Like so many of my demographic of over-educated liberal-leaning city dwellers I’m an avid Daily Show follower. In fact, when Colin and I made our resolution to stop watching TV we didn’t even have to discuss the fact that the Daily Show would be an exception. Yes, it’s liberal leaning, but Stewart takes the dems and President Obama to task too and is best when he’s exposing the hypocrisy and idiocy of the ratings-driven cable news media. It’s not “where I get my news,” but it’s definitely where I get my satire.
Glenn Beck if a favorite and easy target for the show, and it’s definitely where I get my Beck exposure. Stewart’s clips show an overwrought fear-mongering conspiracy-promoting lunatic. It makes for great TV. And I find myself talking, with authority, about how horrible Glenn Beck is for the country. But what do I really know about him? Should I be judging the man from 10 second clips that could be very well taken out of context as fodder for a punch line? So, Colin and I decided to do it: to actually watch a Glenn Back show. Here’s the clip. http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/32734/
Turns out, after a careful study of the show, that Glenn Beck is in fact an overwrought fear-mongering conspiracy-promoting lunatic, even more so than the cartoonish parodies of him portray. And I’m even more worried. The problem is, if you can get past the crazy, he’s a pretty compelling orator. That’s the secret of his success and of his danger. He can convince you despite a dismal lack of evidence and any semblance of a coherent argument. And he primarily convinces you to be outraged and afraid. And there’s something deliciously satisfying about being outraged, so we’re an easy sell.
What’s his secret? First of all, he’s dramatic. He’s asks a question (what is the American dollar really based on?), pauses as if he’s really considering the magnitude of the implications and then slowly re-engages you with his reveal. He builds his points to a dramatic crescendo and slows it down to show you that he’s still in control. He’s got the cadence and swagger of a Sunday morning televangelist. And he actually cries. Real tears. This is great theater. And hey, we love drama. We love emotion. And passion in and of itself has a way of grabbing you.
Then, he mocks. Showing choice clips of unfortunate moments and then rolling his eyes and sarcastically declaring, “oh yeah, we really (pause) really want this guy in charge of your money.” He does all this while simultaneously singing your praises: you true Americans, the moral and economic backbone of this country, you who recognize common sense when you see it. And there it is. By force of this rhetoric you are on his side. You are not with the guy being mocked, you are with the masses being praised.
He uses his lack of expertise as an asset. “Now, I’m no ‘economist’ (full use of air quotes) but…” And the word “economist” is absolutely dripping with disdain and topped off with an eye roll. What a relief to the viewer. We may not understand their sophisticated graphs and arguments anyway. So before we have a chance to let this make us feel inferior, Beck relieves us by declaring that these experts miss the simple and obvious truths anyway. Phew. Now hit these eggheads with some common sense Beck! Hell, why even have experts? If all it takes is some folk wisdom to understand and recommend policy, let’s do away with PhD programs and think tanks. But I digress.
His next trick: he positions himself as an underdog truth-seeker revealing something that those with interests (the media, the liberal elite, the government) won’t tell you. He appeals to the cynical side of you. “I am the only one brave enough to confront Al Gore with his hypocrisy. No one else will ask the question. Gore, if you care sooo much about the environment, why (dramatic pause) do you eat meat?” He then gleefully and triumphantly reveals his prize: A clip of Diane Sawyer confronting Gore with the Beck-inspired question on her morning show. She asks the question. And then the clip inexplicably ends. We don’t get to hear the response from Gore.
What!?!? You’ve finally got someone to confront Gore with his supposed hypocrisy and you don’t bother to see how he answers the accusation? But answers are not his goal. In fact, Beck did this at least twice in the same show. In another instance, he mocked the Administration for talking about jobs “saved” during the recession and then showed a clip of another anchor (David Gregory) asking Tim Geithner how they quantify a “saved job” (Beck’s exact criticism). And that’s it! Question is asked and then the clip comes to an abrupt halt. But before you can begin to wonder about the answer, Beck is on to the next rant. Who needs a cogent argument when you can use rhetorical slight of hand. Which brings me to my next point.
He doesn’t make arguments, he plants seeds. A favorite tack is leading with “I’m not saying…” followed by an outrageous claim like “Obama hates White people.” He then spends the rest of his energy building a case for why something he supposedly is “not saying” is true. But Beck’s “building a case” is usually just drawing dubious connections and shamelessly using emotionally charged imagery to make his point.
In the show we watched he repeatedly ran the following clips: 1) the President saying he consulted with SIEU on health care reform (doesn’t seem like that big of a deal) and, 2) a clip in which the President of SEIU says “workers of the world unite.” Now, I’ve heard reasonable criticisms of labor unions’ outsized influence on health care reform from both left and right, so Beck had room to make point here. But instead he opts for going straight to the most outlandish and incendiary conclusion: that the Obama administration bends towards communism. It’s not only pretty “out there”, it’s intellectually lazy. He puts up a Soviet era poster to point out the similarities and then in his typical rhetorical flourish mocks, “We know Obama said he’s definitely not a Marxist. Rigghht?? (pause) Right???”
What he’s convincing you to believe, other than being untrue, is also dangerous. He would have you believe that Obama snuck into the Presidency based on dubious citizenry and is secretly pushing for communist-style wealth distribution, that the media is controlled by a cabal of elite who actively disdain the “real America” of which you are a part. If all of this were true, I’d be pretty outraged too. But he offers no solutions. Only this: “I, for one, am afraid. And you should be too.” He offers to organize rallies as outlets for your collective and growing anger. But no solutions. So, what’s an outraged citizen to do? That’s what scares me.
Glenn Beck if a favorite and easy target for the show, and it’s definitely where I get my Beck exposure. Stewart’s clips show an overwrought fear-mongering conspiracy-promoting lunatic. It makes for great TV. And I find myself talking, with authority, about how horrible Glenn Beck is for the country. But what do I really know about him? Should I be judging the man from 10 second clips that could be very well taken out of context as fodder for a punch line? So, Colin and I decided to do it: to actually watch a Glenn Back show. Here’s the clip. http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/32734/
Turns out, after a careful study of the show, that Glenn Beck is in fact an overwrought fear-mongering conspiracy-promoting lunatic, even more so than the cartoonish parodies of him portray. And I’m even more worried. The problem is, if you can get past the crazy, he’s a pretty compelling orator. That’s the secret of his success and of his danger. He can convince you despite a dismal lack of evidence and any semblance of a coherent argument. And he primarily convinces you to be outraged and afraid. And there’s something deliciously satisfying about being outraged, so we’re an easy sell.
What’s his secret? First of all, he’s dramatic. He’s asks a question (what is the American dollar really based on?), pauses as if he’s really considering the magnitude of the implications and then slowly re-engages you with his reveal. He builds his points to a dramatic crescendo and slows it down to show you that he’s still in control. He’s got the cadence and swagger of a Sunday morning televangelist. And he actually cries. Real tears. This is great theater. And hey, we love drama. We love emotion. And passion in and of itself has a way of grabbing you.
Then, he mocks. Showing choice clips of unfortunate moments and then rolling his eyes and sarcastically declaring, “oh yeah, we really (pause) really want this guy in charge of your money.” He does all this while simultaneously singing your praises: you true Americans, the moral and economic backbone of this country, you who recognize common sense when you see it. And there it is. By force of this rhetoric you are on his side. You are not with the guy being mocked, you are with the masses being praised.
He uses his lack of expertise as an asset. “Now, I’m no ‘economist’ (full use of air quotes) but…” And the word “economist” is absolutely dripping with disdain and topped off with an eye roll. What a relief to the viewer. We may not understand their sophisticated graphs and arguments anyway. So before we have a chance to let this make us feel inferior, Beck relieves us by declaring that these experts miss the simple and obvious truths anyway. Phew. Now hit these eggheads with some common sense Beck! Hell, why even have experts? If all it takes is some folk wisdom to understand and recommend policy, let’s do away with PhD programs and think tanks. But I digress.
His next trick: he positions himself as an underdog truth-seeker revealing something that those with interests (the media, the liberal elite, the government) won’t tell you. He appeals to the cynical side of you. “I am the only one brave enough to confront Al Gore with his hypocrisy. No one else will ask the question. Gore, if you care sooo much about the environment, why (dramatic pause) do you eat meat?” He then gleefully and triumphantly reveals his prize: A clip of Diane Sawyer confronting Gore with the Beck-inspired question on her morning show. She asks the question. And then the clip inexplicably ends. We don’t get to hear the response from Gore.
What!?!? You’ve finally got someone to confront Gore with his supposed hypocrisy and you don’t bother to see how he answers the accusation? But answers are not his goal. In fact, Beck did this at least twice in the same show. In another instance, he mocked the Administration for talking about jobs “saved” during the recession and then showed a clip of another anchor (David Gregory) asking Tim Geithner how they quantify a “saved job” (Beck’s exact criticism). And that’s it! Question is asked and then the clip comes to an abrupt halt. But before you can begin to wonder about the answer, Beck is on to the next rant. Who needs a cogent argument when you can use rhetorical slight of hand. Which brings me to my next point.
He doesn’t make arguments, he plants seeds. A favorite tack is leading with “I’m not saying…” followed by an outrageous claim like “Obama hates White people.” He then spends the rest of his energy building a case for why something he supposedly is “not saying” is true. But Beck’s “building a case” is usually just drawing dubious connections and shamelessly using emotionally charged imagery to make his point.
In the show we watched he repeatedly ran the following clips: 1) the President saying he consulted with SIEU on health care reform (doesn’t seem like that big of a deal) and, 2) a clip in which the President of SEIU says “workers of the world unite.” Now, I’ve heard reasonable criticisms of labor unions’ outsized influence on health care reform from both left and right, so Beck had room to make point here. But instead he opts for going straight to the most outlandish and incendiary conclusion: that the Obama administration bends towards communism. It’s not only pretty “out there”, it’s intellectually lazy. He puts up a Soviet era poster to point out the similarities and then in his typical rhetorical flourish mocks, “We know Obama said he’s definitely not a Marxist. Rigghht?? (pause) Right???”
What he’s convincing you to believe, other than being untrue, is also dangerous. He would have you believe that Obama snuck into the Presidency based on dubious citizenry and is secretly pushing for communist-style wealth distribution, that the media is controlled by a cabal of elite who actively disdain the “real America” of which you are a part. If all of this were true, I’d be pretty outraged too. But he offers no solutions. Only this: “I, for one, am afraid. And you should be too.” He offers to organize rallies as outlets for your collective and growing anger. But no solutions. So, what’s an outraged citizen to do? That’s what scares me.
No comments:
Post a Comment