Talk Radio Inciting Violence? What Happened to Listener Discernment?

Today's email digest of talk radio news has an article saying talkers may be inciting listeners to violence. According to the article, right-wing talkers are said to send subliminal messages. The author, talk-radio consultant Holland Cooke, invokes Chris Matthews' reference to the "dog whistle" and claims that "fringe ears" might hear those subliminal messages, thus "inciting the next nut."

Why must it always be the talk shows' fault? Any why must it always be the right-wing talk shows' fault? I could make the same argument about left-wing talk shows and left-wing talk show hosts. However, that is not the point.

Do we really believe that talk radio on both the left and right really incites violence? If Chris is correct that hosts use a dog whistle to get the ear of those fringe listeners, where is the causal link between the nutcase at the Holocaust Museum or the shooter who recently killed a pro-life supporter?

The nut cases exist regardless of talk radio or cable news.

Anything can trigger the irrational behavior of a nut case. Just as we cannot fully eliminate traffic accidents unless we eliminate automobiles, neither can we eliminate nut cases taking irrational actions.

We can, however, improve the quality and tone of our discourse.

The point that Holland Cooke misses is that most talk radio hosts truly want a debate. They want those with opposing points of views to call-in and debate the topic. Whether your point of view is from the left or the right, what better opportunity to make your case than to debate someone with an opposing point of view?

Those debates can be civil, too. Even after David Sirota penned in his column that the apocalypse must surely be nearing because he and I host talk shows in the same Clear Channel Denver building, we nonetheless have held civil and, at least from my point of view, enlightening discussions on health care and politics.

We often fail to acknowledge the responsibility of the listener or viewer. As consumers of news and opinion, each of us has a civic obligation to not only hear the other point of view, but to listen with discernment to those who ostensibly reflect our own point of view.

The balance we seek should not be some government-imposed fairness doctrine, or some corporate policy dictating what a talk show host says or discusses. Rather, the balance should exist in our ears and brains, in our willingness to listen -- and I mean really listen -- to what the other side is saying. Not that you have to agree with what the other side says, only that you understand the "what" and "why" of the other side's views.

We should never refrain from expressing our opinions with emotions and passions for fear that the nut case will hear it wrong and act out violently. The nut cases will be with us always, and they should not dictate our willingness to debate with passion, logic and reason our respective views.

Trying to tie violence and radio talk shows or cable opinion shows together ignores the personal responsibility each of us have as consumers of news and opinion to listen, watch and read with judiciousness and discrimination. Otherwise we scapegoat talk show hosts and cable news hosts for the irresponsible and irrational behavior of those nuts.

 

 

Follow Michael D. Brown on Twitter: www.twitter.com/mikebrowntoday

Comments

[surfcitysteven]

How many times do you think rush and beck spewed out nonsense and vilified the census?

[conniptionfit]

Lots of totally unsupported opinion here, Michael, for an issue that involves not only civility, but the public safety. We decided long ago that we should, as a society, protect the public safety by making it illegal to shout "FIRE!" in a crowded theater. We recognized that even reasonable people, worried for their safety, could be stampeded into an unthinking mob that could be fatal to themselves and others. And this is precisely the issue that right-wing talk show hosts are violating. By telling their audience in hyperbolic and incendiary words that Obama is stealing THEIR country, that he's a Nazi, that the Government is running "re-education camps", that all Right-Thinking American Patriots should stand up and take their country back, they are deliberately inciting fear and revolutionary violence. They know it, and you know it. You just hope that the rest of us are too stupid to notice until it's too late to protect ourselves.

[cedy]

ohh c'mon. The rights talk shows like beck have a ferverent following. People assume that since he has a show, that he has power and that easily translates to truth.

Sure there are nutters out there no matter what. Like you said, there is nothing we can do about them. The problem is when the the on-air talent whips up the formally-sane people into a right wing emotion fest. They run around looking like complete fools and constantly refer back to who told them to act this way-- Beck for example.

You simply don't see this insane behavior on the left. Sure there are true nut jobs on the left, but on a percentage basis, the right owns it.

[Michael D. Brown - Huffpost Blogger]

Ah, but I'm not convinced the right owns it but that the left and right are both fighting over it now. Given that recent polls show more Americans leaning more conservative than liberal, then perhaps there is a preponderance of nuts on the right, but as a percentage of the group, it is probably no greater than that percentage on the left.

My point is the nuts exist and we agree on that. So let's stop blaming talk radio for inciting the nuts. The nuts will always look for something to incite them regardless of whether or not that was the intent. I don't want the nuts controlling our conversation.