When I login at home, I use the equvialent of the old wooden, crank-up party line—my dial-up America Online account. I have to admit that I always wait enthusiastically for the slow emergence of today’s headlines, like tea leaves swirling in the digital kettle. There are usually three main “news” headlines that rotate in a rudimentary server push on AOL’s homepage. These are the most distilled, highest-proof example you’ll ever find of Time-Warner’s idea of what captures the most eyeballs in the least amount of time. (Technically speaking, they are normally breathtaking in their brevity. I doubt whether AOL editors ever waste more than twenty-five characters on a story head; anyone who has ever tried to fit headlines to space knows what a special talent this requires.)
The breakdown of the rotation goes something like this: First, the hard news story, preferably with heavy overtones of partisan positioning. (That way, you can salt in two or three reader surveys as an additional enticement.) Second, there is usually a celebrity story of one kind or another, most often having to do with a current scandal or A&E release. Third comes the highly solicitious reader service—Are you too fat? Having enough sex? Working too hard? Is your spouse having an affair? How much would you spend to save your dog’s life? Where will you vacation this summer? Is there a cocktail in your near future? (AOL’s homepage on the web expands this formula to five items—two celebrity bits and two service bits.)
Anyway, this morning’s hard news bit was this: “Should Women Serve?” (Paired with a photo of a female GI in fatigues with an M-16, it did not function quite like the double or triple entendre it does here.) This struck me as provocative, although I resisted the urge to click through to the story. Clicking through is usually a disappointment—AOL’s news stories are almost always stripped down wire items with no teeth or boots. The brevity and concision of that smart headline is most often linked to a story that would barely pass muster in almost any high-school newspaper in the land.
But it did get me thinking. I’ve been saying for months that Democrats would be insane to propose Hillary Clinton for prez in 2008—largely because of entrenched, genteel misogyny. You think Americans are uncomfortable with the idea of gay marriage? Wait until you start push-polling them on whether the US can withstand a woman as commander in chief. That’s why we say only under ONE condition should the Dems put Billary on the ticket: They must also get a referendum on as many ballots as possible to eliminate the vote for women. It would totally work.
Leave a Reply