Krugman writes about the dangers of Big Hate in his NYT column today. He opines:
"... right-wing extremism is being systematically fed by the conservative media and political establishment."
"... at this point, whatever dividing line there was between mainstream conservatism and the black-helicopter crowd seems to have been virtually erased."
This diary is about what, if anything, progressives (other rational sentient beings also invited) can do to tamp down Big Hate. Follow me after the fold.
Heat source for the Big Hate tinder box? Right-wing talk radio. And the inflammatory on-air stars of right-wing cable news.
The drill: A daily pounding by a shrill claque of right-wing red-meaters like O'Reilly, Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, etc., reaching millions of ill-informed Americans ("lone wolves" very much among them), all aided and abetted by the usual virulent winger guests such Coulter, Malkin, Ingraham, et al. to round out "the conversation."
Today Little Hate's become this overheated, dangerous stew of Big Hate that threatens to boil over and incite lone crazies to commit additional acts of violence and domestic terrorism.
But will the media dial back the Big Hate? Will they act responsibly? Not likely. Not without a shove toward virtue. Rush is a cash cow, filling 3 hours a day of air time. For Fox hate talk is happy talk for the ratings and bottom line.
Talking to big media in a language they understand
The media's weak link is money. Ad revenue. Benjamins. And when it comes to ad revenue, I gotta think many responsible corporate advertisers are uncomfortable with the rise of Big Hate on shows that carry their commercials.
The plan: Now while I don't advocate a boycott, particularly in a case where there are so many companies and sponsors, both national and local, that effective boycotting likely would flop, what if a genuine, loud, persistent grassroots awareness campaign "aggressively" encouraged advertisers to put the heat on Big Media to put the brakes on the worst, and most dangerous, of the Big Hate spew?
And what constitutes Big Hate? A few examples of the worst of the worst: the birther conspiracy; feds will take away your guns; Obama's more dangerous than al-Qaeda; Obama's a Muslim/Arab; and so on
Of course, none of this thoroughly discredited crap remotely fits under the rubric of good old nasty, rough and tumble American political opinion and commentary. It's black helicopter insanity.
If the Clear Channels and FNNs of the world start getting heat from advertisers concerned about the problem and rising public pressure, how long do you think it'll take for producers and on-air personalities to start getting heat from the front office?
What needs to happen to make pressure effective
This is not a one diary, one activist plan. Top progressive bloggers need to write about, promote and develop the following: a) plan and objectives for a "Stop Big Hate" push; b) anti-Big Hate website; c) campaign and volunteers to draft letters, emails, phone calls to advertisers; d) letter-to-the-editor effort in local markets to inform and draw support from the general public; e) launch date for national publicity rollout; f) program to book spokespersons on radio and cable news shows to talk about the issue.
Call it a shame campaign, if you will. Shame on any company that by advertising on programs that continually dish Big Hate, tacitly supports Big Hate. On the positive side, for cooperating companies, award a "I Refuse To Support Hate Speech" seal of approval and publicize their participation.
My guess, if the public begins to connect the dots between violent right-wing extremist hate talk and the advertising that supports it, either wittingly or unwittingly, action won't be long in coming.
Corporate advertisers will panic. Media self-interest should do the rest.