Big radio victory; now the rest of the story.

[Fall River]

This is Rant, Opinion, and observation. And you are welcome to think whatever you want, as usual.

I assume that many of you have heard the story of how talk-radio began, as told by Rush Limbaugh.

The problem, as I see it, is that the story was never completed because, if it was completed, it wouldn't have been favorable to the rosy outcome as presented.

Here's the story: Once upon a time, there were Walter Cronkite type newscasters who had a monopoly on carefully slanting the news in favor of the left.

Then in 1988 Rush Limbaugh came along with a very popular radio program and many others followed, like Sean Hannity.

So, according to the story, it was a big victory for talk-radio whereby the left-wing media lost their monopoly.

And, basically, that would be the end of the story.

But I believe the story would be more complete by acknowledging that that is why the mainstream media is the way it is today.

In other words, every action brings forth a reaction. The left was not going to just sit there and let talk-radio have the advantage.

As a consequence, now radio talk-show hosts are constantly informing us how unfair the mainstream media is in their reporting.

Well, duh. That was basically all the left could come up with in their attempt to take back their advantage.

As Paul Harvey would say, "Now you know the rest of the story."

[donttread]

This is Rant, Opinion, and observation. And you are welcome to think whatever you want, as usual.

I assume that many of you have heard the story of how talk-radio began, as told by Rush Limbaugh.

The problem, as I see it, is that the story was never completed because, if it was completed, it wouldn't have been favorable to the rosy outcome as presented.

Here's the story: Once upon a time, there were Walter Cronkite type newscasters who had a monopoly on carefully slanting the news in favor of the left.

Then in 1988 Rush Limbaugh came along with a very popular radio program and many others followed, like Sean Hannity.

So, according to the story, it was a big victory for talk-radio whereby the left-wing media lost their monopoly.

And, basically, that would be the end of the story.

But I believe the story would be more complete by acknowledging that that is why the mainstream media is the way it is today.

In other words, every action brings forth a reaction. The left was not going to just sit there and let talk-radio have the advantage.

As a consequence, now radio talk-show hosts are constantly informing us how unfair the mainstream media is in their reporting.

Well, duh. That was basically all the left could come up with in their attempt to take back their advantage.

As Paul Harvey would say, "Now you know the rest of the story."

Cronkite was perhaps slanted but nowhere near like modern media. He did not deliberately edit out numbers he didn't like and develop pieces full of half truths to shape a country's opinion and if he had the other networks would have called him out on it. So would of mainstream rebups and dems!

[patrickt]

This is Rant, Opinion, and observation. And you are welcome to think whatever you want, as usual.

I assume that many of you have heard the story of how talk-radio began, as told by Rush Limbaugh.

The problem, as I see it, is that the story was never completed because, if it was completed, it wouldn't have been favorable to the rosy outcome as presented.

Here's the story: Once upon a time, there were Walter Cronkite type newscasters who had a monopoly on carefully slanting the news in favor of the left.

Then in 1988 Rush Limbaugh came along with a very popular radio program and many others followed, like Sean Hannity.

So, according to the story, it was a big victory for talk-radio whereby the left-wing media lost their monopoly.

And, basically, that would be the end of the story.

But I believe the story would be more complete by acknowledging that that is why the mainstream media is the way it is today.

In other words, every action brings forth a reaction. The left was not going to just sit there and let talk-radio have the advantage.

As a consequence, now radio talk-show hosts are constantly informing us how unfair the mainstream media is in their reporting.

Well, duh. That was basically all the left could come up with in their attempt to take back their advantage.

As Paul Harvey would say, "Now you know the rest of the story."

How gracious of you to allow the lowly folks to have their own opinion. Now, consider Walter Duranty.

"Walter Duranty was a New York Times reporter whom his greatest critics claim covered up Stalin’s crimes. He was part of an intellectual class spellbound by Soviet economic policy. Editor Oswald Garrison Villard, in a 1929 article called “Russia from a Car Window,” could hardly contain himself in his endorsement, despite speaking no Russian and never having met a Russian peasant: “This, I repeat, is the most stupendous governmental feat ever undertaken—the social, moral, political, industrial, economic emancipation of a people and its reorganization upon the basis of service to the society and to the nation, with the profit-making motive suddenly removed from the individual.” He was sure that “the minority which controls the destiny of Russia is on its way with extraordinary and completely unselfish devotion, with the fiercest determination to succeed at any cost.” To the charge that the Russian communists were fanatics he shot back: “Who else but fanatics would have the course for the task or could be relied upon to drive through to the end without essential compromise?” Such a task required something more than “timid or half-way reformers.” The Soviet dictatorship wasn’t really so bad, since the ruling party was “working for the good of the masses of the working people.”
https://www.historyonthenet.com/walter-duranty-new-york-times

The slavish devotion of the mainstream media to the left started long, long before Rush Limbaugh.

When I grew up I was trying to be grown-up and made a political comment when my father and grandfather were talking politics. My grandfather explained I was yet someone who could have a political opinion because others were paying my dues. His rules for citizens were that you had to pay your taxes, you did your time in the military if called, you voted in every election, and you read both newspapers every day. He went on to explain that one of our newspapers, the morning paper, was solid Democrats and the other paper, the afternoon paper, was Republican. He said they both lied but if you read both you could sometime figure out what had really happened.

Now, there's two problems. One is many cities don't have two newspapers, the television media is dominated by leftists and they don't report what's happened they simply make up what they want, and the left has launched a coup.

Rush Limbaugh came along late enough that I never paid a lot of attention to him. When I was on midnight shift and the weekday nights were long and quiet I listened to Alan Berg. He was successful enough he was assassinated. From Alan Berg I learned that only fools argue with those who control the media. If you pose a good argument they simply turn you off. That's what Sixty-Minutes​ did with Gov. DeSantis recently. They turned his excellent response to their inane question off with dishonest editing.

[Fall River]

Cronkite was perhaps slanted but nowhere near like modern media. He did not deliberately edit out numbers he didn't like and develop pieces full of half truths to shape a country's opinion and if he had the other networks would have called him out on it. So would of mainstream rebups and dems!

Yes, I agree. Cronkite was tame compared to what's going on today.