August 16, 2004

Big media uptake

Posted by Chris

Nick Cohen, writing in the New Statesman cites my post on John Laughland and his views from the other week. (Thanks to Chris Brooke for letting me know.)

Posted on August 16, 2004 12:02 PM UTC
Comments

You might be interested in the comments on Mick Hartley’s blog.

Posted by Backword Dave · August 16, 2004 01:14 PM

Thanks Dave. I’m afraid that MH’s is one of those sites where anyone who doesn’t sign up for the whole swivel-eyed MelanieP/Instapundit programme is an “enemy of freedom” and consigned to the Counterpunch/Chomsky camp. We’re a bit more selective and nuanced with our likes and dislikes over here!

Posted by Chris Bertram · August 16, 2004 02:05 PM

Ah, Chris, that’s not true. Both James Hamilton and Mick have been good enough to link to me, and I’m a long way from the MelanieP/Instapundit camp. Mick also has some very good stuff on Sudan and the situation in Iraq. I often disagree with him, but he’s not barking.

I found the comments amusing. I’d have stuck up for you if I could have thought of something pithy to say.

I think that James’s point was that Nick Cohen was pro-invasion and CT was largely against. When he singled you out, he seems not to have been aware of that, given that he’s spent quite a lot of bile on what Harry calls ‘Stoppers’ himself.

Posted by Backword Dave · August 16, 2004 02:26 PM

Yeah I saw that big media uptake when I linked to the NS article Saturday via Normblog - and I was way impressed. Especially since Cohen cited it as useful original research. I simply assumed you knew about it or I would have let you know (and thus that would be my name in the parenthesis and you would have known about it two days ago). Anyway, hurrah!

Posted by Ophelia Benson · August 16, 2004 04:11 PM

“big” media? Doesn’t CT have more readers than the Staggers (seriously)?

Good to see Nick Cohen still trudging along in Paul Johnson’s footsteps.

Posted by John Kozak · August 16, 2004 10:05 PM

I must say that the ignoble thought did occur in my mind that it was a bit rich for someone to write in the NS about how anything else was on its last legs and had no real point to it any more.

Posted by dsquared · August 16, 2004 11:39 PM

This piece was reprinted in today’s Melbourne Age, but abridged, and without mention of Chris’ post.

Posted by John Quiggin · August 17, 2004 01:02 PM

Since john kozak mentions the great man, does anyone remember the wonderful piece Hitchens once wrote about Paul Johnson? Its in one of his Verso collections, and he’s never written a wittier, more brutal character assassination (and that’s saying soemthing). Are these anti-anti-war leftists also ditching other left-wing commitments? It looks like it from Cohen, but I’ve not followed Hitchens well enough to tell.

Posted by harry · August 17, 2004 04:53 PM

I think so, vaguely. I’ll have to find it. I have his collections. Hitchens certainly hasn’t given up his commitment to, er, disadmiring Kissinger, at any rate.

Posted by Ophelia Benson · August 17, 2004 05:34 PM
Followups

This discussion has been closed. Thanks to everyone who contributed.