Imagine this scenario: you are a lifelong liberal. You pretty much hate everything Rush Limbaugh stands for, and says. You are really glad that the times have finally seemed to have caught up to him, and that people are outraged by his callous, gross comments. So what do you do next? You do the one thing that will make him a sympathetic figure. You call on the FCC to remove him.
Think this is just not-very-good satire? If only. Nope, I draw from this example because in an opinion piecejust published on CNN.com Jane Fonda, Gloria Steinem, and Robin Morgan did exactly this. In the process they seem to have played into the exact stereotype of the thin-skinned, hypocritical liberal. One who supports the First Amendment and freedom of speech � except for when they don�t.
Here is the lame excuse they offered for why the heavy hand of government sponsored censorship should come down on Limbaugh, a guy who seemed to be doing a pretty good imitation of a man hoist on his own petard anyway.
�Radio broadcasters are obligated to act in the public interest and serve their respective communities of license. In keeping with this obligation, individual radio listeners may complain to the FCC that Limbaugh’s radio station (and those syndicating his show) are not acting in the public interest or serving their respective communities of license by permitting such dehumanizing speech.�
Umm, okay. But isn�t there something called ratings that are a truer indication of what these respective communities already want? And shouldn�t that count the most? Don�t ratings (i.e. �popularity�) in fact tell the FCC just whom the public thinks serves their interest? Whether we like it or not?
Either Limbaugh serves a large demographic or he doesn�t, it�s pretty simple. As long as he doesn�t violate any laws I don�t see what argument there is to be made to remove him based on serving some imaginary definition of the public interest. It seems to me the public has spoken q! uite cle arly about what it likes. A large portion of it still likes Rush, although fewer than before this flap began.
Then they argued that while Limbaugh is �is indeed constitutionally entitled to his opinions � he is not constitutionally entitled to the people’s airways.�
I just don�t understand this line of reasoning. Just at the very moment when the public has come alive to the fact that Limbaugh has long since crossed over the line of decency, when the system, in fact, is working, along come these three to say that �the people� need to remove Limbaugh via the FCC. Even as �the people� seem to be doing a pretty good job of it already.
No. That is the wrong way to do it. The �people� need to get rid of Limbaugh the old fashioned way, by not listening to his show. By offering strong counter-arguments to his diminished pulpit. By telling his sponsors they�ve had enough. By proving that the First Amendment still protects all speech, even Limbaugh�s, but that it cuts both ways.
As long as liberals argue that government should protect us from upsetting opinions they are never going to win, and shouldn�t. Begging the FCC to do what listeners have yet to do�get rid of Limbaugh�both looks and is weak.
I am not a fan of Rush Limbaugh�s show. So I don�t listen to it. He hasn�t gotten one Nielsen rating from me, and his sponsors have missed me too. And in the past few weeks many more people who used to be on the fence about Limbaugh have come around to my point of view, it seems. If enough people argue back against his ill-informed spew, using facts, a real, meaningful change will have taken place in this country.
Liberals and Democrats either need to make their case better than Limbaugh does, or, just as effectively, sit back and watch as his hate machine continues to eat its own tail. Eventually, though, you run out of tail. And that�s when the fun really starts. In fact, you could say the past two weeks have offered a pretty great argument as to why Limbaugh! and his kind don�t deserve your vote, by any definition of that word. So let them talk.
Related Articles:The Gory Details on AptarGroup's Double Fumble
Infrared Systems International’s Subsidiary, AquaLiv, Inc., Relocates to Larger Facility
Tags: 2015 Good Stocks ,ATR ,Good Stocks For 2015 ,Good Stocks To Buy ,Good Stocks To Buy In 2015 ,NYSE ,Q4 ,Best China Stocks 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment