Media Musings: Martha has been an easy target
It appears after years of watching Martha Stewart she finally reached the point in her extraordinary life that she became imperial. And her arrival at that point in her career has proven to be very, very expensive.
The modern court of public opinion has battered her ruthlessly and relentlessly and one New York tabloid ran a front page Martha Meter indicating how she was doing – bad day, good day, neutral day with a pointer quickly informing the reader the current condition of the maven of gardens, food and crafts.
You know the story, of course, of her suspicious, timely sale of ImClone stock before it collapsed into worthlessness and the Justice Department now has been asked by a Congressional committee to determine if she lied to them and government agents about personal insider trading. If she did, and it is proven, she will have committed a felony and street talk is she’ll pay a huge fine rather than teach decorating in a federal prison, all for a lousy $240,000.
Yet, there seems to a very interesting story here that must rest inside the world of opinion, both informed and raw, about why this woman became someone the major media joyously hammered.
At first, there seems nothing to cause such a flurry of jokes and barbs (thank you Jay Leno). Think of her career: self-made entrepreneurial legend who went from a tiny catering company to a billion dollar empire with a hugely successful magazine, television show, and weak Internet site, all built around her name, her image, her brilliant self-marketing. At one point within the last year, she was touted as the savior of Kmart, which is losing so much money now only a miracle can stop the bleeding.
She’s not the first brilliant entrepreneur to build a company around her name and likeness. The only people in this country who cannot finish this name – Oprah – live in the deserts of the West. Oprah’s face is on every edition of her magazine and she is trying to lift the Oxygen cable network’s ratings (of which she is part owner) by launching another show. She is considered the first black woman billionaire in our history and it is a great story.
Back to the question: Why cheer as Martha loses half of her net worth? It is because she is both arrogant and ruthless.
Her shows – and, yes, I am a faithful weekend watcher – are often highly informative and show great ideas. But I don’t have five gardeners, a staff of 60 to help us plan quick meals, and five mansions including the old Edsel Ford estate in Maine which she got for a song: $4 plus million.
In sum, her marvelous show is a fantasy to me and millions of others. And her gifts of language, while very impressive (I never did pronounce French well), can be almost haughty.
Her deal with Kmart literally gave away the store and financial news services reported no other major retailer would have agreed to what she demanded.
Whether it’s her lust for power, correctness, perfection or money, or simply that she’s set unrealistic standards, it’s enough to circle the hounds from hell. Hating Martha is now fashionable, but I find no comfort there.
(Ed Kimbrell is a professor in MTSU’s School of Journalism.)