I want to talk about something that I have been spending more time thinking about. There seems to be a lot of people on television, on the radio, in the newspapers and even down at the local watering hole giving all types of political commentary. It seems that the whole some of pundits, or at least those with a stage to express their opinions, has grown quite large.
Rush Limbaugh has been on the radio, with a short-lived television show, for over 15 years now. Others such as Sean Hannity and Laura Ingram all speak for the Republican cause. Recently, Air America, which sought out to share their democratic views, was started with Al Franken the most notable. Of course, there also exists Bill O'Reilly, Joe Scarborough, Chris Matthews, Sean Hannity, Alan Colmes and others on the television screen.
With all this bombardment of information they give us, with all their opinions pieces and analyzation, a bell sounded in my head. How do these guys/gals know what they are talking about? They may have crews that research, they may do it themselves. But often times, I really feel that they simply take a ounce of truth, and stretch it for an hour.
Now, am I saying this is bad? Not at all, in fact it helps spur real debate in our country which is something I believe the founding fathers strongly desired. The issue as it occurs to me is that these people, all listed above, are only uttering facts and interpretations they want you to hear.
The big term that Conservative talk show hosts like to say about Liberals is that they drink the "kool-aid" being sent down their party. But to be honest, so do Conservatives. So who is right and who is wrong? Who is merely and instrument of a party and a intregal part of a bigger picture?
The answer to each question is all of us. On the show The Situation with Tucker Carlson, there was a guest who has recently published a book about Al Franken entitled “Pants on Fire: How Al Franken Lies, Smears and Deceives” by Alan Skorski. Skorski provided a small snippet from his book regarding a time that Rush Limbaugh had mentioned on his show that the majority of those earning minimum wage were teenagers. Franken had told his audience that he had researched the Bureau of Labor Statistics about that claim and then told anyone that would hear that Limbaugh was wrong. Problem? The Skorski of this book contacted the Bureau of Labor Statistics and with their help actually found out what Limbaugh had said was true and Franken had misled his audience.
Now, does my contempt for Franken make that sweeter? Yeah, it does. But in the bigger picture, this is what I feel it means. The following discussion took place during the same segment on Carlson's show with Skorski;
[Franken] cited a credible source, used it to smear Rush Limbaugh. This is his modus operandi. He cites a credible source, distorts the data and then uses that to attack, whether it‘s Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O‘Reilly, that‘s what he does. Because people figure if you cite a credible source...
CARLSON: Right.
SKORSKI: ... you‘re not going to lie about them, because then they say, we never said that.
CARLSON: Right. Also, honestly, apart from you, Alan Skorski, who is going to call the Bureau of Labor Statistics?
SKORSKI: Exactly.
CARLSON: Not many people.
How many people would? That my friends, that is the root cause of the growing number of pundits. Who actually checks the facts? We just believe that since these people have a platform to speak, they must be right. Limbaugh was a sportscaster, Franken a comic. What makes them anymore qualified than you and I. In fact, in reading throughout the blogosphere, I would venture to say that many of you are more able to give analysis of the political thearte.
I have been a fan of the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. I don't always like his leftist leaning views, but I like his style. We may get some of the facts right, most of them wrong, but at least we all laugh.
Tags: Pundits , Rush Limbaugh , Tucker Carlson , Al Franken .
0 comments:
Post a Comment