DO SOME RADIO TALK SHOWS FAN THE FLAMES OF HATE UPON THE UNBALANCED

[Tom Wells]

Obviously that's supposed to say ^^ "can come".

Whoops

 

[RR Piper]

Gregg-Here's another link for you:

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253055&kaid=127&subid=171

This type of language has been used for years by both sides. I think your opinion is coming through loud and clear and don't believe you are open to all sides of this discussion.

 

[gregg75]

That's from the DLC, never even heard of them. They are not the DNC.

Regardless, bulls-eyes or circles don't equal rifle scopes. The political climate is a lot
more strained now than back then.

This post is not really focusing on Sara Palin, that's another can of worms. This post
deals with radio and over the top hosts who are out of control.

I'm not saying the Tucson shooter listened to talk radio, but what about the next guy
who is walking around waiting for that push to set him off that he's VERY likely to get
from talk radio?

 

[Talk_Dude]

I'm not saying the Tucson shooter listened to talk radio, but what about the next guy
who is walking around waiting for that push to set him off that he's VERY likely to get
from talk radio?

VERY likely? You know for a fact that it is VERY likely? That mythical nut-job you're talking about won't be set off by a headline in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution? He won't be set off as a reaction to seeing too many billboards in a language he can't read, or even in an alphabet he doesn't recognize? He won't be set off as a reaction to the little voices in his head that only he can hear? He won't be set off as a reaction to the girl he wishes was his girlfriend picking a popular guy instead of him? He won't be set off because he wants to impress Jodi Foster?

No, you're certain that it's VERY likely that it will be talk radio that sets him off.

Sorry, pal, I'm nowhere near as certain of that as you are.

 

[gregg75]

You need to wake up. These type of Tucson shootings are happening more and more.
I don't think I see random massacres of innocent people suddenly ending.

Many things can trigger an unbalanced person and radio is one of them!

 

[flashback]

You need to wake up. These type of Tucson shootings are happening more and more.
I don't think I see random massacres of innocent people suddenly ending.

Many things can trigger an unbalanced person and radio is one of them!

so can movies,three stooges shorts,news of bad economy just about anything that a person sees and hears.should we censer everything ?should we become a police state in that way?or do we pick and choose according to our personal agenda?

 

[InSearchOfGear]

I see nothing on that map linking it to the DNC. That map could have been done by
anybody........even the anti-DNC.

Hmmm. Please report back here what you ultimately find to be the case.

 

[InSearchOfGear]

I think what we are seeing is the death of manners.
That being said, "manners' are often leftover remnants of days when it was acceptable to have a social structure
with class-consciousness "mannerisms" extended and rigidly enforced through all levels including slavery.

We reject such manners based in inequity rightly.
Do not be sad for the death of such forced "manners".

The death of manners now means a day come come where Courtesy instead may grow.
It is a different thing entirely, and is extended to all equally.

It can start now, by common acclaim.

Hear hear!

 

[InSearchOfGear]

I'm not saying the Tucson shooter listened to talk radio, but what about the next guy
who is walking around waiting for that push to set him off that he's VERY likely to get
from talk radio?

VERY likely? You know for a fact that it is VERY likely? That mythical nut-job you're talking about won't be set off by a headline in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution? He won't be set off as a reaction to seeing too many billboards in a language he can't read, or even in an alphabet he doesn't recognize? He won't be set off as a reaction to the little voices in his head that only he can hear? He won't be set off as a reaction to the girl he wishes was his girlfriend picking a popular guy instead of him? He won't be set off because he wants to impress Jodi Foster?

No, you're certain that it's VERY likely that it will be talk radio that sets him off.

Sorry, pal, I'm nowhere near as certain of that as you are.

All valid points, and the Tucson shooter is obviously a nutcase, but not all assassins are. Some are just normal individuals pushed over the edge after years of frustration and brainwashing.

 

[gregg75]

I'm not calling for censorship. I'm just saying it's time we expose these hypocritical
talk show nut jobs for what they are.

As I said before I don't listen to them, but others do. Here is one woman from the U.K.
on the internet today and her take on Tucson......

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/jan/12/arizona-shooting-arizona

Frankly, I've said all I have to say. Now, I'm just repeating myself over and over. I'm not
here to defend the left or the right......I'm here as an American who has had enough!

Continue your love affair with the radio nuts. This is THE END of this thread for me.

 

[Talk_Dude]

You need to wake up. These type of Tucson shootings are happening more and more.
I don't think I see random massacres of innocent people suddenly ending.

Many things can trigger an unbalanced person and radio is one of them!

Actually, they aren't happening that much more, when taken as a percentage of population. Now that America has 309,000,000 people in it, there will be more things of all kinds taking place.

What is happening more is improved reporting of events like this. When an assasin tried to kill FDR and killed the Mayor of Chicago instead in 1930, it made the news, but there was no 24/7 media that dominated peoples' attention for days and days.

The one tiny little kernel of truth in what you say is that radio is one of many different things that can trigger an unbalanced person. That list of "many" is probably far longer than you can even imagine. Since it is impossible to control the many things that can trigger an unbalanced person, the best course of action is to control unbalanced persons, not the things which might trigger them.

 

[Jay F]

On ABCs Good Morning America they talked to a friend of Jared Loughner and asked him about the killers likes,dislikes, hobbies, etc. One of the things he said was that Jared did NOT listen to political talk radio. This does not surprise me at all. He does not fit the profile of a talk radio listener, if anything because of his age.

I am the rare exception who has listened to talk radio since my early teens. Over 3 decades later I am still younger than the average talk radio listener and I (and those who know me) would consider myself docile, non-violent, and harmless.

Go to any maximum security prison today and you will not find very many political talk radio fans, As angry as some of the talk hosts get they never promote the idea of killing anybody. They quite logically believe change takes place through VOTING not killing.

I would go as far as saying that if only political talk radio listeners lived in this country (which I would not like at all because there would be a severe shortage of women) we would live in a very safe, near crime free utopia. Talk radio listeners as a group are harmless, just better informed and more interested in conservative politics than average.

I would hope (but am not holding my breath) that as we learn more about Jared and discover that he is severly mentally ill and not an especially political person the calls for censorship will end.

 

[InSearchOfGear]

The one tiny little kernel of truth in what you say is that radio is one of many different things that can trigger an unbalanced person. That list of "many" is probably far longer than you can even imagine. Since it is impossible to control the many things that can trigger an unbalanced person, the best course of action is to control unbalanced persons, not the things which might trigger them.

I think the real point is here is that some irresponsible people are masquerading as responsible people. You can't get rid of all the nutcase organizations that sew hate, nor their websites. Intelligent and responsible radio hosts, however, do have the capacity to tone down the BS that contributes to the problem. In other words, since they're allegedly not radical nuts, perhaps they shouldn't act like them.

 

[Talk_Dude]

The one tiny little kernel of truth in what you say is that radio is one of many different things that can trigger an unbalanced person. That list of "many" is probably far longer than you can even imagine. Since it is impossible to control the many things that can trigger an unbalanced person, the best course of action is to control unbalanced persons, not the things which might trigger them.

I think the real point is here is that some irresponsible people are masquerading as responsible people. You can't get rid of all the nutcase organizations that sew hate, nor their websites. Intelligent and responsible radio hosts, however, do have the capacity to tone down the BS that contributes to the problem. In other words, since they're allegedly not radical nuts, perhaps they shouldn't act like them.

You raise an interesting point when you say "masquerading as responsible people". Some of the most hateful movements in human history have been lead by calm-sounding, rational-appearing, soft-spoken polite demagogues. Personally, I prefer that crazy people act like it so that they can be easily recognized. I fear the silver-tongued devil far more than the blathering nut-case.

One of the most terrifying stories I read as a teenager was about how a new school took over an elementary school class after the country had lost a war. She sweetly and charmingly convinced the children in less than half an hour that it was for their mommy and daddies own good that they were taken away to have the bad thoughts in their heads replaced with good thoughts, and that praying to God was silly but asking the teacher for candy made sense. The old saying about flies and honey is true about a lot of things. It's also a much more effective propaganda tool to keep people in line.

When the voices on the radio are all polite and soothing, then no one will notice if they raise an alarm. There's a good reason why fire trucks and ambulances have loud, jarring sirens and not soft, gentle bells like an ice cream truck.

 

[Wildstyle K]

I must admit - I am loving this 6th page of talk here! Most of it is good, but the following;

On ABCs Good Morning America they talked to a friend of Jared Loughner and asked him about the killers likes,dislikes, hobbies, etc. One of the things he said was that Jared did NOT listen to political talk radio. This does not surprise me at all. He does not fit the profile of a talk radio listener, if anything because of his age.

I am the rare exception who has listened to talk radio since my early teens. Over 3 decades later I am still younger than the average talk radio listener and I (and those who know me) would consider myself docile, non-violent, and harmless.

Go to any maximum security prison today and you will not find very many political talk radio fans, As angry as some of the talk hosts get they never promote the idea of killing anybody. They quite logically believe change takes place through VOTING not killing.

I would go as far as saying that if only political talk radio listeners lived in this country (which I would not like at all because there would be a severe shortage of women) we would live in a very safe, near crime free utopia. Talk radio listeners as a group are harmless, just better informed and more interested in conservative politics than average.

I would hope (but am not holding my breath) that as we learn more about Jared and discover that he is severly mentally ill and not an especially political person the calls for censorship will end.

This tops it all. As a matter of fact, I should print out many copies of this and make exterior home wall paper out of it so everyone can see it because it was so perfectly said.

Honestly, I've been avoiding and intentionally not following this entire story - mostly to avoid having to see or hear some of the (serious & actually believed) absurdity and conspiracy theories that it would cause to come out of people's mouths, but I'm surely glad that I took the chance, logged in to this 6th page here, and saw what I've quoted (in addition to a few other details).

Since I don't know much (some, but not much) about the details on this issue, and the only thing I've read here regarding this was this sixth page, I really have nothing more to contribute here.

 

[RoddyFreeman]

Did anyone see that Rush Limbaugh's affiliate in Tucson, KNST, put up a billboard that said, "Rush Limbaugh - Straight Shooter." They were forced to take it down yesterday.

 

[EW0350]

In Tucson, with their sheriff, I wouldn't doubt they made the billboard come down.

I've been in the business, and I know how it works. I've watched it work. I know it can work. American broadcasting is the freest in the world. We don't want to throw that heritage away in an effort to respond to a maniacal mind's visciousness.

But we need to get serious about these talkers and their influence on the media and the public. We need to cancel (or suspend) all political discussion on the public airwaves; satellite radio is fine because you have to pay for it, and can't just stumble on it as you randomly span the dial.

We need to require all newspapers to cease editorials; their opinions might inspire someone on the edge to do something violent.

Goats and sheep images would be banned.

Only pre-1968 Walt Disney movies can be shown in theaters, and certain scenes in BAMBI, DUMBO and SNOW WHITE would need to be edited to eliminate emotional stress for young viewers; i.e. Bambi's mother is only wounded; Dumbo's mother is not chained but restrained by voice command, and Snow White doesn't die, just takes a non-lethal overdose of Unisom.

We need to ban all outdoor,print, television or display advertising featuring females since an unbalanced sex offender might be stimulated to perform an act on an innocent 14-year old, male or female.

All talk show hosts must be rounded up and sent to government sponsored re-education centers to learn all the nuances of "political correctness." Only after they have passed a careful screening conducted by a Select Committee of The House of Representatives would they be allowed to return to the air for no ore than 1 hour every other day every other week. Their grade on the examination must be announced at the beginnning of each broadcast. Everything they say must be scripted; no phone calls would be permitted.

All radio statons should be required to play nothing but Mantovanni albums 24 hours a day.

Is this what we want? Is this where we're headed?

Okay, so I'm a little over the top, but I think you get my drift. If we let this hysteria get too out of control, this is how things might go. Though I'm not a fan of the President, I'm anxious to see if he will follow his own advice and impose it on his cadre. Maybe leadership by example like that might work and we can get this nation back on track.

 

[Tom Wells]

EW350. Love your input, but over the top is currently the problem.
Please restate in terms that recognizes everyone on the same ground.
I agree with the satirical point made, now suggest a workable change to effect improvement our public discourse,
and radio in particular.

Editorials are very important. They are what will FEED our convictions, for right or wrong.
They NEED to be accurately set apart from the "other" body of info, with a "more agreed upon" objectivity
that is supposed to be an underlying fudamental of journalism and considered "new stories".

I again strongly suggest manifest courtesy as a most useful tool for making progress.
Reject any voice that would help anyone decide to close their mind, on air or not.

Otherwise, we become just as crazy as the people we call "terrorists".

 

[EW0350]

Paul White used to tell CBS Radio staff, "Tell 'em what you going to tell 'em, tell 'em, then tell 'em what you told 'em." What's wrong with that approach to radio and TV editorials? Clearly identify the topic, and the positiion from which it is being commented upon. What's wrong with requiring some kind of identification of qualifications? (i.e., Dr. Laura with a doctorate in physiology commenting on psychological disorders) What's wrong with making a serious offer to express opposing views?

Beck, Savage, Limbaugh -- all go on hour long rants and are never seriously challenged by their listeners. When a caller does get on the air, it usually isn't for long, and their response is tightly controlled.

Let's get back on radio a practice of presenting serious discussion, not the fringes or speculative points. That's entertainment; keep it on George Norri's show. If the aim of the show is to stir up political discussiion, be prepared to make it balanced.

I know this sounds like I'm advocating for the return of the Fairness Doctrine, but I'm not. That doctrine, if taken to its fullest possible extension, would demand balance in reporting, not just opinion. We don't need balanced news; let people make up their own minds after they see the facts -- if the newscasters will make the effort to accurately present the facts without trying to skew them to one side or the other.

How's that for some positive, constructive criticism?

 

[flashback]

if hosts took calls without call screeners it would keep the hosts from stacking the deck on the calls mostly being in support of the host.it would bring up chalanges to their points more.