|
"Media wars" is on! The Left is squaring off against the Right and both sides bring a righteous indignation and silliness to the fray that only showcases their blind partisanship and single minded agenda. Political talk radio and television “news” programs are involved in accusations and name calling that is worthy of a bunch of preschoolers fighting over territory in the sand box. Who speaks for the masses? Who speaks for the Party? Who has the biggest ratings? Who cares?
Being a student of politics, I listen to or watch all of them from time to time. I don’t care so much about their Left/Right leanings as how interesting, compelling and informative their arguments are. Listening to the other side sometimes raises new points for careful consideration, or often reveals the flaws in a particular opinion or thought. When I listen to these people though, there is one thing I never forget. Regardless of how passionate and informed their arguments are, they are after all entertainers. Their programs continue to be on the air only as long as they generate ratings, and they do so only by entertaining their audience. Now I know that Michael Steele the new chairman of the Republican National Committee called Rush Limbaugh “an entertainer” and then inexplicably rescinded the comment. In doing so, he left himself wide open to assertions from the Left that Rush was in charge of the party instead of him. I don’t have a clue why Steele would do such a thing, but Rush is no more in charge of the Republicans than Keith Olbermann is in charge of the Democrats. I believe that Rush Limbaugh speaks for himself, covers conservative talking points, and stays provocative enough to keep millions of listeners tuning in each day. Nobody gets close to his ratings, and I think that is driving a lot of competing political personalities crazy.
On the Left, Ed Schultz does much the same thing, bringing an Uber Liberal viewpoint to the debate. He does seem to have a particular dislike of Limbaugh calling him “the drugster,” and often uses the word “idiot” when describing anyone who disagrees with him. Again, he is an entertainer with an opinion, nothing more, nothing less. As I said, when I listen to opposing viewpoints, I am searching for information on a topic, so I have a tough time sticking with hosts who resort to personal attacks rather than thoughtful debate of issues. Interestingly, the left in general has really stepped up the attack on Limbaugh, ironically proving that they think he is more powerful than they really want to admit. The truth is: None of these people have any real political clout since they are not elected officials, and they may bring contentious issues to the public’s attention, but their influence can be quickly negated by a change of the channel.
A more serious Constitutional issue is the recent call for a reinstatement of the “Fairness Doctrine.” Democrats claim it is only to assure diversity of media ownership, so that more Liberal programs would be aired in all markets. Conservatives on the other hand, see it as a direct attack on free speech, and artificial coercion of the free market. Either way, I believe it is a slippery slope to allow Government control of media content because “fairness” is a highly subjective term dependent upon who is in charge. I don’t hear anyone saying that Schultz, Olbermann or any other Liberal host should be shut down, yet many on the left seem perfectly comfortable with suspension of the Constitution in order to silence Conservative voices on the airwaves. Hopefully Senate amendment 573 to the DC House Voting Rights Act, will drive a stake through the heart of the Fairness Doctrine once and for all, and Americans will be free to listen to what they want to hear, not what the Government decides is “fair.”
|
