The undying law of the guild: One of our craziest citizens killed three people this weekend.
At the start of yesterday’s column, Frank Bruni reviewed the carnage. In the process, he asked a pair of questions which we found revealing:
BRUNI (4/15/14): Most of the hate crimes in the United States don’t take the fatal form that the shootings in Kansas over the weekend did, and most aren’t perpetrated by villains as bloated with rage and blinded by conspiracy theories as the person accused in this case, Frazier Glenn Miller. He’s an extreme, not an emblem.Miller is one of our craziest citizens. For many years, he’s been crazily fallen. His craziness has now produced tragedy.
This is someone who went on Howard Stern’s radio show four years ago (why, Howard, did you even hand him that megaphone?) and called Adolf Hitler “the greatest man who ever walked the earth.” When Stern asked Miller whether he had more intense antipathy for Jews or for blacks (why that question?), Miller chose the Jews, definitely the Jews, “a thousand times more,” he said.
“Compared to our Jewish problem, all other problems are mere distractions,” he declaimed, and he apparently wasn’t just spouting off. He was gearing up.
That said, we were struck by those questions to Howard Stern—by what those questions say about the way the press corps works.
Everyone knows why Howard Stern had this crazy man on his program! For decades, Stern has defined the low-IQ, “shock jock” culture which has dumbed our world way down.
We Americans used to get our public discussions carefully sifted for us. Walter and David selected the topics. As a general rule, they didn’t make up crazy shit or fill our heads with crazy claims.
Stern is one of the people who changed that. By now, it’s hard to get a TV or radio show unless you’re visibly nuts.
Stern put this crazy man on the air because that’s what a loud and dumb shock jocker does. But even now, Bruni has to pretend he doesn’t know that.
Everyone knows how this system works. And no, it isn’t just Howard Stern. For decades, it’s been Rush and Sean as well. Increasingly, it’s Rachel and Matthews too.
Bruni will never tell you that either. Like everyone else within the guild, he didn’t tell you about Matthews’ disgraceful conduct in 1999 and 2000. He certainly won’t tell you now.
The press corps never discusses the press corps. We’ve told you that for many years. Most people can’t see that it’s true.
Actually, Bob, you and Bruni are saying exactly the same thing. There is no good reason imaginable for even a "shock jock" to put such a hateful bigot on the air.
ReplyDeleteBut don't let that stop you from pretending you are saying something different.
And by the way, Bob. I happen to live in KC. Here is a little fact you may not know. At the time these random killings occurred, the Jewish Community Center was filled with hundreds of kids, and their parents, who were there to audition for a talent show.
I deeply resent your using any aspect of this tragedy as another club to beat one of your own despised targets with.
No, that's not what Bob is saying. Bob is saying the shock jock himself shouldn't be on the air. Bob is pointing out that when the Sterns of the world get shows, the Millers of the world will get a megaphone.
ReplyDeleteAnd please, stick you resentment where the sun don't shine.
No Matt: Bob is using this tragedy as a stick with which to club Rachel Maddow some more. It's so obvious, it barely merits mention.
DeleteAnd Chris Matthews for good measure.
DeleteAnd my God! Look at the game he plays. Howard Stern, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews? All the same to Bob.
And does Bob really think the whole "shock jock" schtick started with Stern? Is he truly that ignorant?
How dare anyone be critical of Rachel and Chris. That really sticks in my craw.
DeleteAdd insensitivity to victims of antisemitism to Somerby's list.
ReplyDeleteBruni's questions about this real killer's appearance on a radio program were parenthetical, designed as an aside to shame Stern.
The larger question is, especially, now why does Somerby have to pretend he does not know this?
I would have to call it more a micro-insensitivity.
DeleteOMB (BOB Auditions for Airtime)
ReplyDelete"it’s hard to get a TV or radio show unless you’re visibly nuts."
http://dailyhowler.blogspot.com/2014/04/frank-brunis-questions-for-howard-stern.html
KZ
And how is one "visibly" nuts?
DeleteWe’ve told you that for many years. Most people can’t see that it’s true.
DeleteKZ (Unable to pass on a set up like that. And we DO thank
you!)
Say good night, Gracie.
DeleteSomerby's take is accurate. The usual troll crew beg to differ.
ReplyDelete"I, for one, am shocked!"
Actually, no. Somerby's take on Bruni's column isn't an accurate reflection of what that column says in any way, shape or form.
DeleteBob merely read it until he found his club, then rushed to his computer to repeat a favorite narrative, one very pleasing to his rubes.
"The usual troll crew" - what a maroon!
Delete6:23 Bob may not have gone beyond the first paragraph or two.
Delete6:46 Are you not proud to be with the Usuals. We will happily sign you transfer papers so you can serve with the Legion of Unusual Trolls or the Troll Special Forces. But keep in mind the Usual Crew gets the easy pickings here at TDH. The regulars can't think of anything substantive that requires much thought in a comeback and Maddow pays double for every mention of her name on sites her staff has put on the "Threatening" list.
Nice satire. Especially the part about Somerby being put on a "threatening" list.
DeleteNo, sadly, his poor blog is hardly a threat to anyone.
And besides, they're not even trolls, they're just butt-hurt Maddow fans.
Delete"... can't think of anything substantive ...." Project much?
DeleteYou might want to remove your tinfoil hat once in awhile - it's obviously too tight.
Slightly off topic: did you notice Bill Maher's rant against dumb right winger radio talkers? He laid out a pretty complete list as part of his quite appropriate attack on scummy Mike Rodgers. BUT, conspicuous as hell in his absence was Bill's old pal Dennis Miller, who is absolutely on parr with the worst and creepiest of the brood. Those in the stand up wise guy's club watch each other's backs, I guess, or these two have the same agent....
ReplyDeleteReminds me somewhat of this famous Bartcop rant. A bit dated by now, but I think the broad point still holds true:
Deletehttp://www.bartcop.com/libbias.htm
Haven't read Bartcop in years. Is he still living?
DeleteAnswered my own question. Too bad the cancer got him. And thanks for libbias.
DeleteUnlike those others, Dennis Miller was actually funny, once upon a time. I wonder if he still does this bit, but I'm guessing not:
Delete"The Deep South? I've been there, and, to be frank, I find those people anything but deep.''
On Alabama: ''Talk about Darwin's waiting room.''
On West Virginia: ''It makes Mayberry look like a think tank.''
"We Americans used to get our public discussions carefully sifted for us. Walter and David selected the topics. As a general rule, they didn’t make up crazy shit or fill our heads with crazy claims.
ReplyDeleteStern is one of the people who changed that."
Yeah Bob. Back in the sixties you and the cats really grooved to the stax of wax filtered by Uncle Walter and Crazy Beard Brinkley spinning the tunes on AM 590 KGEEZ! Everyone knows how cool they were till Stern took over. Now none of the press will mention the day the DJ's died.
Too bad you're not as clever as you think you are.
DeleteBummer.
Delete"We Americans used to get our public discussions carefully sifted for us."
DeleteYeah, these days, any idiot can have a blog.
Interesting post. I'm not at all convinced the public is or was better served when information was "carefully sifted". Falls too far in line with the "manufactured consent" theory of governance.
ReplyDeleteExactly. Bob yearns for the day when two men decided our topics for discussion, his hyperbole noted. And he thinks Howard Stern did much to change that.
DeleteWell, no, Bob. Blame the inventor of the Internet, whoever that may be. You also might blame the guy who took the initiative during his service in Congress to put it in every home.
This has made a massive difference in the way we get our information these days, and it's amazing that a guy whose been blogging for 16 years fails to see that. Our sources of information have been de-centralized.
I tried to point this out during the "Rodeo Clown" flap that everybody with a Smartphone and a Facebook account can be a reporter and get a story out that travels around the world before the next sunrise.
Bob only saw that story as another excuse to club his targets for using the "R-word."
Today's "news" is still a product of careful sifting, just of a different nature. One rarely hears these days that all this began when network execs began expecting their news divisions to turn a profit.
ReplyDeleteToday there is endless howling about how too much money is ruining our politics. But money considerations ruined our news a long time ago. If only Rachel would occasionally produce a 17 minute diatribe on news-for-profit versus news-as-public-service.
But then she'd be running the risk of changing America, after which she'd be stuck making do with Walter Cronkite money rather than aspring to Bill O'Reilly money.
Follow the money, in all directions.