Yglesias and Chris Bowers both pointed out today that people like Bill Kristol seem to be able to net constant media appearances, newspaper columns, and "serious person" credentials by posing the bomb it-kill them-nuke everybody solution to every problem.
I wonder, why is it we don't seem to have people in important positions in the media who seem as generally disinclined to violence as we do people in the media who seem to gush over it?
The last time someone who seemed to be reflexively antiwar had a TV show, for example, I think was Phil Donahue, whose ratings were excellent, but who was kicked off the General Elec- I mean MSNBC kicked him off after determining "Donahue presented a ‘difficult public face for NBC in a time of war" amidst worries that their network would become "a home for the liberal antiwar agenda at the same time that our competitors are waving the flag at every opportunity."
I'm not saying the media should become as antiwar as it is pro-war today (although I don't know how much I'd mind), but I would like to chip in a few words in favor of balance.
0 comments:
Post a Comment