There is a growing campaign to persuade advertisers to stop running ads on Glenn Beck's show on Fixed Noise. Stephen Colbert had a piece on it last night. You can go around the blogs and find others who are supporting this movement.
Let me make this clear: I do not. I think this is a dangerous tool to play with, it is like going hunting with hand grenades.
There is probably nothing wrong, in and of itself, to point out to companies that they may be hurting themselves by sponsoring an ignorant racist. But if the goal is to kick Beck off the air, that's wrong.
I believe in free speech. I believe that the antidote to hate speech is more speech. Don't let the smears go unanswered, make fun of Beck to your heart's content. (That's not terribly hard, by the way, as Beck would have to spend months in dedicated study to become as ignorant as Sarah Palin.) When someone advances propaganda and hatred and lies the way that Fox News does, the cure is to counter it, not to try and shut them down.
Trying to shut off someone's message because you do not like it is the antithesis of a free society. it is no different from when the Wingnuts were trying to do the same to David Letterman or to Family Guy.
It is an evil tactic. I urge people to knock that shit off.
It’s Usually The Rich That Behave Poorly
26 minutes ago
10 comments:
Agree. I admit some measure of schadenfreude when I hear about advertisers dropping of weepy Beck's show. Really, who would want to be associated with that much crazy? But that's different than trying to shut his show down.
It's discouraging how resonant Glenn's "be afraid, be very afraid" message is with a segment of citizens. But yes, the best thing to do is enjoy TDS & Colbert and laugh at it.
Complete agreement here.
Also, I just want to say how much I enjoy your writing, both here and at Babies in Open. You often say, better than I can, what I have been thinking. And when we disagree, I find that I have to really think in order to rebut your points. This is very valuable.
Best
Yogi
Money talks, and the megacorps have used the "free speech" clause to use their millions in campaign contributions to buy the politicians they want. Now you have a problem with common folks vocally saying they're not going to spend their dollars with the advertisers who support Bleck?
I guess I can see your point, but I disagree. I don't see any problem with consumers using their freedom of expression economically in addition to vocally.
Bull shit. Just bull shit. It would be one thing if we really had the ability to fight back. We don't have accesss, in general. They have all of Faux and plenty of MSM. Who have we got? Olbermann and Maddow. How many people hear them? It would be different if it was still the law that the opposite opinion had to be allowed. We are in a gun fight and you are arguing to use knives. Fuck them. We are demonstrating some clout and if this son of a bitch can be shut up, good job. Some of the others might learn from the lesson.
I am to agree with you. Lockwood makes some good points as well.
In all reality, Beck's ad problems are not going to change anything. Fox has said that they are not losing money. They just shuffle the ads around until the whole thing blows over.
Thanks for the link - Beck, though a nutjob, is entitled to his point of view and he has a mic to say it; you and I do not.
That said, if an advertiser wants to pimp their wares on a show like that, it is their decision to make (that is also a form of free speach). I am glad that some of these companies do not want to be associated with the sort of vile hate that he spews.
Regards,
Tengrain
I know very little about this Beck character. I don't watch his show or any of Fox News, and I'm probably one of the few Republican voting people that read this site.
I'm in agreement that we really don't need to be trying to strong-arm anybody into dropping support for a show because of the political views of the host. It's not something I consider when doing private business and I'd hope it's not something that my clients look into when considering hiring me.
That said, I can totally understand why folks are dropping Beck. The guy's nuts. He absolutely lost his shit a few weeks ago on his radio show. Just go look for the audio of him screaming "get off my phone!!!" in a tone that has no place in any public discussion. It's not even angry -- it's unhinged.
I would not want my business associated with that.
Gug, you really think that an advertiser boycott will cause Fox to shut off Beck's mike? I don't think so, not for a picosecond. Fox is the propaganda network for the Wingnuts and nothing is going to change that.
What it will also do is allow Beck to take on the Mantle of Persecution; he and the other conservative gasbags will wail about how "them eevil lib'ruls are trying to stop Beck from speaking".
My sincere compliments, E-B. I agree with you. Your post makes a very clear and important point about free speech that a great many Americans (and some of your readers) confuse or misinterpret. Free speech must be afforded everyone, not just that of those with whom we happen to agree. To deprive anyone of the right to speak freely is to diminish our right to the same, as the examples provided by the previous administration's eight-year reign showed on an almost daily basis.
Sorry, but you're totally full of shit.
No one is trying to "silence" Beck. They are simply pointing out to Beck's advertisers the consequences of sponsoring the ability for him to propagate his speech on a massive national media outlet--i.e., exercising their own free speech rights.
If that has the effect of sponsors shifting their advertising dollars elsewhere, and Beck ends up losing his national mass media platform, and has to just blog like you and me, then that is simply the free market for free speech in action.
Post a Comment