I just saw a piece on CNN (see Carol Costello’s blog) about some agitation for fairness in talk radio. The conservative right has had a strong foothold in this arena for at least a couple of decades. I used to listen to AM radio a lot as my jobs at the time involved a lot of driving. And my attitudes and politics were certainly influenced by these seemingly knowledgable commentators — who obviously had more time to do research on the issues than I did.
My politics and religious views have changed considerably from those times. Part of the reason is the realization that these people are not really doing this to inform people or, perhaps, even to persuade them. It is theater. People respond to the dramatic, theatrical and often hysterical claims made by these entertainers. Rush Limbaugh made no secret of considering himself an entertainer early in his career. Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, and Sean Hannity are all entertainers playing to the crowd. (So are Rachel Maddow and Keith Olberman on the left, even if they do seem somehow a bit more earnest at times.)
So, should the rules be changed because right wing talk shows have been so popular? Of course not! Why would anybody think it is OK to dictate the tastes of radio listeners (or, by extension, TV viewers). The Fairness Doctrine was repealed for many reasons. Even on the face of it, you can see the potential for all kinds of conflicts. What, for example, exactly defines an opposing point of view? Who is going to listen to every show broadcast and measure the number of minutes devoted to one point of view or another? There are not just two points of view. What about the full range of views in between right and left? What constitutes balance if you happen to have various shades of moderate expression?
The market has spoken. The left tried Air America with name brand talent. It failed. Progressives (yes, liberals) have a lot to contribute. But much of the message has the appeal of “eat your brussell sprouts”. The fundamental tenet of liberalism is that the privileged are obligated to give up some of their excess to take care of the less fortunate. Conservatives value rugged independence and individual achievement. The vast majority of Americans identify much more with the message of protecting individual resources and freedoms than they do with sacrificing for the greater good. So it is not surprising that people would rather not spend their day listening to somebody tell them how good they have it and how selfish they are if they are not willing to pay higher taxes for more government programs. The spectre of government waste and the discomfort with our reduced retirement nest eggs cuts across the political spectrum as evidenced by the “blue-dog” Democrats.
Progressives are not without a platform for sermonizing. MSNBC and CNN have deliberately created platforms to counter the Fox effect. NPR generally has a liberal shading to its programming and choice of talent and is arguably one of the most effective outlets due to its intellectual appeal. Unlike the “entertainer” shows from both right and left camps, NPR takes a no-nonsense, rational, somewhat subdued (some might say “dry”) approach which substantially elevates its credibility.
Not long ago, there were complaints (somewhat justified) of a clear liberal bias in the media, especially print and television. Now that some liberals are complaining about talk radio, I think it is pretty clear that the ideal of American freedom of speech is working as it should. Let’s not tinker with it!
