There is a God and he's American!
Nate Silver, fresh off his $700,000 book deal, posted an excellent article about the differences between conservative and liberal radio. For those unfamiliar, Heartless and Brainless tabbed Silver as the World's Greatest Statistician back in August. He is full of delicious wisdom. The lengthy quote from David Foster Wallace is just the whip cream on top.
His main thesis is that right-wing radio stimulates people while liberal radio engages people's minds. Compare Rush Limbaugh's pleas for outrage with the monotone of All Things Considered. Rush wants to create a visceral, subconscious loathing of his target. NPR wants to give people time for the ideas to soak in.
That's the promise of Obama's victory. Republicans and Democrats don't have to love each other. They do need to listen, see things from their opponent's perspective, and solidify the common ground.
3 comments:
This is the silliest thing I've ever heard (to use excessive hyperbole). Rush points out what others will not point out. He does stimulate. Viscerally and intellectually. Liberal talk radio (I can only think of NPR with any longevity) talks about ideas as if they're accepted laws of nature. Rush challenges "conventional" thinking. He satires the silliness that pervades the political debate and provides a voice to those who share his opinions through their own convictions. I've got nothing against liberal talk shows but they certainly do not hold a monopoly on ideas and thinking.
If by "challenges 'conventional' thinking," you mean challenges rational thinking, then I would agree with you. Otherwise I tend to favor the assessment that conservative talk shows use fear, ignorance, and bigotry to motivate listeners, while liberal talk shows tend to favor logic and rational thinking. However, I would also agree with Nate Silver that the visceral conservative hosts are more effective through their means (for what that's worth)--I just disagree with those means on a moral basis.
Post a Comment