I can't imagine anything more boring than a blogger self-obsessing about a media performance. Unfortunately, your humble diarist is exactly the type of person that is prone to such extravagances.
Yesterday, as many of you know, I did Reliable Sources. The right side of the blogosphere is all atwitter with self-congratulatory circle-jerk posts claiming victory. A large part of their victory, supposedly, is that I, and other bloggers, haven't made a big deal out of my appearance.
Well, NewsBusters, I'll bite. Eat this:
(flip)
HOWARD KURTZ: Now, the talk gets pretty hot on KSFO, conservative San Francisco radio station. And one blogger found some of the hosts' language offensive. Melanie Morgan, for instance, said this of new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
MELANIE MORGAN, KSFO: We've got a bull's eye painted on her big, wide, laughing...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Easy. Easy, easy.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
KURTZ:: Then there was this bit where the host talked about what it would sound like to execute "New York Times" editor Bill Keller.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We're going to take Bill Keller. And if he were to be tried and convicted of treason, he needs to go to Old Sparky.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. And so Officer Vic (ph) was giving us a wonderful imitation of what that might sound like. So we're just going to allow you to feast your ears on this.
Go ahead, O.V.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All right. Here you can see it's being strapped in now. And here comes the switch. They're throwing the switch.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
KURTZ:: Wow. The blogger who posted these clips on his Web site, known only as "Spocko," sent audio clips from KSFO to advertisers in trying to launch a boycott. ABC Radio, which owns the station, successfully pressured Spocko's Internet provider to take down the clips on copyright grounds, which triggered a backlash from bloggers on the left.
Neither ABC Radio nor KSFO would give us a comment, but KSFO hosts complained on the air about crackpots with keyboards.
Joining me now in New York, Dan Riehl, who blogs at riehlworld.com -- riehlworldview.com, excuse me. And here in the studio, Mike Stark from callingallwingnuts.com.
Mike Stark, this guy, Spocko, he doesn't like what the KSFO hosts are saying on the air so he tries to get an advertising boycott going. What happened to free speech?
MICHAEL STARK, CALLINGALLWINGNUTS.COM:
The way to fight free speech that you disagree with is to engage in more free speech. And that's exactly what Spocko did.
Spocko recorded these segments, he spread the segments. He enlarged their free speech. He send sent them to advertisers, who had been told, by the way, that KSFO was a family-friendly Disney station.
They had no idea that they were advertising MasterCard and Federal Express and. And, you know, several of their advertisers had know idea that this kind of speech was occurring on KSFO. And they exercised their free speech rights and said I don't want to say this anymore.
KURTZ:: Do you know who the mysterious Spocko is?
STARK: I don't. I don't know his name.
KURTZ:: And neither do we.
Dan Riehl, when a blogger sends audio clips from a radio station around, I mean, you are technically ripping off the station's product, right?
DAN RIEHL, RIEHLWORLDVIEW.COM: Yes. I think there certainly are legitimate elements of fair use here, although in this case I think it's a little bit more of unfair misuse because I think things were blown out of proportion misrepresented. But yes, we do take clips from radio shows and so forth.
Whew! Score one for Riehl - his eloquence and fierceness in the face of such hostile questioning is, well... wait a second... uhm... it's not... uh... anything at all... Howie tried to set Danny up with a softball, but Danny couldn't even bring his normally dishonest self to agree with the hypocritical Kurtz! He was forced to concede that Spocko's use fell within the legal limits. Instead, he suggested that Spocko's use was "unfair misuse" because "things were blown out of proportion and misrepresented."
Uhm, does anyone else remember John Kerry's poorly worded joke about Chimpy's stupidity and how we arrived in Iraq? Does anyone else remember Howard Dean's poor choice of microphone after the Iowa primary?
This is not to say that I agree with Riehl's characterization of Spocko's clips being misused - I clearly don't. But I do suggest that Riehl's argument, well, it's fairly typical of the poorly reasoned clap-trap that is so prevalent amongst wingnuts...
Meanwhile, already I've pointed up the fact that Spocko is vigorously joining the debate by using his own powers of free speech to counter KSFO/ABC/Disney's... that ABC/Disney misrepresented their product when they sold the advertising spots to Mastercard and Federal Express; and that these advertisers used their own free speech rights by choosing to no longer associate their products with the putrid KSFO rhetoric...
Of course, this was a missed opportunity for me, but this in no way should be seen to "score points" for Danny... My take should have started with a question. Why was Kurtz’s use of the audio appropriate, but Spocko’s was "ripping off the station’s product"? I also should have mentioned that, thus far, the only person to have been (briefly) silenced is Spocko... and all throughout this segment, I should have characterized KSFO's right as one to engage in "snuff talk" I dropped the ball there... chalk it up to inexperience and anxiety.
let's move on...
KURTZ:: Mike Stark, I'm not defending some of these outrageous comments on KSFO, but, you know, when Melanie Morgan, one of hosts there describes Barack Obama as a "Halfrican," meaning he's only half a minority -- black father, white mother -- isn't that obviously intended as a satire?
STARK: You know, it's funny, because I don't believe you've even brought up the most egregious clips. Lee Rogers (ph) called for killing of millions of Muslims in Indonesia if they didn't bend to our will. We have got troops in theater in the Middle East right now in Muslim land, and Lee Rogers (ph) is calling for the killing of -- I mean, essentially the genocide of Indonesian Muslims.
Other Muslims are going to take up the cause. They're going to join that battle, and it's endangering our troops.
KURTZ:: Wait a minute. Other Muslims are going to take up the cause and join the battle because of what somebody said on a radio station?
STARK: Because of the entire psyche of the United States, which is, you know, essentially set by our media. They see our media. Our media goes worldwide. And when Lee Rogers (ph) says that, it expounds to, you know, the president saying things like -- that Democrats don't support the war on terror, that we're supporting the terrorists.
KURTZ:: All right. But, you know, radio hosts are opinionated.
Let me go to Dan Riehl.
Look, KSFO is a major station. None of this is a secret. Don't advertisers know what they're getting into when they buy time on that station?
RIEHL:: Yes, I think they do. And I find this silly.
I mean, in essence, the clip he's talking about, I believe what was said is that there were a lot of terrorists in Indonesia. And if they don't knock it off, we'll end up in a war and we'll end up killing millions of them. That's a far cry from the way Mike is representing it. That's his typical tactic.
It's my understanding just last week Don Imus and Mike Barnicle did an entire bit on hanging Vice President Dick Cheney. We had a movie released last year that the premise -- the basis premise was the hypothetical assassination of the sitting president of the United States. You know, during a week when a young woman died allegedly because of some involvement with talk radio, if this is the most outrageous thing Mike is seeing, he might want to revisit what's going on in the media around him today.
KURTZ:: You're referring there to the woman who drank seven gallons of water apparently at the urging of some radio jock and did die. What a tragedy that was.
RIEHL:: Yes.
Well, here, again, Danny really has me by the short ones. His best response was, without having any knowledge at all of what the hell he was talking about, to assume that the oh-so-very-responsible Lee Rodgers was making a reasonable point and that I wsa misrepresenting Rodgers' spoken idiocy. Well, Let's listen to the clip.
But that’s not all this shining luminary from loony-land gives us... He feels compelled to mention that Imus and Barnicle did something entirely stupid on the radio. Because, you know, their stupidity is an excuse for the repeated eliminationist rhetoric spewed by KSFO hosts. And, you know, Don Imus, Joe Lieberman’s favorite fellator, is soooo far left wing...
Still, that’s not all. Danny’s logical circle just wouldn’t be complete without using the tragic story (all the way around) of some girl that drank too much water as part of a radio contest... As a law student – one tasked with studying and recognizing logical fallacies – I cannot think of a more clear example of argument by non sequitur... Danny just compared violent political rhetoric to some dolts that came up with a contest to give away a Wii... And Danny thought it was relevant. Ha. Even Howie was at a loss for comment...
here again, though, I am not without fault. As you watch the segment, you see me grasping as I drowned in the weeds of my own confusion at Kurtz’s question. I’ll tell you this: when you are on these shows and you know you’ve got all of 6 minutes to split between you, your opponent and the host... you know you’ve got thousands of people rooting for you, and, more importantly, counting on you to perform... well, the tick of the clock is deafening. You only want to hit two or three points, but you want to under-gird them with the most solid foundation you can build... as a result, your thoughts just aren’t as fluid as they are otherwise... (and that’s without mentioning that I slept fitfully the evening before and left the house at 5:30 to get to the studio in DC by 10).
That said, I remember the first time I got through to O’Reilly. It must’ve been about the 10th time I tried calling him and I was thrilled to get through. Sitting on hold, though, waiting for my "big moment"... well, my stomach started churning, to say the least. I realized that within minutes, I’d be speaking to millions of people. By the time my turn came, it felt as if I had just eaten a spoonful of desiccant – my mouth went dry, my palms went sweaty and I just did my best to remember what it was I called for. I think I even said, "Hi, Mike" when O’Falafel finally put me on the air. The call was, needless to say, a disaster. As you know, I picked myself up, dusted myself off and lived to fight another day. By the third or fourth time, I was sure enough of myself to see O’Falafel as a joke and begin treating him that way...
The point? Well, this is something that I’m sure I’ll get good at with practice. You can count on better things from me going forward...
Anyway, how could I have done better? Well, I was certainly taken by surprise at Kurtz’s question. Did he really believe that Muslims around the world aren’t exposed to depravity of what American media has devolved to? Did he really think that the our media has no effect on the way the rest of the world, especially the Muslim world, perceives us? The idea that he would question that premise just never came up during my preparation. I’m not sure to what extent I can prepare for every silly question, but it is clear that I can afford to put nothing beneath the American media...
So what would a proper answer have been? Maybe something like: "Well, Howie, what do you think? Do you think enlistments in the US spike when Osama puts out a new video mocking our country? Are more Israelis willing to defend their country when Iran hosts a Holocaust denial conference and pushes anti-Israel propaganda? Why would you think that Muslims are any different? Further, and more directly, this rhetoric is the bleeding edge of what passes as responsible debate on the right. When Rush Limbaugh sells "Gitmo Gear" and ridicules Abu Grahb as "fraternity" pranks – even though over twenty Muslims died there – some with signs of torture... and then Dick Cheney legitimizes Limbaugh by going on his show and George Bush actually invites him to the White House... Well, do you really think all of this goes unnoticed in the rest of the world? Would you want to be a soldier trying to win hearts and minds under these conditions?"
OK, let’s get back to the Danny kicking my ass...
KURTZ:: Mike Stark, do you want to respond to that?
STARK: Yes. Actually, that's not the most egregious thing.
I think this rhetoric bleeds over from right wing talk radio into the blogs and even into the leading influentials on the right side. Ann Coulter was at CPAC. That's the Conservative Political Action Committee meeting they had here in D.C. last year.
She said, "Ragheads talk tough, ragheads face consequences."
Who else attended that? Dick Cheney, Mitch McConnell, John Fund, John Cornyn.
KURTZ:: All right. I don't want to get into too much of a tangent about the impact of right-wing talk radio, but you seem to have a problem with the First Amendment. I mean, some of us think -- you and I may think this is the most offensive stuff in the world. We can always turn it off.
STARK: I am the champion of the First Amendment. I want their speech to be known by everybody. Because you know what? These people marginalize themselves. The more their speech is heard by reasonable people like you and me, the more they marginalize themselves. So I want their voices to be heard by everyone in America.
KURTZ:: Well, thank you for including me in that description.
Dan Riehl, what about ABC Radio, which reacts to this blogger Spocko who starts this boycott campaign by going to his Internet service provider and getting these clips taken down? Isn't that a little heavy-handed?
RIEHL:: Well, I thought it was a little heavy-handed, but I just need to say one thing. OK, I'm not here to push my blog, but I have a picture on it right now of Mike sneaking into camera view on a national network, holding a banner which is probably one of the most obnoxious distasteful things you've seen. He's not exactly the person who should be making judgments about what's outrageous in media today.
That said, yes, I think if I were ABC, knowing what I know about Mike Stark, I would have sent him a hat with funny ears and let him wear it around the house and let him shine them on, frankly.
KURTZ:: Mike, just explain to our viewers, what banner were you holding up and where was this?
STARK: I was on your competitor, FOX station. I stood behind Colmes during a viewing of "Hannity and Colmes" with a sign that said, "Hannity sucks ass." All I did was tell the truth. That's not a major...
KURTZ:: You had no right to be there.
STARK: I'm sorry?
KURTZ:: You had no right to be there.
STARK: Sure I was. I was at Ned Lamont's headquarters.
KURTZ:: I see. All right.
OK, so here Danny thinks that me pulling a pretty funny prank on Hannity – somebody I’ve practically established a professional relationship with – is analogous to KSFO hosts repeatedly using violent hate speech in an effort to jack up ratings. He also never addresses the idea that KSFO sold ads as a "family-friendly" ABC/Disney radio station. Further, I’m not sure if anything more "Fair and Balanced" had ever been aired on the Fox News Network, so I really don’t understand the problem here.
Oh, wait a minute, yes I do... Kurtz actually asked Danny a relevant question... of course he failed to see the fallacy in arguing that I have a problem with the First Amendment, but ABC/Disney did not when they bullied Spocko off the internet, but that’s forgivable. We expect that type of "balanced" double standard from the traditional media.
But why didn’t Dan answer the question with the seriousness it deserved? Is he OK with ABC/Disney’s actions? I mean, where, exactly, in the spectrum of acceptability does "a little heavy-handed" come down? Should people be free to post video and audio clips to their blogs or should we rather live in fear of the corporate media’s legal teams? This was Danny’s opportunity to show how principled he was and really stand up for that First Amendment he accuses us of trampling so heavily upon... All he has is "Hannity Sucks Ass"? And NewsBusters and friends thinks he won this debate?
Here, I’m more than happy with my performance. The fact is that this violent, hateful and eliminationist rhetoric is the first choice of the right. They cannot win debates on the (de)merits of their arguments, so they strive for graphic hyperbole that dehumanizes their opponents and casts everyone as morally equal "enemies" or "heroes". The unfortunate fact is that Mitch McConnel, Dick Cheney, and John Cornyn realize that this form of "argument" is the only kind that appeals to the lowest common denominator mouth-breathing voter they need to win elections. Simultaneously, Ann Coulter, John Fund, Melanie Morgan and Lee Rodgers realize that there’s a sucker born every minute and this is an absolute goldmine for them to exploit. Hell, what Scaife and Moon don’t give them, the mouth-breathers will – all they have to do is slap a few words together and call it a book...
Back to the transcript:
STARK: Something I'd like to suggest...
KURTZ:: Let me ask this last question because we're running short on time.
STARK: Sure.
KURTZ:: Is this, the way ABC and the parent company reacted, is this a big corporation trying to intimidate bloggers?
STARK: Oh, it's absolutely a big corporation trying to intimidate bloggers. But what they're enabling here is Ann Coulter calling for the rat poisoning of Justice Stephens. Supreme Court justices, each one of them, received a box of cookies filled with rat poisoning.
KURTZ:: So you're saying there are real world consequences to some of this speech. STARK: Real world consequences. Anthrax attacks all went to journalists and two Democratic senators.
This elimination (ph) rhetoric from the right is irresponsible and I don't know why Dan would ever defend it. But he engages in it himself. He posted pictures of "The New York Times" publisher's home on his Web site...
KURTZ:: All right.
STARK: ... essentially encouraging people to...
KURTZ:: You two continue this off the air. I want to give you my take, which is, I don't like boycotts, but, you know, tough luck. It's fair game when you're in the media business for critics to talk about what's on your air.
And ABC Radio should not be saying no comment. ABC is in the communications business. They ought to have some kind of comment about what they did.
But you all are continuing this exercise in free speech. And it's an interesting one. It shows that bloggers have become a real force.
Dan Riehl in New York, Mike Stark here, thanks very much for joining us.
RIEHL:: Thank you, Howie.
STARK: Thanks very much.
I can’t be sure that Howie took my point, but as the only Sunday morning talk show that has the express purpose of discussing media issues, I thought it was important to make this last point. The fact is that 5 people died in the anthrax attacks of 2001. All five worked for media organizations. The right has been railing against the judiciary and through coincidence or not, the Supreme Court did receive one batch of cookies for each Justice. Each cookie in each batch was laced with enough rat poison to kill the entire bench. Soon thereafter, Ann Coulter demonstrated her kindredness of spirit with the criminal that sent the cookies when she called for Justice Steven’s poisoning... Like it or not, this kind of "discourse" permeates the right and has consequences.
Taking the point a bit further, when this is the baseline of conservative rhetoric – remember, nobody in attendance objected to Coulter’s "ragheads" commentary... to the contrary, it was applauded by those present – and she’s been invited back to this year’s festivities – well, it should surprise nobody when the President and his lackeys impugn the patriotism and integrity of their political opponents in the Democratic Party.
And what kind of political discussion can you have when the VP is telling you to "Go fuck yourself"? When the President is disingenuously claiming that Democrats don’t want to intercept the telephone calls of terrorists?
Now, we all know that Danny and his band of merry sycophants will shrilly complain of all the "moonbats" that march with "Bush=Hitler" signage... maybe they’ll bring up that Colorado professor who claimed the WTC workers were "little Eichmans"...
This shouldn’t surprise us... Danny’s arguments are always weak and easily refuted. The point of this entire exchange is that liberals that espouse these views aren’t spokespeople for the movement. We marginalize our embarrassments – the right offers them book contracts, microphones and visits with the President in the White House.
Anyway, the bottom line is that this battle is only beginning. We need each and every one of us railing against the cesspool fountain that is right-side rhetoric wherever we encounter it. Spocko has shown a model for effecting change, it's up to us to follow it.