This isn't something you see every day: a member of the media scolding colleagues for criticizing conservative talk show hosts such as Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Mark Levin.
Yet, that's exactly what Howard Kurtz did on CNN's "Reliable Sources" Sunday as he took on all the recent carping and whining about the message being relayed over the airwaves by the Right's strongest voices.
Kurtz even went after the so-called conservative New York Times columnist David Brooks (video embedded below the fold, relevant section at 36:50):
HOWARD KURTZ, HOST: Talk show hosts sound off for a living. That's their job. And the rest of the media spend an awful lot of time talking about them. But how influential are they really?
First there was Rush Limbaugh on the cover of Newsweek. Then it was Glenn Beck on the cover of time. Ever since President Obama took office, conservative talkers have seized the spotlight. Whether it's Beck cheerleading the Tea Party marches, or Rush calling for the Obama administration to fail, or Sean Hannity leading the charge against ACORN, they have had an impact. Keith Olbermann may call them "The Worst Persons in the World" on any given night, but that just confirms that they are big targets.
Lately, though, the talk show titans have been drawing some flak from the right. Former Bush speechwriter David Frum has been outspoken in criticizing Limbaugh. And New York Times columnist David Brooks is taking on the whole gang.
(Played videotape of Brooks recently on "Meet the Press" complaining about Beck, Limbaugh, and Mark Levin. Then played videotape of what Republican strategist Mike Murphy said about Fox News and MSNBC on "Meet the Press" last week.)
Limbaugh says Brooks is just jealous. Besides, he told Politico, "how many Americans know who David Brooks is?" And Mark Levin, another conservative radio host, dismissed Frum as "irrelevant" and "incoherent."
But what about the larger point? Limbaugh, Beck, and Hannity have no party machinery. You don't measure their clout by any one election. Their power lies in influencing the debate on everything from Afghanistan to ACORN, from the Olympics to Obama himself. And that, without question, they have done.
And if liberals, or conservatives like David Brooks, don't like what these high-decibel pundits say, or think they're peddling misinformation, they should go after them in the media marketplace, not with boycotts or name-calling or screaming or shouting, but on the battlefield of ideas.
Sounds almost like he was quoting Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, or Levin concerning this very matter, doesn't it?
Nicely done, Howard, although you should be careful calling Brooks conservative, for you'd be hard-pressed to find a REAL conservative that would agree with the Times columnist being so labeled.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Noel, this is a landmark - calling for a battle of ideas?
October 11, 2009 - 10:54 ET by acaiguanaThat doesn't work, huh?
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana notes from the Underground' (Soon to be at theaters near you)
I refuse to admit that I
October 11, 2009 - 10:56 ET by samhermanmdI refuse to admit that I agree at all with Howard Kurtz. Doing so would cause a massive migraine headache, and I do not have enough Imitrex on hand.
When Brooks writes a column
October 11, 2009 - 10:57 ET by d1carterWhen Brooks writes a column on the crease in BO's pants it kinda gives a clue to the readers that he is truly irrelevant and should be more unknown.
I love it. The old media are
October 11, 2009 - 10:57 ET by notonmywatchI love it. The old media are losing money hand over fist because people don't want to be propagandized, and suddenly there is an occasional crumb thrown to the viewers who are supposed to go back, like a beaten wife, to be abused some more.
Thanks, but no thanks.
___________________________________________________________
Graphical conservative commentary - animations & pictures for posting on forums: http://ubama.org/chu...
Sounds like Kurtz is
October 11, 2009 - 10:59 ET by KJ_sezSounds like Kurtz is looking for work with a profitable news organization.
Dude, where's my country?
A Rush to Defame
October 11, 2009 - 11:06 ET by Timothy HI always find it interesting when the knee-jerk response to an opinion or a statement is to defame the speaker (and I feel this way regardless of the political leanings of the speaker or the defamer). Usually I attribute this to the defamer having no logical argument for the original statement, and I think that, consciously or unconsciously, that is what is happening in America today. The left has spent so much time trying to discredit Rush, Glenn, Sean and the like through name calling and smear campaigns that the general masses have taken notice and are beginning to wonder why there are no refuting argument in the place of said smears.
I wonder if that's not being recognized by some of the left wing media, and why some of the more astute among them have taken to giving these sort of opinions in public, as above with Kurtz and in another post with Maddow.
Just a thought. Maybe these are less an attempt at later gaining a job with a profitable network, and more about trying to draw attention away from the initial debate, making the pundits themselves the debate and thus helping the public to forget the issues they were concerned with in favor of the more "interesting" media debate.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe. - Albert Einstein
Excellent
October 11, 2009 - 11:02 ET by KC MulvilleThat makes me want to listen to Kurtz even more.
Kurtz can try and voice
October 11, 2009 - 11:08 ET by SnappyKurtz can try and voice plain and simple reason on this topic all he wants.....and he will find out that the argument just wont work. Never has and never will, he will be dismissed and brushed aside until he gets back in liberal lockstep with harranguing the conservative hosts. Because as everyone knows in this Muslim country of America, conservatism is the small and clinging minority.
October 11, 2009 - 11:08 ET by jessieHComrade Kurtz hears the Botox, err fat, hissing in the fire
October 11, 2009 - 11:11 ET by InfidelphiaHe's laying the groundwork for his State Media friends to accept all the new faces they'll see in Congress in 2010.
Liberals' biggest objection:
October 11, 2009 - 11:37 ET by motherbeltTheir [conservative talkers] power lies in influencing the debate on everything from
Afghanistan to ACORN, from the Olympics to Obama himself.
And that is exactly what the liberals do NOT want.
They don't want anyone other than themselves influencing any debate. They want to be in control, the ones setting the parameters.
And that is what Rush and the others have taken away from them: their ability to control the debate.
Mootherbelt
October 11, 2009 - 12:12 ET by Jerry MackExcellent evaluation!
Note: They live and die by ratings. Look for changes at Cnn very soon. Only Msnbc doesn't seem to care about profits.
Random Comprehension is Not Understanding
October 11, 2009 - 12:54 ET by Thoreau"...they should go after them in the media marketplace, not
with boycotts or name-calling or screaming or shouting, but on the
battlefield of ideas."
I don't think he realizes that Liberal/Communist Utopia doesn't exist in reality. This is why they can't argue with the above Conservative talk shows. Conservative's bring law and facts. The Liberals bring nothing but feelings that apply to special groups- never the individual and never everyone. That's why we all despise them.
They are like the slow kid in school that doesn't realize gravity applies to them. And every day the other kids laugh at him, as the slow kid blames the chiding of the others for falling out of his own desk.
Liberalism is a disease where comprehension is no more. Right and wrong no longer exist. So while I can appreciate Kurtz's moment of clarity. I know that it's an accident. He won't defend free speech consistently. To keep it simple, "Even the Sun shines on a dog's ass once a day."
Well Put! and with
October 11, 2009 - 19:07 ET by jkwtradingWell Put! and with my dog I say c'mon Natasha finish that Obama it's cold out here.
Howard Kurtz is such a
October 11, 2009 - 13:53 ET by TEHoward Kurtz is such a blithering, idiotic leftist that dozens of times in his column he has "identified" the leftist fundamentalist homosexualist Andrew Sullivan as a "conservative". Predictably, on the dozens of times that I have read Kurtz label Andrew Sullivan as a "conservative", Kurtz was dutifully quoting Sullivan saying what any other leftist kook had said. Even better, before quoting Sullivan, Kurtz would normally introduce his allegation a long these lines: "Even conservatives like Andrew Sullivan are denouncing the Republican party and Sullivan's fellow conservatives for ...." Consequently, it's no surprise that Kurtz dutifully quotes an Obama loving loon like David Brooks and predictably labels Brooks as a "conservative", and, like he does with Andrew Sullivan, Kurtz turns to Brooks when Brooks is denouncing Republicans and actual conservatives.
Newsweek
October 11, 2009 - 16:00 ET by charlietexasthey don't know what to do.
Don't you see it
October 11, 2009 - 19:27 ET by ChattychitoHe's not telling his comrades to stop bad mouthing these guys because they are correct or that they are being mean spirited. No his has an agenda.
ask yourself, Why?
It is
because the more they scream and complain about Rush, Beck and Hannity the more people go to their sites, papers and News Media outlets to see what the fuss is all about.
It's is all about lowering the ratings of Rush, Beck and Hannity not about political correctness or conservative views. By bad mouthing these guys they have in fact fed their high ratings. So if he can get them to stop bad mouthing them on national television the ratings of Rush, Beck and Hannity will go down. And they could expect to see a rise in their own ratings again.
We report you decide!
Here's a fact that's worth the knowing, So treasure and mark it well. When the mind is through with growing, the the head begins to swell. Sir Nosmo King
It's not working
October 11, 2009 - 21:55 ET by ChaitealoverEvery time one of them mentions Rush, Beck, Hannity, etc; whatever the context, those guys' ratings get higher.
Chai
“When all government...in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided...” Thomas Jefferson
that is what I said
October 12, 2009 - 03:39 ET by Chattychitothat is what I said
Here's a fact that's worth the knowing, So treasure and mark it well. When the mind is through with growing, the the head begins to swell. Sir Nosmo King
Is it possible?
October 11, 2009 - 22:02 ET by pbthinkerIs it possible that the Nobel Committee has awakened some, in the American media, to what they've done? Perhaps they could be looking at the plans Obama's czars have and they're getting scared. Regardless, anything that shows an independent thought from our press should be noted as a positive thing.
Election 2008-God's way of showing us that elections count.