What would be so bad about liberals refusing to go on right wing TV shows

[burythehatchet]

I understand the argument that you want to try and reach people on the other side. But lets face it, if those people are getting their ideas implanted from those talking heads like hannity and oreilly, they are simply not reachable.

So what would happen if every liberal simply said that as a matter of principle they would not dignify their shows with an appearance just so they can get shouted down and cut off. The talking heads would have their usual guests who would all sit there shaking their heads agreeing with each other. With noone there for them to spew their vitriole they actually might turn on each other. That I would watch.

Am I way off base?

[AlinPA]

1. No. We should stay away from O'Reilly and Hannity shows.

All it does is help look like they are legitimate. If all they had were right wingers on there, people would see them for what they are: propagandists spewing out their hate.

[ObaMania]

5. But according to O'Lielly..

.. FAUX has more liberal guests than conservative!

[nostamj]

15. it was worse than that!

he said they had more liberals HOSTS

[burythehatchet]

16. I guess that would be true

if you believe that colmes is a liberal
and if he counts as 17 people

[OneTwentyoNine]

7. Why? Every Liberal on Hannity kicks his ass,happened again last night..

Discussion about those swift boat idiots and their book. Can't remember the Dem's name but once again Hannity got his fucking head handing back to him.

Its easy when you don't put up with Hannity crap of trying to cut you off to where you stop talking. Don't play that game and you'll win every time.

Lets see...RFK Jr took Hannity to pieces a few years back,the guy last night shredded him. Over a year ago Mike Ferrell on Hannity's radio show beat up on him so bad over the coming Iraq War that all Hannity could do was run to the safety of commercials. He screwed up and scheduled Ferrell for 30 minutes or more--it was a hoot!

David

[burythehatchet]

10. its great when that happens but would you agree that

those instances are few and far between?

its like that "debate between oreilly and krugman the other night. how absurd that krugman would even agree to be in the same room as that shithead, to talk about economics no less. well krugman is interested in debate and oreilly is interested in physical intimidation. Why bother?

[OneTwentyoNine]

14. Because Krugman got in points....

And O'Reilly came off as the hot headed bully that he is. It would have been a real debate but candy-ass Russert let O'Reilly just keep going and going.Even when Krugman got the "floor" BO started in again,Russert should have stopped him cold.

If you don't go these RW hosts always throws out the "ducking,no message,something to hide" talking points. Its better to go on,be prepared,cut the milque-toast type of delivery and the "OMG,they called me a Liberal,now what?" mindset and get your points across solidly.

David

[Killarney]

2. I agree.

No Democrat should go on ANY Fox show until they get more fair.

Fox supporters claim that Fox is fair and balanced because they always have Dems on. If there were no more Dems on, they could not claim that anymore.

[vi5]

3. I disagree.....

Much as we'd like to believe otherwise on here at DU, I know plenty of people who are not rabid wing nuts, who listen to and watch a lot of those shows. They simply find them more entertaining. I think we stand to lose more by not having liberals appear on those shows and have them complain about that and have it look like we are ducking, than we do going on and voicing views and opinions.

[SammyWinstonJack]

4. Funny you mention that

"They simply find them more entertaining." I know someone who watches Faux News just for that reason. :shrug: I don't need that kind of "entertainment".

[burythehatchet]

6. I think you're bringing up a very central issue

is it news
is it entertainment
is it education

the reason that networks like fox are successful in misleading is that they blur the lines between those three. In a recent, heated e-mail exchange with a freeper, he kept sending me articles by coulter and mona charen as proof of his positions. Amazingly he could not distinguish between news and opinion.

As far as the ducking charge, I'm willing to bet that a highly publicized boycott would do more good than harm, but that's just an opinion :)

[sendero]

8. I disagree with...

... the idea of Dems not appearing anywhere on Fox, but on O-Really and Hannity, or any other show where they are shouted down and not allowed to make their points - why bother?

Absolutely nothing is gained by appearing on those shows. Dems/Liberals should, very publicly, say, "are you kidding? why would I"?

[Murdock]

9. We Cannot afford to not go..

Faux is the #1 rated news channel... Simply put, we need to put our best spoken, most battle hardened ranks on that channel to debate them.. The audience is simply too large to ignore, but we cannot put the jellyfish out there to be eaten alive.. It's not easy, they have home court advantage, and use it well but Liberals can and have debated on Faux successfully in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

Mike Malloy.. Bill Maher.. Al Franken. Howard Dean, John Stewart.. Generals Zinni and Clark and many others have all done very well on Faux in the past..

[Justice]

11. Democrats Should Boycott - These Are Not News Shows

Cable has a tiny audience, they should simply refuse to go on the shows. Hannity cannot just keep screaming at himself, he needs controversy - he is a terrible interviewer, cannot ask questions and would drown if he just had RW people to talk to.


We CAN afford not to and We should not.

[JHB]

12. It doesn't matter. They'll have "liberals" on anyway...

...no matter how deep into the Zell Zone they have to reach.

Yes, liberals should be careful about picking venues, and should be prepared for the type of treatment they get from RW hosts, but a simple, blanket boycotting of those shows lets THEM define who is "liberal" (as opposed to "beyond-the-pale leftist radical nutjob").

[burythehatchet]

13. you mean like super-liberal alan colmes? the black hole of charisma?