An Observation

While driving across country the past couple of days, I spent a fair amount of time checking out the AM radio dial. As I'm sure most of you are aware, it is dominated by right-wing talk shows , mostly syndicated stuff like Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Medved, etc. As I traveled over many miles, I got a chance to sample all of these. Not once did I come across a more liberal-oriented program-- though I know they exist, they are in a clear and distinct minority. I also noticed, hearing one after the other (not whole programs I admit) I was struck that all were commenting on President Obama's selection for the Supreme Court and all were criticizing the pick in exactly the same terms and using exactly the same examples to support their points. Here's the point I'd like to make-- these guys all deny they are working from a common set of talking points, but I've noticed this phenomenon over and over again (I take a lot of long car trips), that they are in lock-step with regard to the topic for the day, the point to be made about that topic, and the terms they use to make that point. How can this be coincidence? There was one exception, that I heard, and I find his program to be the most listenable of the bunch, namely Dennis Miller. I don't agree with his political views any more than I do with the others mentioned, but at least he mixes things up and talks about other things (like sports and movies) in a manner that is generally engaging, while the other one-note clones become boring very quickly (to me anyway). The other thing that is sort of striking about this, is that all of these guys are dead set against the re-institution of the FCC rule known as the Farness Doctrine (which Reagan revoked twenty-five years or so ago, which was a boon to the rise of right-wing talk radio), suggesting that it will destroy open debate. If the current state of talk radio, where you basically hear the same position parroted over and over through much of the country, across the dial and around the clock, is considered open debate, then we've kind of lost sight of what true democratic dialogue is supposed to sound like. But of course what's really at risk is not open debate, but rather-- as far as AM radio is concerned-- a monopoly of one ideological perspective masquerading as a consensus.