more on unseemly treasure hunting

Jonathan Tobin doesn’t think much of the The Sarah Palin E-Mail Treasure Hunt.

Almost three years later, it’s not clear what the point of the e-mail dump is today. But that has not stopped the media from rushing to the Palin e-mails as if it were another gold rush in the Klondike. … What motivates these publications and their civilian volunteers to spend so much time going through every Palin communication? The answer is obvious. Leftists who hate Palin will spend days, if not weeks, sifting through boring routine communications as if they were panning for gold in order to find something embarrassing or silly that can then be published in order to humiliate her.

But there is something unseemly if not indecent about the way publications like the Times and the Post have embraced this project and sought to involve readers

Tobin also illustrates another interesting Palin phenomena that shows up in certain circles.

I have no brief for Palin. She is a flawed public figure whom I have criticized sharply.

What does this have to do with the unseemly treasure hunt? This judgment about Palin being “flawed” or some such seems to be a very common disclaimer in a lot of posts about the Palin obsession. It is a phenomena that needs to be observed, noted, and discussed in its own right.

Meanwhile, Ann Coulter was stimulated to do a bit of research about mobs after her experiences on the speaking circuit. (AmazonCoulter home page) It seems what she is describing applies both to the treasure hunt and to Tobin’s disclaimer theme.

Comments are closed.