Slate's Bizbox
the breakfast table: An e-mail conversation about the news of the day.

Walter Shapiro and Jodi Kantor

the breakfast table
entries
12345678910111213141516171819
from: Walter Shapiro

News We Disapprove Of

Posted Wednesday, Aug. 4, 1999, at 11:14 AM ET

Good morning Jodi,

I love evergreen headlines, those perpetually blooming stories that could run in any newspaper, any year (an example: "New Jersey Official Indicted, Mob Ties Alleged"). Well, the front page of today's New York Times provides an all-time classic of the genre: "Pediatricians Urge Limiting TV Watching." Stop the presses! No, on second thought, didn't I read that same story in the Times in 1979? Or was it 1959?

Back in the old days, like 1979 or 1959, the Times editorial page was the repository of the conventional wisdom written in a uniquely ponderous style that combined voice-of-God self-confidence and the bromides of a foundation-backed task-force report. All that has mercifully changed as the edit page has been transformed under the editorship of Howell Raines. But every so often, the Times goes completely retro with a return to yes-but-on-the-other-hand prose. Today, the edit page finally weighed in on Hillary's Talk interview, devoting infinitely more space to the "Intimate Hillary" than was deemed appropriate by the news section. (I have long thought that the Times should handle hot-potato stories like this with a special daily page called: "News We Disapprove Of.") But the Times editorial concluded with a sentence so pompous and so non-committal that it should be immediately be added to the syllabus in journalism schools.

Jodi, parse this one if you dare: "In a contest involving two personalities as distinctive as Mrs. Clinton and Mayor Rudolph Guiliani, the potential Republican nominee, every citizen will have to reach a decision that balances all aspects of a candidate's abilities, issue positions and personal qualities."

This morning I was overjoyed to snag the last copy of the New York Post at my little Washington newsstand. That's where I learned of the latest circulation-boosting gambit by Modern Maturity, that up-with-aging monthly published by the AARP. The big story this month on the senior circuit is an exclusive listing of the 50 "sexiest" celebrities who are over 50 years old. The winners include Richard Gere and Susan Sarandon ("steam heat"), Julie Christie and Tom Selleck ("anytime sexy"), Donna Karan and Louis Rukeyser ("sexy in suits") and Lauren Bacall and Paul Newman ("vintage sexy").

I'm 52 years old, balding, well-rounded, and doomed to always misplace my reading glasses. But I'm also old enough to know that sexual allure does not necessarily dim with age. (At last year's Time magazine anniversary gala, I found myself positively tongue-tied, embarrassingly adolescent in my awkwardness, on being introduced to Lauren Bacall.) So why does the "Modern Maturity" spread leave me so uncomfortable? Would I feel different if this sexy plus-50 cavalcade appeared in People magazine?

My guess--and let's not delve too deeply into my psyche--is that I'm offended by the AARP's role in sponsoring this silliness. There's something about this middle-aged spread (the magazine's, not mine) that suggests a desperate need to join the self-esteem movement. It all seems, well, Viagra-esque.

Jodi, any reaction from a younger and fitter generation?

the breakfast table
entries
12345678910111213141516171819
from: Walter Shapiro

News We Disapprove Of

Posted Wednesday, Aug. 4, 1999, at 11:14 AM ET
Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
Walter Shapiro is the political columnist for USA Today. Jodi Kantor is an associate editor at Slate.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES
Washington Post
The Washington Post
OPINIONS
Imagine if...
Hiatt | What if McCain had waged his campaign based on respect?
Editorial: Meddlesome PalinKing: The Danger of Palin Power