Inflammatory 'news' programs on the media

[Louie Crew <lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu>]

XXXXX wrote:

> One thing I can't stand from either side is a commentator/ranter who
> consistently invents inflammatory terms for those with whom the ranter
> disagrees: "feminazis," "priestesses," "neo-Bolsheviks," or whatever.
>  ....

I agree.  I particularly wince at such antics from "commentators" on the
left, with whom I am ideologically more comfortable.  Two whom I watch very
often raise these problems for me:   Keith and Rachel.

Keith Olbermann is not only childish with his "worst person in the world"
routines, he radically reduces the power of the critiques that he intends by
this series.

Rachel Maddow seems more restrained than Keith in her exposes, but sometimes
she blows relatively small offenses into major ones, especially if they have
'entertainment value.'   She loves the 'gottcha' that is not yet a
'gottcha,': the question she is asking quite fairly becomes less fair when
she holds her subjects guilty until they prove themselves innocent.

MSNBC is a great counter to Fox News; but it cedes too much of the network's
integrity when it acts on Fox's premise that entertainment must trump truth
at center stage.

I have always objected to pulling the legs off grasshoppers, not because I
am squeamish or faint hearted, but because I know myself easily suckered in
to the wrong expression of my views if I can just find an articulate leader
of the chorus to take the blame.

And I am not nostalgic for Walter, Dan, or Connie.

With apologies to those on the other side of the pond.

Louie