So, we got a zillion suggestions for NRO slogans (to see the list of the first hundred or so, click here). Itโs clear from many of the entries that we have some very loyal readers โ โNRO: So Shines The Light of Reason in the Darkness of a Troubled Web,โ or, โNRO: When Youโre Serious About Freedom.โ Itโs also clear we have some very wise-ass readers: โWeโre Not Bed-Wetting Liberals Like They Have Over at New Republic,โ or โYeah, We Hate Hillary Too.โ Currently, my favorite is: โNRO: Official Sponsor of the Harrison Junior High Mathletes.โ Though the simple and elegant, โRamesh! Ramesh! Ramesh!โ does have some appeal.
I almost got misty reading all of the mottoes sent in, seriously. It was a fascinating glimpse into what many of you guys think weโre doing. Because thatโs what mottoes do: They sum up the essence of an enterpriseโs aspirations, like โSemper Fi!โ for the Marines, or โYou Deserve A Break Todayโ for McDonalds, or โCan I get fries with that?โ for Bill Clinton.
But for us, a motto is quite a challenge because, well, Iโm not sure what it is โ precisely โ weโre doing. Sometimes Iโm very surprised Bill Buckley hasnโt logged onto NRO, looked around, sprayed his morning coffee all over the screen, and mailed me a dead fish with a severance check attached. We are not exactly a normal operation and I am, frankly, sometimes baffled that things are going so well.
Case in point: As I mentioned in my much-derided and long-winded Wednesday column, recently I was giving a speech, and several college kids wanted to know about my couch. Now, I know that when big-league pundits โ like George Will or James Carville โ speak to college audiences, itโs common for them to get questions about other Washington figures: โWhatโs Cokie really like?โ or โMr. Carville, is Mephistopheles really as bad-tempered as people say?โ But me, I get questions like, โWill your couch write another column?โ, โIs he your ghost writer?โ, โWhat did he think about the X-Men movie?โ, or โSir, do you mind? I wasnโt finished eating that.โ
OK, forget the last one, but my couch! For newer readers, you might not remember my couch. Back in the early days of this column, when my only readers were people who were really, really, really angry about impeachment, I wrote a lot of strange things. This was mostly due to the fact that I was steadily losing my mind working out of the house all day (though I must say the shameless concatenation of lies, abuses, and slanders coming out of the White House and its defenders didnโt help my stability too much either). So, I started referring to various members of my โstaff,โ including my โDirector of Research,โ the Couch. This made sense at the time because: 1) heโs one of my closest friends; 2) I had already made my relationship with the Couch fairly central to my whole existence. It started with simple jokes about how much time I spent watching TV on the, well, you-know-who/what. Then, it became a way to gripe about my life, as when I wrote in December of 1999:
All Iโve got by way of a staff is a Couch with an ever-expanding crater in the middle where my ever-expanding Dershowitz, oops, I mean ass, goes. Even when my Couch is working heโs more surly than a Teamster with a workmenโs comp claim pending.
But hereโs a secret about writing this column: I never actually imagine anybody reading it. In fact, Iโm often very embarrassed when I bump into people who quote it back to me. Itโs very flattering, sure, but if I thought about the fact that thousands of serious people read this thing every day Iโd never be able to write it.
Which gets me back to NRO. This whole thing started as a lark, at least for me. Rich Lowry โ who I would gladly take a bullet for, or at least a whack from a very splintery board โ asked me to write an โImpeachment Diaryโ for a web page that looked so bad it would have come in a very distant second to the Harrison Junior High Matheles homepage. He said, โI guess we can call it the โGoldberg Fileโ until we come up with something good.โ I was an angry young man with nothing to lose and even less to do, who had turned his back โ thank God โ on a promising career as an earnest public-television producer and freelance writer.
Things changed. First of all, many of you bizarre, hyper-intelligent, time-wasting, overly-ironicized freaks decided to keep reading this column even after the president put his pants back on and โgot back to the work of the American people.โ It appears that many people want to read about Oakeshott and St. Augustine and hear about why the holo-deck is the worst plot device in the history of Star Trek. In fact they often want to hear about both things in the same column โ if not the same sentence. Whoโd a thunk it?
About six months after I started writing the then-daily G-File, Rich asked if I wanted a part-time job as the โEditorโ of National Review Online โ which at the time was like asking if I wanted to edit the Collected Wisdom of Alec Baldwin; how much time could that take? Well, now this is a pretty serious enterprise. Weโve got serious people working very hard on and writing for this thing. I mean, have you ever met Chris McEvoy (the Managing Editor of NRO and the Production Editor of NR and the de facto Editor of NRO Weekend)? This is a serious guy. I used to make fun of the old glue-sniffing webmaster, Russ Jenkins โ a great guy in every way โ because, well, I could get away with it. And besides, whoโd notice? But these days, if I said Chris spent the weekend doing lines of toner cartridge ink and thatโs why heโs crumpled in the corner brushing away invisible spiders, heโd kick my ass or, worse, he might quit.
Thatโs the essence of the dilemma and the triumph of National Review Online these days: Weโre a serious operation. We have over 300,000 unique visitors every month โ and growing every day. The elite press is saying nice things about us. We often get mentioned alongside some media giants as if we belong there, and I guess we do, at least sometimes. Our competitors used to be the web pages of other magazines, like the Weekly Standard (tee hee). Now, itโs Slate and Salon and WashingtonPost.com and MSNBC.com and a thousand other creatures big and small. But none of those guys is like us, weโre a hybrid. Weโre not just the National Reviewโs website, but weโre not a โpure playโ online magazine either.
In short, there are no rules for NRO because nobody has ever done what weโre doing. I think the suits might be miffed at me for saying we donโt know what weโre doing, but I think thatโs whatโs best about NRO, except for the freaks who read it.






Comments