The Power and Responsibility of our Nation's Broadcasters

The following is my opening keynote speech for the National Association of Broadcasters Show in Las Vegas, which I delivered Monday night.

To listen to the speech, click the play button below:

Hello, I'm Tim Robbins. I'd like to thank you for the invitation to address you here at the National Association of Broadcasters. When I first received the invitation I was a little confused because the last time I had contact with the national media I seem to remember them telling me to shut the hell up.

I would like to start with an apology. To Rush and Sean, and Billo and Savage and Laura what's-her-name. A few years ago they told America that because I had different opinions on the wisdom of going to war that I was a traitor, a Saddam lover, a terrorist supporter, undermining the troops. I was appealing at the time for the inspectors to have more time to find those weapons of mass destruction. I was a naïve dupe of left wing appeasement. And how right they were. If I had known then what I know now, if I had seen the festive and appreciative faces on the streets of Baghdad today, if I had known then what a robust economy we would be in, the unity of our people, the wildfire of democracy that has spread across the Mideast, I would never have said those traitorous, unfounded and irresponsible things. I stand chastened in the face of the wisdom of the talk radio geniuses, and I apologize for standing in the way of freedom.

So when they asked me to come speak to you I said, "Are you sure? Me?" And they said, "Yes."

And I said, "You know, I have a tendency to say things that I believe at the time to be well-intentioned but that are actually traitorous." And they said, "Sure, cool." And then I read the press release and it said, "Mr. Robbins will be speaking about the challenges of new media and delivery systems." Oh, OK. But I just want you to know I'm not sure I know what that fucking means.

But it is an honor to be speaking to you here at this years National Association Broadcasting convention even if I don't know what the hell I'm talking about.

I owe a lot to broadcast media. I got my start in radio in the early 20s. In my early twenties. And it was television.

But these tremendous inventions have benefited us all.

Radio has come a long way from the early days when family's gathered around the trusty old Philco to listen to such programs as Superman, Sherlock Holmes and Amos and Andy. Thanks to music and sound effects, this magical medium was able to transport families to a place where a man could fly, a brilliant detective could solve the most perplexing of crimes, and two white guys could portray ridiculously offensive black stereotypes for the amusement of millions.

The first broadcast occurred on Christmas Eve in 1906 at Brant Rock, MA, when a man named Fessenden played his violin, sang a song and read Bible verses into a wireless telephone of his own invention. His goal was to find financial backers, but no investor of the day believed that radio could ever replace the most popular leisure activity of the day; listening to the hoot owl while playing the zither as your 14-year-old niece bounced on your knee. Some of you may remember. It was all the rage in the early century.

But soon broadcasting over the radio caught on and zither playing and child molestation were a thing of the past. Radio reached a boom time during the Depression as people begin to listen to and depend on radio to lift their spirits during that catastrophic economic crisis. Shows such as The Bickersons taught people life is not so bad as long as somebody has got it worse.

President Roosevelt became the first "radio president" and his "fireside chats" set the stage for later presidential weekly addresses such as; "chew the fat with Ike," "LBJ's bull session," and George W's "Hooked on Phonics and Strategery Hour."

Radio continued to expand and soon, the public turned to their radios for news, which began to mature during World War II with the regular reports of the bombing of London by Edward R. Murrow, with his "London After Dark" series, where Murrow coined the famous phrase: "Good Night and Good Luck" as well as the lesser known phrase; "Die, you Nazi cocksuckers."

In the post war years, the radio business exploded when 90% of all American's claimed radio was their primary source of news and entertainment. To meet this incredible demand Philco built 6 million radios in 1947. And to provide content for those 6 million radios, we were introduced to some of the greatest drama, comedy and musical entertainment this country has ever seen.

In the '70s, radio took a serious nosedive when Edwin Armstrong invented FM to eliminate the static and noise associated with AM and unwittingly provided a home for easy listening jazz rock, overly dramatic disco songs and 20 minute psychedelic sitar jams.

In the '80s and '90s the FCC, under pressure from the Reagan and Clinton administrations, changed the rules limiting the number of radio and television stations a business entity could own, paving the way for such conglomerates as Infinity broadcasting and Clear Channel to buy up local stations and put them under the umbrella of their larger corporations. Again the community benefited because due to Clear Channel and Infinities' conservative approach, listeners no longer had to be subjected to perplexing controversial subjects, or confusing varied opinion, or alternative rock. And as a bonus these large companies, with the help of Mr. Reagan and Mr. Clinton got rid of that annoying Fairness Doctrine, freeing its listeners from the burden of hearing equally from all sides of the political debate. What a bore.

This new world of conglomeration also brought us back to a simpler, more exciting time with regard to natural disasters and calamities. Your local station would now be broadcasting from a city many miles away and should there be a tornado coming your way you wouldn't know about it until the funnel was in full view. Exciting times.

In the 1950s, television began to replace radio as the chief source of revenue for broadcasting networks. It quickly became apparent that talking about "Old Sandusky Lager" on the radio didn't quite have the same impact as watching a buxom flaxen haired temptress in a skin tight dress play pool in a bar while she drank "old Sandusky Lager." Beer sales skyrocketed.

In the '60s, American television networks began broadcasting in color bringing a new vibrant reality to the content of the day. Suddenly it didn't seem unusual that an astronaut was dating a scantily clad genie that lived in a bottle in his living room.

Television also brought the horror and reality of war into our living rooms airing footage of the war in Vietnam. Building on the mistakes of the past, war is now televised in an easily digestible sanitized version. The current administration has proven that war doesn't have to be upsetting, or sacrificed for, or even reported on at all. We have come a long way, baby.

But what is the state of broadcasting today? Some critics have noted that there is a dangerous lack of diversity and opinion. That may be true, but imagine the nightmare of having to rectify that situation.

I propose a much simpler solution, which I've separated into three prongs, or a Satan's trident if you will.

First, erase all diversity. Thankfully the majority of what is broadcast over television and radio is of two opinions and that feels good. That's simple. But unfortunately there is a tiny minority out here on the airwaves expressing a different view outside of the Democrats and Republicans nexus trying to confuse us all. Can we please shut them up? How expensive could it be to buy Pacifica Radio? These people are driving us apart.

Secondly, let's stay focused on Sex Scandals. Stop with the in depth reporting that gets outside of the sound bite. More sex scandals! Surely with a little more prying, a little more effort we can find more sexual deviants. And trust me, sexual deviancy is something we can all agree on. It's deliciously intoxicating to watch unfold. It's titillating.

The absolute zenith of news, the perfect storm of reporting, the shining city on the hill in news coverage was Lewinsky v Clinton. Now that was fun. We couldn't get enough of that. There were salacious details, semen stains, oral sex. And the president lied. He threatened every notion of marriage and the sanctity of family. He put our country at risk. And when he did lie we held his feet to the fire. We reported on every angle, every permutation of the story. We held hearings, appointed an independent council, led off every newscast for months about the lie, played it until there was no hiding from it, and then held him accountable by impeaching him. It is our moral responsibility to report on the sex lives of the powerful. It is the only thing that kept our country alive at that point. It righted our ship of state. It saved our collective soul. And it was great, juicy fun. Imagine what would have happened to our country's soul if the president lied and nothing was done about it, if impeachment was off the table. Where would we be today if we did not hold our president accountable?

Third, find more racially divisive news and play that constantly. As long as we hate each other we will never be bothered with this gnawing lefty obsession with information. Let's make the purpose of the media salacious entertainment, not information. The more our news outlets and talk radio can distract us the better. We love distraction. When the nattering nabobs of negativity tell you that the economy is falling apart, that gas costs four dollars a gallon, that they are foreclosing on your home, that there is chaos in Iraq, when these propagandists spread this "information" it is our moral responsibility to distract. I don't know about you but show me a starlet without panties getting out of a car and suddenly the world seems like a better place. Show me Knight Rider drunk on the floor eating a hamburger, and I won't ask why my kid has no health insurance. Let's stop burdening people with facts. I bet some of you are saying; "Sure Tim, there's no question, sex scandals, race riots and drunken TV stars are a lot of fun, but shouldn't broadcasters see themselves as part of the larger picture? Isn't there an obligation to honestly report on what is going on, to pursue stories past their headlines? Haven't criminal acts occurred in government? Shouldn't there be accountability for inept policy decisions? Shouldn't someone be fired?" And you know something? I didn't hear any of that because I'm still thinking about that starlet getting out of the car without her panties. You see, that doesn't take any energy. I know exactly what to think about.

Now some of you are concerned with that unrelenting pesky competition. You know, the new technologies; the Internets and satellite radio and television. The problem is there are too many people in this country that take the notion of creativity and invention too damn seriously. Just when one technology is centralized, conglomerated, monopolized, along come new technologies and delivery systems to threaten the good work born of deregulation. Just when we were getting close to a national playlist for our music, satellite technology is threatening to provide music that people actually want to hear. Just when we were close to a national news media, providing a general consensus on what the truth is, along comes the Internets that allow its users a choice on the kinds of news it watches. And the You Tube. My God we've got to stop them. Recently when we were about to enjoy our great national pastime of 'tearing apart a presidential candidate with relentless repetition of ugly things his friend said', You Tube provided the candidates reasoned response and millions watched and responded positively.

Well you here at NAB have the power to stop this dangerous technology. The question is, how? I respectfully suggest that you do what others have done when facing the competition of new technologies. Get compromising information on your enemy and expose them in a sex scandal. Or call them a racist, or better yet a traitor. That not only undermines your competitor, but provides the public with fantastic entertainment.

Of course you can do that. And no one in this current world would fault you for it. It is, after all, where we stand today. In all seriousness folks, let's face it. We are at an abyss as a country and as an industry. And I know that saying we are at an abyss isn't the stuff of keynote addresses but all sarcasm and irony and rude pithiness aside, we are at a critical juncture in this nation's history. This is a nation divided and reeling from betrayal and economic hardships. And you, the broadcasters of this great nation have a tremendous power, and a tremendous potential to effect change. You have the power to turn this country away from cynicism. You have the power to turn this nation away from the hatred and the divisive dialogue that has rendered such a corrosive affect on our body politic. You can lift us up into a more enlightened age. Or you can hide behind that old adage; "I'm just a businessman, I provide what the audience wants." Well, I'm here to tell you that we don't need to look at the car crash. We don't need to live off of the pain and humiliation of the unfortunate. We don't need to celebrate our pornographic obsession with celebrity culture. We are better than that.

Some of you are trying. Some of you are inspiring people towards altruism and compassion with your programming. Some of you are trying to lift the civic dialogue into a more responsible and adult arena. But I know you do so against the odds of ratings and job security. It is really up to the leaders in this room. It is up to you, the scions of this industry to leave behind formulas and focus groups and your own fears of job security. Only with your courage and your vision can we begin to imagine a world of broadcasting where the general consensus of those with real power say "Enough is enough. Now is the time to move away from our lesser selves. Now is the time to stop making money on the misfortunes of others and the prurient and salacious desires of the public. Now is the time to admit and recognize that we aren't just businessmen but the guardians of the human spirit, with a responsibility to the health of this nation. That we can lift this country up with our programming, that instead of catering to the gossips and the scolds and the voyeurs we can appeal to the better nature in our audience, the better nature of what this country is all about."

This is a country filled with people of great compassion and tremendous generosity. This is a country that has survived dust bowls and depressions, that united to defeat Hitler and fascism and communism. We are a resilient people and a tenacious people. And we are ready for change.

Imagine a new broadcasting industry aesthetic, that respecting the better nature of the American people, produces shows that promote strength instead of fear. That does not divide, but inspires, that does not promote hate, but unity, that will not tear the weak down, but build up their strength. Imagine a world of broadcasting where the American people are encouraged to reject despair and distrust. And when they turn their TVs and radios off at night and go to sleep they possess strength, and unity and compassion for those they disagree with. That's not out of the question. You can make that happen. It will be difficult, and will fly in the face of conventional wisdom, and standard operational procedures. But do we have any choice? The road we are on is leading us to a corruption of our former selves. We are better than that. You can help us reclaim our better nature, our perfect union. It isn't necessarily a matter of country before profit, or of patriotism and truth before personal comfort. There could be money to be made in appealing to our better selves. Wouldn't that be great?

And if there isn't and we came out of it a little less rich but more unified and healthier as a nation wouldn't that be something we could all be proud of?

Comments

[Beowoof]

After all the hits that Robbins, Sarandon, Garofalo, Donahue and all the so called "Hollywood elite" took for just voicing their opinion about going to war with a sovereign nation by a President that everyone wanted to share a beer with and Robbins is still positive. Did any of those assholes apologize to Robbins or to all of us regarding their cheer-leading for this unending madness and unnecessary loss of life? Well he's a better man than I. Great speech.

[procrustes]

Mr. Robbins,

"Where would we be today if we did not hold our president accountable?" Droll. Very droll.

You said a couple of times, "We're better than that.." Really? Are we really?

Half of us voted for what we have, twice. Europe understands morality is not about fucking, we don't. Europe understands that making sure everyone has access to basics like food, water, shelture, medical care, education comprises the floor of civilization, we don't. We think a bible and rod is the stuff of social (oops, can't use that commie word), er community cohesion--and we try to apply that tenet to the world by bombing the holy shit (it IS holy because Jesus approves) out of societies that don't agree with us.

As long as a whimpy little TeeVee creep that made his career on a cum stained dress tells us what is important we're never be better.

We won't change until we're changed, and the coming economic disaster will change us, but to what end is very much in question.

[athy]

There is dangerous lack of diversity and opinion in broadcasting today.

We need to turn off TVs, radios, and stop reading newspapers and instead surf internet for news and information and interact with bloggers to share & exchange information and ideas.

Al Gore discussed in his EXCELLENT book “The Assault on Reason” how we are losing our ability to collect and analyze information, form opinion and take action based upon opinion. ‘Assault’ due to a number of factors including consolidation of media outlets and their management by few, large for- profit corporations.

Mainstream media (MSM) using more sophisticated techniques to control WHAT topics we will think about AND WHAT OPINIONS we will have about these topics. Propaganda, psychology, etc… being used to control level of our awareness of current events and opinions we hold about these events. Gore states that democracy’s advocates beginning to use own sophisticated techniques in effort to remain informed engaged citizens-including use of internet, on-line organizing, blogs, and wikis.

It’s possible to be well-educated and at same time misinformed. Easy to become trapped in web of totalitarian propaganda. With internet, we have opportunity to question everything. We must protect freedom of internet contents and use at all costs and make it easier for all to have access. This is challenge faced if we want to protect democracy. New media and delivery systems are threat only to MSM organizations whose goal is to control public opinion in effort to control votes and spending habits/choices.

[dugan45]

Then you better contact your senators and congressperson. Media conglomerates are lobbying for a rewrite of federal law on control of the flow of information--who controls it, with the establishment of prioritzing hierarchically who has access to that control. Verizon, Comcast, and others are involved in lobbying the FTC to rewrite communications law. I no longer have the link. You might want to google it.

We all should make our senators and representative aware that we want free access to the internet.

[athy]

I agree. We need to stay on top of this.

Shout out to any 'legitimate' msm journalists, indep. journalists, citizen journalists, or bloggers- we have to step up to the plate and get involved. We need to write about this (internet regulation, access, privacy, etc...) talk about it, blog about it. We need to explore this topic from the perspective of ' regular users of the internet'- including how citizens can get involved as activists to participate in decision making process, impact legislation may have on our ability to govern ourselves in our democracy etc...If MSM chooses to or is allowed to cover this issue- they will probably gloss over from the perspective of corporations, stockholders, government, and regulatory agencies.

Check out this web site for starters:

http://www.democraticmedia.org/about/history

Center for digital democracy

and this one:

http://www.apdip.net/publications/iespprimers/eprimer-igov.pdf

Internet Governance- A Primer (Excellent overview that won't put you to sleep). Keep also for future reference.­..

[elisunday]

Huzzah!

[AdultFilmLegend]

There is also the possibility that braodcasters could come up with better programming. That's unlikely, but the market (usually) rewards the better product or service.

[jeersforfears]

Broadcasters who present the truth - both sides of the story - are being rewarded. It's just that left wing ideologues can't accept that they are wrong about some things. They are sheltered, haven't a clue about what goes on in "real life" and are acting against their own, and the country's, best interests.

[Geauterre]

Mr. Robbins has a sharp mind. Perhaps he and Justin Raimondo of the Washington Independent can collaborate on a piece? Now that would be interesting.

[JonStewart4President]

Ack, I mean TIM Robbins. This is what happens when you post and do papers. But TIM Robbins, loved what you said, very true, very funny and very brave.

Repeal the Telecom Act of 1996!

[texasyankee]

Tim Robbins is a fine actor and I have enjoyed many of his movies. But I cannot agree with almost any of his political views and I am tired him complaining about how the left is repressed in this country. This site is a love fest to the left and whenever a moderate or conserative post anything they are instantly attacked by the "tolerant" left. Tim's rant, while quite funny and sad, could not be more intellectually bankrupt, his short history lesson in the media notwithstanding. If a person does not want to listen to conservatives turn off the TV/Radio. Ad dollars drive programming, it is just that simple. Listening to Tim's sad little rant is like listening to people who complained about Howard Stern. Turn the media device off and think for yourself. There are more outlets than ever to find out what is going on in the world. Also, how has Tim been muzzled?? Not at all. He continues to act and gets invited to speaking engagements like this event he attended. What drives Tim nuts is that there is a market for Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'reilly and others that he disagrees with. Because Tim needs everyone to agree with him. This is still the most free and diverse country in the world, sorry Tim your rant does not play with me.

[Strepsi]

You are right in the first part: the market does dictate content and Americans can turn it off. And half of them don't turn it off. So therefore the more complex and difficult question becomes, "Why do Americans yearn for fascism?"

Your conclusion, "This is still the most free and diverse country in the world", is one of those things Americans just say and just believe based on your own myths - but it is not true.

Canada is much more free and diverse, as my 5-year-old gay marriage attests. Many, many countries are more free, and this increases with every freedom Americans themselves give away - such as the right to a trial. Again: why is America moving backwards compared to the rest of the developed world: why do Americans yearn for fascism?

[JonStewart4President]

I saw a video of this, it was great. Tom you are great, funny, smart and everything you said was the absolute truth.

And yes, the Telecom act of Bill and in 1996 has been as horrible for the media and free speech and informing this country, as any of the horrible things Reagan did. Even worse.

So thanks for speaking the truth in a fearless and funny way. Bravo.

[YWCYWC]

Call me elitist, but up until the election I was getting my news by brouseing the NYT, listening to NPR and catching the Jim Lehrer News Hour on PBS. My perception of CNN and MSNBC was that they were just tabloid, sensationalism, and occasional headlines. Since I found myself hooked on the primary campaign I turned to those networks for more moment by moment coverage. This experience has reinforced my orginal perception. They are awful source for news and just one step away from FOX. I am so disgusted that I have simply turned them off.

Now I'm back to where I started, but have expanded by using the internet to pick and choose the information I look at. The elections gave these networks a chance to grow their market with people like me, but they seem stuck in their way. Tonight, I turned back to Jim Lehrer and the difference was night and day, like walking back in time to a more sane world with real objective reporting and analysis.

[grasshopper84663]

I couldn't agree more. I am so tired of infotainment. When will the mainstream media start reporting the news again?

[NightOwlCafe]

Excellent speech Tim and thanks for the effort to open the ears, eyes and minds of media power brokers. The "Fourth Estate" is worthless and much like our Government has been corrupted by corporate greed.

[athy]

Some media members are members of the "Fourth Estate" in name only. Other members take their role as guard dogs in this 'Checks and Balances' system very seriously.

Thanks to the three ring circus put on by the main stream media during this presidential campaign, I was forced to look more closely to independent media sources, independent journalists, and yes...citi­zen journalists and informed bloggeers for my collection of facts so that I can make an informed decision this November. There are indeed some EXCELLENT alternative sources of information out there. After having experienced this new source of informatio­n...I can't go back to MSM... Suggestion for any MSM reporters who may have erroneously considered themselves to be journalists-- Read the book "The Elements of Journalism" by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel. They write that purpose of journalism is to provide people with info they need to be free & self governing. Inorder to do this: Journalism’s first obligation is to the truth and First loyalty is to citizens- NOT SHAREHOLDER RETURN.

[MizJ]

Tim, you are not only a great actor but a wonderful satirist as well. I wish I could have heard this speech in person as I am now sitting here, close to midnight, laughing out loud by myself! What you said is absolutely on the mark and only illustrates how low are expectations have fallen when we do not demand to be treated by these pseudo newscasters as adults. Case in point: news blackouts of the bodies of the soldiers being brought home for burial. What better way to ignore this folly of a war while lulling the public into being told that "progress" is being made in Iraq. It is the same talking heads rehashing the same idiocy with the same panels adding nothing of substance to the dialogue other than complete blather. We ignore corruption, shrug off torture, allow the media to select/deselect candidates in favor of corporate interests, turn a deaf ear to the issues and offer shoddy analysis on events that shape our existence. Your speech may be nothing more to them than a celeb just blowing off a little steam but you addressed it on behalf of many of us whose voice are never heard. Thanks.

[sdskelton03]

Tim

I know it is a tough pill to swallow that those who disagree with you are allowed to speak as well.

I wish you Godspeed in silencing those who inconvenience you with their thought.

[mamayo]

now, that was just plain rude!

[stanjz]

Senator Clinton has little chance of winning in Nov. Senator Obama has run a very clean campaign and Senator Clinton's supporters have no right to be angry at him. The same cannot be said for Senator Clinton's campaign. The smears, lies, distortions, and dirty tactics won't be forgotten by many of Barack's supporters. Let's remember the Muslim emails, Bob Kerrey trying to scare people with Barack's middle name, implied drug dealing by Shaheen and the list goes on. Senator Clinton even teamed up with FOX to attack Obama.

If Senator Clinton cannot win in a Democratic primary without going dirty, how is she going to win with independents and Republicans more heavily in the mix?

[Opus007]

You're right. The Obama campaign could have had a field day with Hillary's Bosnia lie but he took the hight road. I think Hillary is practically a Republican like her DLC pal Joe Lieberman. My opinion of HIllary has changed radically over the last year and it could not get any lower at this point.

We have a textbook fascist goverment- working for corporate interests at the expense of the citizens. All the while hiding behind Jesus and the Flag. Sound outrageous? With a few clicks on gooogle you look up the meaning of fascism. Look how much control this goverment has- starting with the media. It is frightening. Clinton and McCain are part of the problem not the solution- no surprise they have joined forces against Obama.

[sdskelton03]

I respectfully disagree with Mr. Robbins when it comes to the fairness doctrine.

The fairness doctrine made a lot of sense a number of years ago when information was dissemenated only through a limited number of outlets; local newspaper and over the air televsion and radio. Perhaps there was a role for the FCC to insure that controversial opinions were covered from all angles.

Today, however, the afformentioned media is no longer alone. My television has 1000 channels, satelite radio prevails and the internet is essentially unlimited in sources of informaiton.

No matter the issue, I can find coverage and opinion from the entire ideological spectrum.

Not only are all voices heard, none can be silenced.

The answer to speech one finds unpleasant (i.e. Rush Limbaugh or Tim Robbins) isn't the silencing of those one likes, but rather the opportunity to others to speak.

Just like Tim is doing here.

[NightOwlCafe]

You may be assuming that everyone has access to or can afford 1000 TV channels, satelite radio and/or a computer. Many people have limited or basic cable TV and Am/FM Radio only. I would say they are getting a somewhat slanted (to the right) version of news/infor­mation/opi­nion.

[dugan45]

You are so right on, bro'. Thank Jesus for the firness doctrine; conglomerization, too. For example, look at what happened during the windup to the invasion of Iraq. There was insufferably overlong debate on whether we should go to war. Chrissy Matthews, Wolf Blitzer, Andrea Mitchell, Peter Jennings, Tim Russert, and other reporters as well as pundits and commentators filled the air with valuable argument and counterargument. Even third-opinion views were honored. Keeping up with the welcomed, varying opinions on tv talk shows and in news print was so overwhelming I begn taking notes so I could review and recite key points. ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Fox, and MSNBC committed themselves to a meritorious effort to provoke debate and keep us informed through investigative reportage. So did print news. The NY Times and Washington Post: were incredible, providing us with the results of in-depth investigative reportage. I especially enjoyed Charles Krautheimer's efforts to look at all sides. Column after column, he filled us with deep insight, knowledge, and understanding. For every report by Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller on why we must invade Iraq, the NY Times made certain counterviews appeared regularly. And the Wash Post's entire staff painstakingly made certain they covered all aspects of the great national debate.

[dugan45]

(continuation of post)
All this happened because the fairness doctrine and media ownership became amenable to the process.

In fact, that filtered down to internet users. The right blessed me in chat rooms for expressing my views. So open and tolerant they were of open debate that everyone felt secure in openly opposing the invasion. I never found myself kicked out or banned. Never was I called faggot, pinko, traitor, cocksucker, Jew, or Nigger for laying out in lucid detail my premises. Had those terms been swung at me, the namecallers would have outed themselves as being intolerant, racist, anti-Semitic, anti-gay, and fearlessly nationalistic: we all know how tolerant the right is of alternative views, especially those evidenced by accurate supporting facts and details. The internet was rockin'. The lack of a fairness doctrine and the conglomerization of the media precipitated awareness and tolerance of altnerative views those in power were willing to consider and assess.

What I cannot understand is the blowback against the media after the invasion and why tv news anchors, commentators, pundits, reporters, and columnists began reporting hard news about the war and then why at some point they replaced that with video loops of Brittney's goings-on and horrible murder events. Or why Republicans and conservatives disappeared from chat rooms, I became acceptable as a chatter, and eventually right-leaners began appearing as Independents and Libertarians.

Tim got it all wrong.

Mr. Robbins, one day America will honor you with its highest awards.

[Betsy]

Correction­..........­..As of yesterday, 4,031 American troops have lost their lives.