In what he must surely view as a touch of delicious irony, author Robert Hoffman is publicly gloating in the wake of Kate Gosselin's embarrassing firing as a blogging expert on money-saving grocery coupons.
In an interview with Radar, the author of "Kate Gosselin: How She Fooled the World," beams:
"Although I won't celebrate Kate's most recent loss of employment from her couponing blog, I am encouraged that more and more people are seeing through her facade and realizing that Kate Gosselin isn't who she claims to be, and I'm hoping that more people will come forward to speak out about what they know to be the truth about Kate Gosselin's eight-year web of lies, abuse, greed and manipulation – for the sake of the Gosselin children."
(Hoffman may not be celebrating, but the Radar headline uses the word "applauds" in its lead and headline.)
Irony, or maybe sweet revenge, rears its ugly head because in his book, Hoffman notes that Kate was instrumental in having the newspaper blog of his wife, Dana, shut down. Hoffman writes in his book:
Coincidentally, my wife Dana was the first person to publicly speak out about Kate and all of her real or perceived shortcomings as a mother, as far back as when the sextuplets were just babies. Dana wrote a blog for the Reading Eagle, Kate's local newspaper of record. It wasn't even a little bit flattering to Kate and Kate and Discovery had the blog shut down. I also worked at the Reading Eagle at that time, and was in the office when the call came in. Kate and company made one phone call and had the world's oldest family-owned newspaper cowering in the corner like – a scared child. Dana's blog was shut down within the hour because the newspaper's management team were spineless cowards.
Great anecdote...except it's not entirely true.
Dana's vintage blog posts on Kate and the 'tups are still accessible to this day. You can read some classic entries here:
I don't even know where to begin about the Gosselin family.
I've frankly had enough. In the front-page story in today's Reading Eagle, the mother Kate used, to quote the story, "a flurry of adjectives to describe the past year -- exhausting, strange, surreal, challenging and scary."
Not one of those words even comes close to being positive. Then, almost as if she realized that just a second too late, she added, "Did I say exciting?"
Later on, she does say, "Look at those beautiful faces, how can't you keep going? They're awesome."
So I guess it isn't all torture.
This family has had an endless outpouring of volunteer hours, money and donations both monetary and of necessary items. But still they ask for more.
Training additional volunteers to help is apparently too much work so they are looking for a $25,000 donation to extend the use of a part-time nurse.
And by saying you are "praying" for something doesn't make it any more holy than it is ... looking for free handouts to be able to manage a life that YOU created. And for that matter, don't seem to be too happy about.
The babies eat donated food and sleep in donated cribs. They stay dry in donated diapers.
The Gosselins seem content to allow everyone else, and even have come to expect everyone else, to pick up the tab for what they knew would be a very high-cost lifestyle choice. The father, Jonathan, didn't even have a job for much of the past year.
The Gosselins used fertility drugs to have their twin daughters, now 4. They again used the drugs to conceive the sextuplets. They had a choice. This wasn’t a natural act, something they could not have controlled.
By saying they didn’t want to reduce the number of children, saying it goes against their beliefs, how do they justify using fertility drugs to achieve such a number in the first place? How is using fertility drugs considered God's will?
And yet the donations kept pouring in. They received a mind-numbing amount of support yet she says she is "praying for just one more year" of help.
I have three children, by choice. To support those three children and have a lifestyle we can be happy about, my husband and I work full-time and he has freelancing on the side which equates to more than a part-time job.
The Gosselins are planning to move to Harrisburg to be closer to Jonathan's job. What about the house they are now in? The one that was renovated by volunteers, using donated money, that made their house liveable for 10 people?
Maybe they should stop worrying so much about where the next handout is coming from, and instead concentrate on their healthy, hopefully happy, children, and be tremendously thankful for what they have received and continue to receive.As I describe, accurately, in my own book, "The Secret World of Jon and Kate: The Stupidest Story in the History of the Universe and the People Who Covered It," the newspaper's management never caved nor ordered Dana's blog scrubbed, although control-freak Kate did indeed scream and holler:
Kate had read enough. She telephoned William Flippin, the publisher of the newspaper, and essentially said that Dana Hoffman was taking food out of the mouths of her babies. Instead of telling Kate to buzz off, Flippin ordered the bloggers — every one in the paper’s stable — to lay off Berks County’s new first family.
Thus, an embargo went into effect. No more blogging about what cheesy bunco artists these Gosselins were.
But the entries already posted did not come down. Nor the comments. Hundreds of them, linked from various anti-Gosselin sites that made Dana’s blog entries among the best-read stories at the Reading Eagle website for years to come.
Credibility check: I also worked at the Reading Eagle at the time...AND...I was in charge of the blogging network there.
Disclosure: Robert Hoffman was an early collaborator on my book, and he did provide some valuable behind-the-scenes scoops.
This example does make the reader wonder: if Hoffman fractured the facts on matters involving his own wife, or if he chose to embellish this incident to paint Kate as an even more hideous ogre, or stick it to those pricks at the paper, are there other credibility issues in his book?
As for Hoffman's tattle tome, unceremoniously yanked from Amazon over legal issues, the author tells Radar he is editing it– not re-editing it, since the cover itself says the first edition is unedited – perhaps to bring it in compliance with the demands of the legal teams of Kate and Discovery, who say it relies heavily on confidential documents. If so, once the privileged portions are purged, the prose may shrink from over 300,000 words to maybe 750.