Violent Rhetoric, Violent Viewers
In an alarming trend that has received scant notice from journalists, more and more consumers of right-wing media have started using violent threats to respond to political opinions that differ from their own. Once a rarity in American political discourse, it has now become commonplace for people who appear on right-wing media to offer dissenting opinions to subsequently receive emails filled with death threats, promises of physical and sexual abuse.
While it is difficult to pinpoint one cause for this trend, those on the receiving end of these violent threats have commented that the catalyst appears to be the right-wing shows themselves, both on television and radio.
Commenting during a recent appearance on Real Time With Bill Maher, African-American pundit and TV regular Michael Eric Dyson observed:
We see [broadcasters talking] on FOX about 'fair and balanced'--when I go on Bill O'Reilly's show--and I tell him this after the show--I get the worst hate mail ever. I get the 'n-word' thrown at me, I get email. And I want Bill O'Reilly to challenge that in public.
(Real Time With Bill Maher, Episode 110, September 30, 2007)
More recently, Brandon Friedman of VoteVets.org, appeared on Countdown with Keith Olbermann to discuss the violent threats he had received from Rush Limbaugh listeners. One email threat sent to Friedman stuck out for the specificity of the violent promise it offered:
It never matters to you Left wing liberal bastards about the truth, but it appears that the control of the future of this country is at stake and like it or not, we may have to resort to the same tactics as used back in 1860 when this country went to war with itself, North vs South, only this time it's Conservative vs Liberal and I'm ready to join in as soon as the fireworks start.
Just keep up the constant lying and sooner or later it will catch up with you and all those in Move On.org and Media Matters will get what you so richly deserve.
Make no mistake: that is a death threat. Once upon a time, death threats were spelled out in letters cut from magazine pages. Now they are typed out on temporary email accounts. But they are death threats, just the same.
What set this in motion? Friedman's organization made several advertisements, in response to which Limbaugh accused them of hating America. The violent threats from Limbaugh's listeners, however, seemed less in response to the subject of the Iraq war than to the criticism of Limbaugh himself. Indeed, a closer look at the transcript shows how Limbaugh reframed Friedman's criticism into violent rhetoric--recasting what should have remained an argument about politics into a media confrontation set in the language of physical assault and war.
Reading these threats, however, I am always struck by a recurrence of accusations that seem too consistent to be accidental. Listeners moved to send violent threats invariably accuse the recipient of being 'communist' or 'socialist,' of 'wanting' Islamic terrorists 'to win,' and of being on the opposite side of an impending civil war at home--another 1860.
What is most alarming about these two accusations showing up over and over again in email death threats--communism, collusion with terrorists, and civil war--is how often these two ideas also show up in books written by right wing pundits.
Most Americans are familiar with Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly, whose books Treason and Culture Warrior argue that American liberals are engaged in an ongoing communist conspiracy and hoping for the destruction of America by terrorists, albeit to advance a 'Secular-Progressive' agenda (O'Reilly's phrase) instead of an Islamic one.
Few Americans realize, however, that there is an entire generation of right-wing pundits who echo and repeat these same arguments constantly on FOX News and the vast radio networks that host the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity, Gibson, Beck.
It is difficult to say whether the right-wing pundits provide the arguments and the media personalities echo them or vice versa. But either way, when a guest appears on or is the subject of a right-wing talk show--and then they subsequently receive a violent email threat from a viewer--the arguments presented can be traced back to the right-wing pundits and the media circuit that nurtures them.
What should a country that believes so strongly in freedom of speech do about this problem? The answer, of course, is not to limit speech, but to first recognize that we have a very serious problem developing and to commit ourselves to dealing with it.
The problem, as the American philosopher John Dewey once observed, is not simply the use of violent rhetoric and the constant demonization of dissenters as 'enemies' of America that we find repeated and repeated in the right-wing media. The problem is the way this tendency gives rise to a strong social unity amongst those who experience it over an extended period of time:
History shows that more than once social unity has been promoted by the presence, real or alleged, of some hostile group. It has long been a part of the technique of politicians who wish to maintain themselves in power to foster the idea that the alternative is the danger of being conquered by an enemy...Here also is both a warning and a suggestion to those concerned with cultural conditions which will maintain democratic freedom. The warning is obvious as to the role of propaganda, which now operates with us in channels less direct and less official. The suggestion is that the printing press and radio have made the problem of intelligent and honest use of means of communication in behalf of openly declared public ends a matter of fundamental concern
(Freedom and Culture, John Dewey, 1939)
With so much talk about the internet, we often overlook the special relationship between radio and propaganda of which Dewey warned Americans over half a century ago. The radio and printing press was in his day, as it is in ours, not just a means of propagating fear, but an instrument for creating and maintaining the vast 'social unity' necessary for long-term control of government. The relevance of Dewey's insight to our current situation is transparent.
It may seem at first that receiving a death threat from a Rush Limbaugh listener is the most alarming part of this story, or perhaps the admission by a leading African-American intellectual that the most vile and shocking email he receives always follow his appearances on the The Factor with Bill O'Reilly. In fact, the conclusion that Dewey leads us to is far more disturbing: that behind the death threats there is a broad and growing social unity.
What we face as we look to the America of 2008, 2012, and 2016, in other words, are vast sections of the country held in place by social bonds forged out of anti-Democratic notions such as: violent threats are the best response to dissent.
Acknowledging and refusing to accept this growing problem from this point forward will be, in many ways, far more important than the outcome of any election in the near or distant future.
Either we as a country come together and stop right-wing media from continuing to be the source of violent rhetoric, violent listeners and violent viewers, or America stands to lose far more than a war.
(cross posted from Frameshop)Follow Jeffrey Feldman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JeffreyFeldman
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Fox has nothing on you when it comes to bias. Are you really arguing that those on the right are the only sources of these threats of violence? I beg to differ. I happen to be one of those on the right and I write a blog (Tiger’s Right Paw) expressing my views, which I don’t believe are violent or abusive. Responses to my posts are usually from those who disagree and seem to be coming from the left. I love a good debate, and looked forward to an intelligent discourse. This did happen to a certain extent, but others took a different approach. While they have never gone as far as physically threatening me, they have often expressed their feelings that I am a lower class of person and don’t deserve respect or simple courtesy. Once when I wrote a post citing my reasons for being pro-life, a blogger accused me of having “a temporary psychotic condition associated with extreme paranoia.” The same blogger lumped me with those who bomb abortion clinic and kill doctors, actions that I would never condone for any reason. I am often referred to as a fanatic right-wing nut job. And I’m just a beginner blogger with a limited audience. I can only imagine the sort of responses well-known conservatives get when they appear on CNN.
I agree, the country should come together and stop these violent responses and threats, but it shouldn’t be an us versus them, Republicans versus Democrats approach. Media leaders from both sides of the aisle should take a stand against this violence and discourage their audience from going to these extremes.
Dear Mr. Feldman,
Eloquently expressed indeed. Agape.
There are laws in my state and I assume other states against "terroristic threatenin
I stopped listening to Limbaugh years ago. I used to watch O'Reilly and Shepard Smith, but I have not tuned in to the Fox Channel in about 4 years__that Hannity just got to be too hypocritcal and smarmy.
I think alot of people like me, who actually like to hear different points of view, left these shows, and those that still remain are just that lizard-brained segment of our society we've always been plagued by. You know, the "lynchmobs" blindly following the loudest mouth.
They are less than 300,000, but even a few mosquitos can make alot of decent folks scratch themselves raw.
They can have the South, for all I care. They can rename it, Monstertruckia.
As a native of the South who cast my first presidential vote for McGovern, I resent your stereotypical hostile attitude! I have lived in the South , the Midwest, and New England, and have found compatible folks and right wing nut all over. Wherever you live, I's sure if you look around you will find the same.
I've noticed this myself. At first I thought it was just poor debaters, using name calling and threats to compensate but over time I've come to realize that there's an entire population of people out there who see liberals as a threat to their very existence. Really scary.
I am 63 years old and have lived through the Korean Conflict, The Vietnam Conflict, and the first invasion of Iraq. In the last 30 years there has been a ever increasing take over of American corporations by the religious fanatics that want a return to the days when if you did not belong to their church and worship the way that they do you are a heathen and must be converted or destroyed. These people are the biggest hypocrites in the world.
They preach love and God but they will do just as their ancestors did. They will work you and your children and grandchildren to death for pennies a day while growing richer and richer.
Yes they must be stopped at all cost and never allowed to do this again.
Don’t worry; they are shooting themselves and the right in the foot;)
Rush, like the vast majority of the neocons avoided Vietnam and his followers that are making the more extreme threats will also be found wanting in the "put up" department.
Bullies are always cowards so it is no surprise what kind of following Rush has. They will run at the mouth, but do nothing that involves any actual risk to their persons.
Their behavior is going to cost them and the right as people learn of it and correctly dismiss them as lunatics.
You are overlooking the "courage" bullies are able to muster by forming gangs and maintaining anonymity outside their circle. Specifically, I'm referring to the KKK and their ilk, who only come out at night, wearing hoods to mask their identities. Their obvious cowardice does not make them any less dangerous; they are quite ready to lynch individuals as long as the thugs have the advantage of numbers and/or weaponry.
In one sentence you say the solution to the problem is not to limit free speech. Yet in your last paragraph you want to stop right-wing media and its listeners. You should at least try to posit a consistent thesis.
The other thing is the right-wing pundits and talkshow hosts are merely tapping into the mood of a very HUGE and angry constituency. Indeed, the left has taken on all the attributes of a mortal enemy to these people. You are extremely naive (and entering dangerous territory) if you think you can constructively engage this element in civil dialogue. It appears you have no idea how much hate is smoldering in the hinterlands.
I call them the "dirty underwear crowd" They're out there in their mobile homes in their dirty underwear stroking their shotguns and M-16s saying "I'm going to kill a liberal for Rush." I know they're out there and I'm scared to death. Osama bin Laden is a pacifist compared to the yahoos who listen to Limpdick, O'lielly, Coultergeist et al.
Excellent commentary on the state of the American political debate and the lack of rhetorical skills eminating not only from listeners to pundits but found (or more aptly not found) from those with the electronic megaphones.
Even the discourse in congress as devolved the level of gross generalizations and marketing quips. What was once the forum for thoughtful debate and a stalwart of reverence and respect of dissenting opinions, the U.S. Senate has become the purveyor of ridicule and derogatory sound bites. How can we expect more from non-elected entertainers or anonymous repondents.
The only caution I would advise is to think that this is limited to right-wingers. Examples of irrationally expressed hatred are easily found in the Huffposts and they are not universally from conservative sources.
The minute you try to attach a specific attitude, the debate devolves into which side does it more and finger pointing.
I agree with the basic premise, just take the right wing part out and make it inclusive of all who make threats and espouse violence. Hashing out who is most at fault is an exercise in futility and will never get resolved.
I am neither of the right nor the left, but I have seen just as much vitriol, inclluding threats, coming from the fringe left as I have from the fringe right. You even see it in comments here. Want a good dose of it? Go to "Raw Story" and read some of the comments coming from the left, especially the ones directed at Israel, Jews or Christians. It is indeed a serious problem but it is deceit to suggest that it is confined to one political extreme.
His point was that the talk shows drive it. The lefties are driven to insanity by Hannity.
Your blog is on seven second delay, there is a disconnect, excuse me---there is a war going on, you know. If it works as usual there, it works as usual here. There is still the matter of that Civil War and bombs bursting in air, you know.
America's been to the moon, Alice, wherever can I send you now?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
