Please Don’t Boycott Rush Limbaugh
Image via Wikipedia
If you ask Ditto Heads, Republicans or just casual fans why they like Rush Limbaugh their answer is always the same: because liberals hate him.
No, “I admire his humanity.” Not, “I like his high moral standing in the community.” Nor, “He inspired me to get off drugs/lose weight/have a family/find true love.”
No if you ask someone who likes Rush Limbaugh why they like him it’s solely because he makes liberals nuts. Some will say it’s because they think Rush is funny; he’s funny to those who love to see liberals go nuts.
It’s a political theater show: The warm-up act is Rush blowing hard into his syndicated microphone. There’s the cameo by people who agree with everything he says, just because he says it. But the main event is people reacting to Rush. Together it’s a hyper-partisan spectacle and Rush is being the producer solely by setting the tone.
“Limbaugh wants Obama to fail!” was a headline for two weeks last winter. It was talked about, denounced, analyzed, discussed, pondered, considered and dismissed in and around the media. In doing so this sound bite, a flippant comment made by a jock paid to shock was repeated a million times. So instead of maybe one million* disinterested people or so having their familiar day-time drone of Rush’s in-studio spit-cast on in the background, now every man, woman and child knows what he said about the freshly sworn-in Barack Obama. Rush’s proclamations suddenly got an exponentially larger audience than they would have otherwise.
All because what he said was offensive: It resonated with our lower nature and some of us are ashamed of that. When we lose, we secretly want the winner to suffer.
Rush is an agitator. That’s what his role has been for more than 20 years. He’s not a reporter, he’s not a politician nor is he a strategist. He just says horrible stuff and regular people, liberals and the media get whipped up and therefore more people hear him.
He’s also, like most of this current crop of conservatives, a contrarian. So whatever the current Democratic president is for, he has to be against. Obama is for improving the country’s health care system, Rush is for the opposite. Obama is for repairing our financial system, Rush is for the opposite. Obama is for American’s donating to Haiti, Rush is for the opposite. Remember when Rush was for everything President Bush was for? Neither does anyone else.
So since Rush, in the wake of the Haitian earthquake, before the bodies were cold, before the death toll was counted, before the aid could land, decided to bloviate “Obama will use Haiti to boost credibility with light-skinned and dark-skinned black community in this country.” This seems to be a tipping point and there have been calls by liberals to boycott Rush Limbaugh.
Now I believe in Free Speech, protected speech. Therefore I believe in protecting hate speech. Even stupid speech. Even outrageous and poorly timed speech. It doesn’t mean I’m for corporate sponsored hate speech, which Rush Limbaugh is. He has the right for the government not to silence him, but not the right to have companies financially support his views.
So you’d think I’d be all for a boycott of Rush Limbaugh. No. No I am not. Here’s why: you can’t boycott something you’re not patronizing. So if you’re not listening to Rush’s show, then you have no leverage in a boycott. There was a boycott of Glenn Back after he called Obama a racist last year. Yes, Beck lost from some estimates 98 sponsors. But now his ratings are higher than ever and lack of sponsors or not, he’s still on the air. Did the boycott backfire? Yes.
Consider this: if a group of neocons wanted to boycott Rachel Maddow, everyone in the country would watch her show. If she managed to irritate a group enough to have them call her sponsors, her platform would swell.
The answer is to ignore Rush Limbaugh. Ignore him. Just stop being outraged by the stuff he says. You’re not going to change his dwindling fan base. He doesn’t command a voter bloc (remember when he asked his listeners to get Hillary the nomination?). If you disagree with Rush, you’re the audience that must walk away. We can leave ignorant and racist comments unchecked if it means a smaller broadcast of said comments. If the only reason his fans love him is because he makes liberals nuts, liberals have their job clearly laid out for them.
He has the right to say things and I have the right to not repeat them. Besides, Rush hates tolerance. What a more perfect revenge.
*His current ratings are reported at 13.5 million a week. At 15 hours a week of yammering, that’s less than one million an hour, average listening. But actual data of radio ratings are kept vague on purpose.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
I agree with the writer. It is probalby best that she ignore Rush Limbaugh. She should allign herself with true non agitators like Keith Olbermann and Rachael Maddow.
My sentiments exactly expressed two days ago on my timeline on Twitter: #silenceofthelambs #ignorerush #coffeeklatch
that1ebd @TinaDupuy What if Rotund Rush never saw any of his rancid rants in print or repeated on TV? Or Twitter? @ebertchicago #SilenceoftheLambs
2 days ago from web
Like minds…
Hmmm.. Mr Limbaugh..
Lately I have been visiting with the ghost of Woodie Guthrie, and we wrote a song that tells everything I know and feel about Mr Limbaugh. You can see this all original work over on youtube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzcCMKZY2u8 (what the heck, it’s quick, it’s free, it’s fun). Or you can visit my music site and download a copy for free if you are so inclined at http://soundclick.com/333maxwell
Rush Who??
Eh, I don’t believe that Rush Limbaugh has 15 to 20 million listeners at any one time, but the 1 million listeners at any given time that Roger Ebert is currently peddling on his Twitter account based on this article seems like liberal wishful thinking based on the fallacious premise that most people in his audience only listen for one hour out of the 15 hours he’s on the air each week. If you divide by the number of stations he’s on, more than 600, that’d be less than 2000 listeners per station at any given time. Maybe I can believe that for really tiny markets, but not an average of all markets.
Also, it doesn’t take into account Rush 24/7 members who listen online through his site or download the show to listen on iPods.
All you can say for certain is that rating numbers are vague (4-8 million listeners at any one time has a certain degree of “truthiness” about it), but you shouldn’t take the absolute lowest possible number as the most likely just because nobody you know in your own social circles listens to Rush.
What I can’t understand is why many in the media, including MSNBC’s hosts, don’t take your advice, Tina. Ignore the guy! He’s more of an entertainer than he is a pundit. (I confess, I liked his description of the underwear bomber as the “fruit-of-kaboom” bomber–which I heard on MSNBC.) If only he would stick to one-liners and clever ripostes, and stop pretending to offer political analysis.
I began listening to Rush in the mid nineties and followed his program regularly for about six months. I stopped listening because I realized I was being conned by an entertainment program disguised as a political talk show.
Those who recognize Rush for who he is, and what his broadcast is about know they can’t take anything he says seriously since it’s designed to illicit knee jerk responses.
The reason Rush is still on the air today is because those who react to his inane blabbering give him credibility by responding and yes that includes the media which seems to feed on each obsurdity that he utters.
Tina, your article is “on point” and makes a very compelling case, but when you write about Rush, you like many others give him and his broadcasts exposure to people who may tune in just to see what all the fuss is about. Therefore giving him higher ratings and allowing his sponsors more reason to continue supporting his show.
It’s like the riddle, “How do you get a 300 lb gorilla out of your living room? Ignore him and eventually he’ll just go away.”
RE:Now I believe in Free Speech, protected speech. Therefore I believe in protecting hate speech. Even stupid speech.
Yea, but a Teleprompter has no right to free speech, even if it belongs to Obama…
Thanks for the suggestion Tina. After 20+ years of listening to Limbaugh, I did not tune in today. I’ll probably still check in occaisionally but my days as a regular listener are, most likely, over.
So by telling me not to boycott HeadRush, are you telling me I should listen?