Tuesday, January 25, 2011
This whole "moratorium" concept came to mind this weekend when I read an opinion piece in The Washington Post in which columnist Dana Milbank promised a "Palin-Free February" during which he'd completely refrain from covering her. The reasons were many, and the story itself is a pretty fascinating read. It also made me think about my own tendency to overblog about Palin, and whether or not it's such a good idea anymore.
Let's face it, Palin is an interesting person, mainly by virtue of being so polarizing. She says dumb sh*t. She's annoying as the pack of gnats circling around that big piece of watermelon at your family reunion. She spouts deliberate untruths (Death Panels!) that overshadow legitimate political debates. She's a big ball of deception, bad hair, and lies. And she's unavoidable if you're a blogger, for all of the reasons I just listed. In short, she's great fodder because she's such an un-great person. Since 2008, she's been the gift that keeps on giving to this blog, but sadly this must come to an end.
As Milbank posits, the fact that Palin is so frequently covered is what makes her relevant, not her (laughable) political acumen, or even her (equally laughable) presidential chances. We pick fun at her, she plays the victim role, and everyone gets paid in the end, whether in the form of web clicks, or in her case, book sales. It's a symbiotic relationship, but it's not one that's particularly good for political discourse, and it definitely isn't good for our country.
So, as simple as that, I'm going to follow Dana Milbank's lead and indefinitely declare AB.com a Palin-Free Zone™. If you need your fix of craziness, just consult The Google News, and I'm sure you'll find plenty. Just don't expect anything more here.
Happy Trails, Miss Sarah. It's been unReal.
Question: How long will AB's Palin-ban last? Would she actually go away if the media as a whole quit covering her?
 Unless, of course, she officially declares she's running for President. That's actually blogworthy.