« The Idea of Scarcity | Main | Video of the Day: Eco Friendlier Building »
I've addressed political discourse before here, here and here. Each time I directed my comments at media figures whose rhetoric I find flawed. Talk radio host Mark Levin stood in as my most frequent example.
Here I want to take a look at the effect talk radio has on some of its listeners. It's useful to begin by referencing a May 28, 2009 segment on Mr. Levin's show:
MR. LEVIN: Mary, Westport, Connecticut, WABC, you're an independent. You don't like when I yell, do you Mary?Of course, on matters related to political discourse, Mr. Levin is anything but a regular guy. The average American male doesn't reach a nationwide radio audience, nor does he lose his temper and begin to yell angrily when confronted with people whose politics differ from his own.
MARY: No, no I don't. The point is this. I truly appreciate what you're doing. You have a clear mind, you present your arguments very clearly, you have background. But I want you every so often to step back. Because we need new people to listen to you. And if new people tune you in screaming, they're going to turn you off.
MR. LEVIN: Let me tell you something, Mary. Let me tell you, you're a very sweet Lady. But it takes all kinds. And the fact of the matter is, there are hosts out there that are NPR types. And they're out there. If you want to listen to them, listen to them. I'm very passionate about my views, and so I express them in a passionate way. I'm a regular guy. I'm a regular guy. (lowers voice) Regular guys don't always talk like this.(raises voice) Regular guys aren't cerebral 100 percent of the time. Regular guys are human beings. Get what I'm saying?
MARY: Yes, I do.
MR. LEVIN: All right, Mary, God bless you, my friend.
Unfortunately, some Mark Levin listeners imagine that his behavior is a model, and take it upon themselves to mimic the rhetorical style and attitude of the talk radio host in real life. One hardly needs to read between the lines to see that they aren't well served by doing so. Take the caller who conversed with Mr. Levin on his June 1, 2009 program. A fan of Los Angeles area talk radio host Larry Elder, he began the call by describing Mr. Levin as "Larry Elder with a bite, with a hard bite, and that's what I like about you."
The caller continued (emphasis added):
I'd just like to ask one more question. I'm not invited to a lot of parties anymore, because I hammer people and I try to get my point across, and I read your book, and I try to make people understand what's going on. But like you said they're drones, or they just don't care, they could care less where we're going. But my question is what the hell sacrifice has Obama made-- when the media is swooning over a $24,000 date he went on the other night with his wife, are we kidding? This guy is eating caviar on the back of the American worker, and he talks about sacrifice? It's sickening, we've got to figure out how to stop this guy, and I'd like to know from you, how do we stop him, or why do these people who've lost so much money already, why can't we stop him, and how do we do it?A responsible host might have said something like, "Look, if your attitude when you attend parties is to 'hammer people' with your politics -- and assume they're drones if they're unreceptive -- you're taking the wrong approach. Don't compromise your views, but try to communicate them respectfully, and do your best to understand where they're coming from so you can better convince them." But Mr. Levin can hardly preach the opposite of what he practices.
Or consider a Mark Levin listener named Cindi who I encountered in the comments section of a post on the blog Riehl World View. I'd criticized Mr. Levin for indulging a mean spirited sense of humor. In a followup comment, she began by saying that she too is a mean spirited person, and went on to say, "My humor, sarcasm is beyond the grasp of the liberal majority. This has cost me, have a few family members as well as friends who choose to cut me off. So be it."
I am hardly alone in observing that some people are entirely unpleasant if you get into a political conversation with them. Perhaps you knew someone in college like that? Or you have an uncle who ends up shouting about politics every Thanksgiving? These folks aren't all talk radio listeners, of course, but I do think that the rhetorical style employed by Mr. Levin and others with similar styles encourages listeners to imagine that political discourse is inherently adversarial, that politeness is a mark of insufficient conviction, and that bombast persuades better that pleasantly articulated arguments.
Common sense, electoral politics and personal experience lead me to the contrary conclusion that a conciliatory approach is more persuasive when addressing anyone who isn't already predisposed to accepting your conclusions.
Comments on this entry have been closed.