[Note: See my post-broadcast update here}
Yesterday on Hardball, Salon editor Joan Walsh quite correctly called right-wing media to task for being provocateurs who openly engage in inflammatory rhetoric that paranoid, racist, lunatics feed upon. She said:
“When Bill O‘Reilly goes on TV every night and calls Dr. Tiller a baby killer and a Nazi and a Mengele, and shows where he works, why do we put up with that? Why is that entertainment in our culture? It‘s demonizing a private citizen for doing a lawful job? Why are people doing that? Why is that acceptable?”
Why, indeed? Why are these people given platforms to spew such thinly veiled rationalizations of violence and hatred? Why are their baseless rants regarded as acceptable in the discourse of controversial issues? Why are their words not associated with the all too predictable consequences wrought by the entranced disciples who congregate on the ledge of sanity? And why do otherwise reasonable editors persist in lending their credibility to these media malignancies, as Joan Walsh has agreed to do?
After her remarks on Hardball, O’Reilly invited her to appear on his program to debate the issue. She inexplicably accepted. It is beyond ridiculous for her to agree to participate in what will surely be a manipulated exercise in justifying O’Reilly’s incitations and massaging his bloated ego. What can she possibly hope to accomplish? She won’t change his mind or those of his brainwash followers…er…viewers.
I have previously documented the multitude of reasons why all Democrats and progressives should refuse to appear on Fox News (Starve The Beast parts One, Two, and Three). O’Reilly, in particular, is well known for bullying his “guests” and for using his editorial control to dismiss and humiliate them. He isn’t interested in winning an argument on its merits when he can just shout you down and exploit the resulting chaos to enhance his ratings. Here is a simple primer for an encounter with O’Reilly:
The O’Reilly Interview 101
Ask direct yes or no questions where one answer is clearly reprehensible and the other is totally meaningless, and bully your guest into responding.
“Do you want the U.S. to lose in Iraq? Well, do you?”Create an association with an unpopular (preferably mischaracterized) opinion with the broadest attribution possible.
“Do you agree with Harry Belafonte, and the rest of the liberal establishment, that Venezuela should take over America?”Never concede on substance, even if your arguments are demonstrably false.
“Saddam Hussein did too meet with Osama Bin Laden at Michael Moore’s compound in Libya – Twice.”Employ ad hominims liberally.
“Why should anyone listen to a radical, Kool-Aid drinking, far-left loon like you?”Shout louder than your guests and interrupt frequently, especially when they are making a good point.
Walsh is making a mistake by sucking up to this demagogue and she should seriously consider canceling the appearance. She is not merely placing herself in a position where she will be disparaged and diminished, she is creating an opportunity for O’Reilly to project his venom on everyone with whom she presumes to represent. She is willfully doing harm to all of us who are fighting so fiercely against the sort on poisonous rhetoric that O’Reilly dispenses on a daily basis.
It’s not too late to tell Walsh to back out of the booking. She asked for advise on her Twitter stream. Let’s give her some. And you can speak out at her blog as well.
Update: Well, after the taping, Walsh blogged about the experience. It wasn’t pretty.
Even though she has already gone through with it, we can still let her know that it was a mistake.
