Faux News

I hardly know where to begin. Let's cut to the chase, my head hurts thinking about this too much.

First and foremost, let me simply state that Glenn Beck is a dick. I usually refrain from such terms and personal attacks (even against the deserving) leave a bad taste in my mouth but, BUT here is a man who's commitment to zealotry, fear-mongering and sensationalism go so far above and beyond (below and beneath?) the norm that I cannot help but comment. There are other talking heads that irritate me on the basis of their general misrepresentation of fact and shameless spin doctoring, warping words and deeds to fit an agenda; Glenn Beck has however succeeded in surpassing the usual standard.

This sort of carrying on is symptomatic of a mind either unable or unwilling to concede that A: there are some problems too big to be resolved by individuals or their local communities and B: that we are all, in fact, in this together. Personally, I think Beck believes his rhetoric (if it's deserving of the name) and consider him a genuine, if idiotic, ideologue. The case has been made to me though, that he's a phony, a hired shill who can and would be bought for a sufficient quantity.

It doesn't matter which of the numerous talking heads we're discussing, they all have the same basic modus operandi and they all are guilty of the same crime; they present themselves as legitimate journalists, as legitimate sources of information when what they are, in fact, is a bunch of politically and/or financially motivated spin doctors. The best of them are simply crossing the line between news and entertainment; the worst are knowingly and with malice of forethought exploiting the tendency of people to accept that which is entertaining or reinforces existing conceptions and the tendency of people to admire the intelligence of people saying things they already agree with or are entertained by. Long sentence, sorry.

In honesty, I've used the gambit myself. My preferred method of gaining consensus or changing minds is to make people laugh. It isn't always easy and it doesn't always work but in general people are more likely to look at something favorably if you can get them to laugh. Is it manipulative? Absolutely. It also works. So what makes me better than the likes of Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly or Limbaugh?

Well for starters I don't use my power to deride anyone else's ideas. I build my own up, I don't try to tear down others'. That said, it's worth noting that there is a difference between attacking someone or their ideas and pointing out the flaws in those ideas. The latter is potentially constructive, enabling a refinement and improvement of ideas while the former just tries to silence dissenting voices.