, the are all over town.
Posted by: Cully | Aug 17, 2007 12:40:20 PM
manic makes no cents.
Posted by: A.J. | Aug 17, 2007 12:50:33 PM
Look at Thomas Roberts. He was basically forced to quit once he came out. And what did Anderson do, nothing.
Posted by: John | Aug 17, 2007 12:58:47 PM
"once again, it's nobody's business but himself to choose to come out or not and no one should be judging him for that - just dumb queens like you who think that being gay is everybody's business...shut up!"
Just like celebrities who are cheating on their spouse is nobody's business but it is still reported on in the news media and no one complain. Look at the news of Ryan Phillippe cheated on Reese Witherspoon with Abbie Cornish. Why is still closet celebrities get a free pass and the rest don't?
Posted by: Scott | Aug 17, 2007 1:08:00 PM
Those tags are also all over 8th Avenue in the 50's.
Posted by: Jeff | Aug 17, 2007 1:08:54 PM
It's Virginia Woolf, not Wolfe.
Posted by: Vita Sackville-West | Aug 17, 2007 1:11:53 PM
"once again, it's nobody's business but himself to choose to come out or not and no one should be judging him for that - just dumb queens like you who think that being gay is everybody's business...shut up!"
People judge celebrities on their private life all the time. Look at the Tom Cruise and how he was judge by the public. Should Anderson be treated any different from other celebrities/public figures?
Posted by: Amy | Aug 17, 2007 1:12:35 PM
Yes, before I read your update I was going to say that the "Manic" looked like the writer's tag line.
So, when are we going to see pictures of your dog? Hmmmm?
Posted by: Patrick | Aug 17, 2007 1:21:09 PM
I walked past a couple yesterday on E.13th between Broadway and 4th. (near the corner of 4th). This chick was snapping pictures of them... Now I know why.
Posted by: scottevill | Aug 17, 2007 2:10:43 PM
Ryan Phillipe has just come out slandering Jake Gyllenhaal with Brokeback jokes. Sorry now gays can no longer fawn over Ryan. He should be put at the top of the gay black list for 15 y/o girls. Lets all boycott all his movies.
Posted by: Zeke | Aug 17, 2007 2:13:33 PM
Jeez, I always thought it was Ryan P. who was the subject of those H'wood blind items about the married twink who attended the Palm Springs circuit parties, with wedding ring firmly in place.
Posted by: zabadak | Aug 17, 2007 2:27:38 PM
Maybe it's because I see him every day at the gym - the gayest gym in all of gayville - but its never appeared to me that he was in the "closet". Yes, it would be cool if he were to apply the same bravery he uses when he is reporting from the edge, to his off camera life but I don't think his silence on that issue makes him "a worthless piece of shite" either. Typical maybe but a bad person - no.
Dude will take the plunge when he is ready (and his contract permits?) and I would imagine there will be no formal announcements or magazine covers but instead he'll probably just casually slip it into a story or an interview or anecdote - at least that is what I would do - the worst thing he could do for his career as a globe trotting journalist is to make a big deal about it and by writing tell alls and not telling all - well that's kind of what he did. I wish him luck though because its obviously a precarious situation in his mind but nothing ventured nothing gained.
Posted by: Giovanni | Aug 17, 2007 2:37:00 PM
Giovanni... Cooper should've just "slipped it in" casually wayback, but now it's festered and he's painted himself into this corner.
i think it all has something to do with his mother.
Posted by: A.J. | Aug 17, 2007 2:44:19 PM
** and what if this Mani-no-cents is infact a 15yr old girl.
Posted by: A.J. | Aug 17, 2007 2:45:20 PM
Funny how as a community we ask the world not to judge us, but feel so entitled to judge others.
None of us have ever been in this man's shoes, none of us KNOWS what goes on inside this man's head. Why do so many of you think it's ok to make speculations, judgments and demands on someone you've never met?
If you're so concerned about gay visibility, go work hard and get yourself a high profile national tv show and tell the world you're inner most thoughts.
I hate to say this, but ya'll should "Starting with the man in the mirror", it would certainly serve the gay cause more than spending your energy and time ranting in the comments section of someone's else blog about someone you don't even know.
Posted by: rich | Aug 17, 2007 2:50:13 PM
It's a crime that queens can't even get it together to correct mistakenly spelling Virginia Woolf's name as "Wolfe." Vita herself pointed it out to you. Please don't let us think you're ignorant.
Posted by: gwyneth cornrow | Aug 17, 2007 3:13:44 PM
Giovanni: I believe the gayest gym in all of gayville would be the 24 Hr Fitness across from the Ramada in WeHo - is that correct?
And I cannot wait for school to start back up so we have fewer whiny brats looking to stir up trouble here. Some of you mean bitches need to grow the fuck up.
Posted by: Anoonymouse | Aug 17, 2007 3:20:35 PM
Anderson's living his life the way he wants to with no explanations. Since he never beards or pretends to love women, I don't see him as closeted. He's just not doing things the way some people THINK he should. If the info about his brother and his family is ALL he wants the public to know, that's his business and his right.
I agree with Manic's sentiment.
Posted by: Ron | Aug 17, 2007 3:37:06 PM
Thank you for saying it, Rich. The hypocrisy of the gay community is startling and, honestly, sad.
Posted by: Derrick | Aug 17, 2007 3:48:21 PM
Most people I know don't have a problem with Anderson in the closet but they do have a problem with Anderson not supporting gay rights or gay groups once he started working for CNN. While he was at ABC, he attended gay events such as NLGJA, GLAAD, and HRC but no longer. FYI, while at ABC, he didn't talk about his personal life too but that didn't stop from attending these events. What happen when he started working at CNN to prevent him from going to gay events to show his support for the gay community.
Why can't he more like David Hyde Pierce? Like Anderson, David won't talk his personal life until recently and I quote "My life is an open book, but don’t expect me to read it to you." This didn't stop him from being a regular supporter of AIDS charities and LGBT causes.
Posted by: Allen | Aug 17, 2007 4:33:05 PM
Quit yer dreamin boys. Anderson is NOT gay. He is my boyfriend.
15 y.o. Girl
Posted by: meowmiz | Aug 17, 2007 5:42:20 PM
Anderson hasn’t aired any big personal information that wasn’t already public knowledge. His father’s and brother’s deaths were in the papers and TV news. His mother had already written about them herself.
Anderson gets the same treatment from the press that other people like him get. That’s classy, likable celebrities who date non-celebrities, have performed work that earns them respect, are considered to maintain some dignity and integrity, and avoid making a public spectacle of themselves. That group includes Jodie Foster but also includes people like George Clooney. Everybody is aware that George goes through women like Kleenex, and it sometime surfaces very generally as marriage questions in the major media similar to how Anderson gets asked the gay question, but you don’t see them painting him as a slutty cad or going after details which would take George’s privacy and probably ruin his career. If every week there was another woman on the cover of Us Weekly with headline allegations that George had used this poor lady and thrown her away his female fan base would probably diminish quickly.
I understand that Anderson’s hosting Elton John’s upcoming AIDs event, which is a positive thing all around. I agree it would be nice if he spent more time at gay events since making it big on CNN. Since the gay press is the only one that makes a big fuss about his sexuality and has done ever since he made it big, I’m not sure who should be considered responsible there – the guy who’s probably become uncomfortable or the people applying the pressure and scrutiny that’s made the situation uncomfortable. How much grief and gay media exposés did DHP attract at those things? Probably not much if any I’d bet.
Posted by: TR | Aug 17, 2007 6:58:18 PM
Ummm....can we leave aside the issue of whether he should burst out of the closet or not, and mention the REAL issue here, as far as I am concerned...the poor thing is just not that good as a reporter OR an anchor, IMHO...he is as wooden as a plank in his delivery of the news, his interview style is plain awful (he always seems to be attempting to challenge Matt Lauer's breezy style, and he falls flat in the attempt...he is just too uptight) and as for his onsite coverage (and this includes the infamous Katrina coverage), meh...not that insightful at all...he really is just eye candy for cable news. I don't get his appeal as a journalist at all.
Posted by: tom | Aug 17, 2007 6:59:10 PM
The reason why Anderson no longer attend gay events because CNN won't let him. It been rumor that part of his contract with CNN, will not allow him to talk about his homosexulity. One great example of this is what happening to Thomas Roberts. He was sacked shortly after he came out.
Posted by: Jack | Aug 17, 2007 7:32:52 PM
You might be correct, Jack. Look at how Anderson Cooper overreact after "we" incident during his interview with Jerry Farwell. He personally reply to a e-mail from Gawker.com, a gossip blog, about the incident saying he didn't said "we" and went as far to send them a video tape.
Posted by: Alex | Aug 17, 2007 7:43:43 PM
jeez, are we now gonna make a minor celebrity out of this idiot by obsessing over every tag he makes? I see it coming. The endless reports of "sightings" and pictures by camera phone. He'll wind up on the today show and Anderson will interview him and then someone will start cutting the tags out of the walls and selling it as "art" for a million dollars! What a load of crap!
Posted by: soulbrotha | Aug 17, 2007 10:03:00 PM
I've heard that rumor about the CNN contract and I don't buy it. I'm sure they don't have anything specifically addressing homosexuality in the contract. They could never enforce such a clause without attracting terrible press and a very strong lawsuit. On the other hand, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they had the same general clause that most companies do today when they hire somebody to represent their image to the world. A clause that gives the company an escape hatch if the hiree changes their own image too drastically in a way that's inconsistent with the company's vision. If the star puts out a scandalous music video, gets charged with the wrong sort of offense, makes the wrong sort of comments and causes a big outrage or whatever Wheaties, Pepsi, CNN, and the rest of them can use the clause to drop the person who is no longer presenting the sort of image they feel reflects their business.
Thomas Roberts was not a fixture at CNN the way Anderson is, so I doubt they even had to use one of those kinds of clauses on him. Depends what sort of contract he had. If it was a relatively short-term one, which it probably was, they could simply wait for it to run out and then fail to renew. That would be a good way to avoid worries about cases for wrongful termination. It could all be handled very nicely, so while he would have suspicions about why it happened there would be no evidence that it was any different than any other minor newscaster not being renewed.
I hope Thomas finds other employment at one of the news outlets. I remember it being said that a few years ago MSNBC lost interest in luring the fresh to news stardom Anderson over when they realized his orientation and his lack of effort in concealing it. I'm not sure if that's true, but Thomas is likely getting some cold responses and he isn't to be spotted anywhere on the tube so far.
Posted by: TR | Aug 17, 2007 10:38:04 PM
Interesting how some people here consider Anderson an "idiot" and a minor celebrity. Anderson's accomplished a lot more of significance in his life than someone like say, David Beckham, who gets a lot of inexplicable attention here. I'd prefer to hear more about Anderson Cooper rather than non-entities like Beckham. And I'd also like to say that Anderson is a very good reporter, his reports from NOLA were some of the best on television and his coverage of the mine collapse last night, where he was on for 4 hours, was thorough, cautious and sensitive. Anderson is certainly no "idiot". He's a lot smarter than he gets credit for. Watch him on 360 during his round table discussions with other CNN correspondents where he always shines. As far as I can tell, Anderson has never denigrated the gay community and is only attempting to live his life the way he sees fit.
Posted by: Ron | Aug 17, 2007 11:12:54 PM
How is it people expect to be taken seriously when they can't even write serviceable English?
To wit, from this comment chain:
"well its just too damned depressing."
No, dear, it's just too damned depressing.
". . . once again, it's nobody's business but himself to choose to come out or not . . ."
I rather think that it's nobody's business but his own.
"And what did Anderson do, nothing."
And what did Anderson do? Nothing.
"Just like celebrities who are cheating on their spouse is nobody's business but it is still reported on in the news media and no one complain. Look at the news of Ryan Phillippe cheated on Reese Witherspoon with Abbie Cornish. Why is still closet celebrities get a free pass and the rest don't?"
OK, I'm just going to assume that this is the work of a non-native speaker of English. The syntax is just too tortured to be explained any other way.
"People judge celebrities on their private life all the time. Look at the Tom Cruise and how he was judge by the public. Should Anderson be treated any different from other celebrities/public figures?"
private liveS, "the" Tom Cruise?, he was judgeD, treated any differentLY.
"Ryan Phillipe has just come out slandering Jake Gyllenhaal with Brokeback jokes."
"Slander" is a specific legal concept which does not likely apply to the circumstances you describe. Making bad jokes about someone hardly constitutes defamation of their character. If anything, it defames the jokester's own character.
"Lets all boycott all his movies."
Yes, by all means, do let's.
". . . but its never appeared to me . . ."
it's
"None of us have ever been in this man's shoes"
None of us has . . .
"Why do so many of you think it's ok"
okay or OK, not ok
". . . national tv show and tell the world you're inner most thoughts . . ."
television or TV not tv; your innermost.
"I hate to say this, but ya'll should 'Starting with the man in the mirror'"
If you must, it's y'all, otherwise the pronoun "you" nicely takes both the singular and the plural with no modification needed. And what should "we all" do starting with the man in the mirror?
"It's a crime that queens can't even get it together to correct mistakenly spelling Virginia Woolf's name as "Wolfe." Vita herself pointed it out to you. Please don't let us think you're ignorant."
Amen to this. But there's a lot more correcting to be done than the botching of Ms. Woolf's surname!
"FYI, while at ABC, he didn't talk about his personal life too"
either? Preceded by a comma? Much better.
"What happen when he started working at CNN to prevent him from going to gay events to show his support for the gay community."
happenED. Also, interrogative statements like this generally end with a question mark, not a period.
"Like Anderson, David won't talk his personal life until recently"
wouldn't talk about.
"The reason why Anderson no longer attend gay events because CNN won't let him."
The reason Anderson no longer attends gay events is because CNN won't let him.
"It been rumor that part of his contract with CNN, will not allow him to talk about his homosexulity."
It's been rumored that, by contract, he cannot speak bout his homosexuality. (IMO, "sexual orientation" would be a better choice, but that's more of a style question than usage.)
"One great example of this is what happening to Thomas Roberts."
One great example (of WHAT?) is what IS happening to Thomas Roberts. or has happened, since the rest of your statement seems to suggest that the Thomas Roberts episode has already taken place.
"Look at how Anderson Cooper overreact after 'we' incident during his interview with Jerry Farwell."
overreactED, after THE "we" incident, Falwell.
"He personally reply to a e-mail from Gawker.com, a gossip blog, about the incident saying he didn't said 'we'"
He personally replIED to AN e-mail, he didn't SAY "we".
If you're going to take on the burden of trying to represent the gay community in your arguments, ladies and gentlemen, at least represent us in a literate and erudite fashion. Keep in mind the old adage, "it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth (or take to your keyboard) and remove all doubt."
Posted by: Defender of the English Language | Aug 17, 2007 11:48:48 PM
Ron,
as far as I can tell, I am the only person who used the word "idiot". So if you are referring to my comment, I suggest that you read it again carefully. I was not referring to Anderson, I was referring to "mania¢".
Posted by: soulbrotha | Aug 18, 2007 11:47:50 AM
i fucking love it.
Posted by: simonpieman | Aug 18, 2007 12:17:38 PM
and if someone sees some of it to send me to australia, please get in touch. i suck.
Posted by: simonpieman | Aug 18, 2007 12:21:14 PM
i want to say that the verification procedure to leave comments here is too tedious.
Posted by: simonpieman | Aug 18, 2007 12:22:36 PM
Posted by: Joe | Aug 18, 2007 4:51:10 PM
Needs to get in line
Posted by: Ian | Aug 18, 2007 7:03:48 PM
Right on, SoulBrotha, my mistake.
Posted by: Ron | Aug 18, 2007 7:35:31 PM
I don't care if Anderson is gay, bi, straight, or asexual. He's good, he's cute and his on air presence is always fun. Just recently he suggested to his femalw 'co-anchor', 'top of the hour news lady' that even if he teased or flirted with her on air, her husband has NOTHING to worry about. It looks to me that he drops hints right and left, but just isn't ready to open the door completely. My wife and I just spent the weekend with friends, a gay couple. They are some of the most amazing friends and talented men we know. But even in their ordinary (non-CNN anchor) lives, they've lost friends, but even worse, their parents have disowned them. (How a parent could do that, I have no idea. I don't know of anything my daughter could do that would cause me to not love her, disappointment, yes, but never stop loving her.) These friends don't have to major network jobs to be worried about losing. Yes, I wish Anderson would come out. I think it would be good for everyone to know and realize that he's no different after his 'outing' than before. But I respect his decision to progress on his own timeline. We don't know what he stands to lose. As someone else said, we aren't walking in his shoes.
The world is changing. It's not changing fast enough to suit me, but it is happening. I see a day Or as Martin Luther King would have said: "I have a dream", and I know it's going to happen.
Until it happens I have to respect people's decisions.
Prayers and peace:
evan
Posted by: evan | Aug 18, 2007 9:15:20 PM
Evan, very touching! You speak volumes!
Posted by: Benjamin | Aug 19, 2007 1:30:04 AM
What about the Supreme Court reporter for NBC? He is out and no one has made a big deal about him.
Posted by: Raymond | Aug 19, 2007 7:29:40 AM
Here are statements of support for gay employees from the major news network. Notice the lack of response from CNN.
"When NBC's Wallace was asked if NBC would stand behind an on-camera news anchor or host who chose to be honest with outside press about sexual orientation, she responded: "100 percent. I am telling you. That is not the company answer. That is my answer. … This is a very, very supportive organization." Even if it got rocky? "Yes. Even if it got rocky."
In a follow-up email, ABC's Schneider said "of course" ABC would support any on-camera talent who chose to acknowledge their sexual orientation in press interviews, whatever the public reaction might be.
AfterElton.com invited CBS, Fox News, and CNN to provide via email similar statements of support for on-air talent who chose to be frank in outside press about being gay – support that would remain regardless of public response. Fox News' Executive Vice President John Moody came back with something less strong then Wallace or Schneider, expressing support for the “right to privacy of all our journalists,” and saying if gay employees “choose to disclose their sexual orientation, they can expect to be supported and treated the same as if they had not. That's the definition of a personal life.”
CBS' Mason responded with a statement that missed the point, and was far more watered down then the interesting interview she had given; merely expressing that CBS supported all their journalists “regardless of sexual orientation …”
CNN did not respond to this request. And while CNN was given weeks of extra time to work out an executive interview – they did not come through with one until after press time. They did offer a statement early in the process from Jim Walton, president of CNN Worldwide which supported both the value of a “diverse workforce” and CNN journalists “ in whatever decisions they make about sharing aspects of their personal lives.”"
http://www.afterelton.com/TV/2007/5/gaynewsmen2?page=0%2C4
Posted by: Ben | Aug 19, 2007 4:04:26 PM
so someone likes Anderson Cooper !!!
Posted by: Frank | Aug 20, 2007 6:26:30 AM