Ethnography Part 1: My three year experiment with left-right talk radio
My three year experiment with left-right talk
radio
From
2010-2012 I co-hosted a weekday radio talk show with liberal San Francisco activist
and author Patrick O’Heffernan. I had forged a reputation as a conservative radio
host and author who often interviewed liberals and who strove to engage in
constructive dialogue. My past guests included such left luminaries as Noam
Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Gloria Steinum and Congressman Barney Frank who I ended
up running against in the 2004 election.
Patrick
and I rotated as hosts, by phone, and we scheduled an equal number of guests, authors,
and personalities from both the left and the right. I noticed certain
predictable patterns emerge from my co-host early on and these became more
intense as time went by. My analysis of his behavior and that of many of our liberal
guests, along with my own experience as a former liberal who grew up in and who
continues to operate in a liberal enviornment, instructs my opinions and offers
me a prespective based upon careful
study and inside experience.
Patrick
rarely engaged in what could be described as a normal exchange of ideas and
opinions. He was all about winning at any cost and he world resort to dirty
tactics which he deliverd with an inpenetratable air of authority and erudition.
I did not view the show as a contest and while I enjoy persuasion and political
combat I’m not afraid to be wrong. Talking with Patrick on the air often felt
like I was talking to a taped message.
I
soon realized that Patrick lied to win his arguments and, worse, that he occasionally
initiated a lie to catch me off guard. While on the air, it was obviously impossible
for me to do the research required to refute his often outlandish contentions
in real time. I would conduct the research later and, the next day, I would politely
raise the contradiction. While he would respond by acknowledging that he was
wrong, when confronted by evidence, he would wait about a week and go back to
pushing the same lie as if nothing had happened. In the early part of our work
together, I naievly didn’t catch the lie but as time went on I began to call
him out. The result was that our professional and personal relationship eventually
desintigrated. I started to notice this same pattern with other liberals, as
well as a tendency on their part to severely constrict their exposure to
opposing opinion. This has led me to wonder whether liberals operate in a
fantasy world of their own ideological construction.
Patrick
often behaved brutally with our conservative guests especially when they were women.
If Patrick felt he couldn’t defend his liberal position with a guest,
particularly an author, or if he felt that the author presented a case
devastating to his liberal belief, he would approach the interview by literally
changing the subject and sticking to irrelevant to the interview. When
interviewing Dr. Judith Reisman, author of Sexual Sabatoge, he insisted on
discussing some current controversy about advertising at high school football
games, which had absolutely nothing to do with Dr. Reisman’s research. Other
times, in classic leftist agit-prop style, in order to discredit an author or a
columnist he didn’t want to answer to he would uncover some miniscule mistake,
an outdated footnote, a wrong date, and he would procede to pound away at it in
an attempt to hurt their credibility and avoid the relevant subject.
Patrick
consistently conformed to a liberal party line. I would prep for the afternoon
show by listening to progressive Boston radio host Jeff Santos. With rare exceptions,
Patrick, during our opening dialogue before we invited our guest to join us,
would regurgitate the exact same talking points that were mouthed by Jeff
Santos earlier in the day. Not only would Patrick parrot the same ideas and
items, but he would deliver his comments often using the exact same words that
Jeff used and even the same mannerisms and intonations. I have observed, over
time, that liberals tend to engage in group-think and they rarely deviate.
Certainly
conservatives lie and conform from time to time but I have noticed a trend
amongst liberals in this regard which has led me to speculate over the
possibility that lying and conformity is more than a casual event for them but,
rather, this is something that they internalize as a basic and necessary part
of their ideology. They seem to feel justified in these practices as they think
that such actions preserve and advance their idea of progress and are thus
justified. Perhaps this reflects the old communist maxim: “You’ve got to break
a few eggs to make an omelet.”