Time Magazine Loves Glenn Beck (Again)
Last month FCP discussed the revolting tendency of “liberal” publications like The New York Times and The New Yorker to publish gushing profiles of repellent public figures like Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage and, especially. Glenn Beck. This week the trend accelerated as David von Drehle profiled Beck for the cover of Time magazine.
Von Drehle’s piece is so humiliating on so many levels, it’s hard to know where to begin. But at least the web version of the piece carried a headline which FCP thought posed a reasonable question: “Is Glenn Beck Bad for America?”
Trouble is, after reading the piece, it was still impossible to know how Von Drehle might answer that query. So FCP telephoned the Time writer to find out more.
“I haven’t seen the layout on the web,” Von Drehle said, “So [that question] is news to me. I personally wouldn’t take one guy and say he’s bad for America.”
You see, even though Von Drehle’s piece was–ostensibly–a profile of a media figure–von Drehele is not interested in writing “media journalism,” the kind in which you actually try to evaulate the person you’re writing about.
“I do not want to give every single person a score card,” Von Drehle told FCP. There has obviously been no “shortage of rants against Glenn Beck,” so rather than give an intelligent appraisal of what Beck actually says each night, von Drehele wrote a story which focuses on the fact that “this is is a big business and a lot of people are making a lot of money.”
Von Drehle’s total lack of interest in actual facts is briskly displayed in the very first paragraph of his profile, describing the tea party in Washington last weekend, which was largely the result of Beck’s six-month-long on-air organizing effort for what he called his “9/12 project.”
“If you get your information from liberal sources, the crowd numbered about 70,000, many of them greedy racists,” Von Drehle wrote. “If you get your information from conservative sources, the crowd was hundreds of thousands strong, perhaps as many as a million, and the tenor was peaceful and patriotic.”
Members of the Washington, D.C., Fire Department will no doubt be delighted to be identified as a “liberal source,” since they originated the crowd estimate of 70,000 people. As for the higher crowd estimates, the biggest one, of 1.2 million, was simply invented by Matt Kibbe, president of Freedom Works, one of the protest’s main organizers. Kibbe announced from the stage that ABC News had reported the 1.2 million figure. This led to an e-mail to news outlets from ABC, very shortly thereafter, pointing out that the network had never done any such thing–but instead had relied on those “liberal” firemen who offered the lower 60,000 to 70,000 figure. But you would never know any of that from reading Time.
Jamison Foser of Media Matters does his own fine dissection of Von Drehle’s drivel here. In an e-mail exchange with FCP, Foser listed some of the other lies from the organizers of the Washington protest: “they invented a Park Service spokesperson, they used a quote from an actual Parks Service employee saying it was the biggest gathering ever – a quote that was actually about the inauguration; they made up that ABC report that never happened, and they claimed that photos of the Promise Keepers march were photos of last Saturday’s protest, in order to substantiate their claims of massive crowds. Time, however, thinks their ‘estimates’ are just as valid as those of the ‘liberal’ DC Fire Dept.”
Foser also highlights Von Drehle’s hideous tendency to draw utterly false equivalencies throughout his piece, like this one: “Between the liberal fantasies about Brownshirts at town halls and the conservative concoctions of brainwashed children goose-stepping to school, you’d think the Palm in Washington had been replaced with a Munich beer hall.” Which leads Foser to ask:
“What in the world is Time talking about? Conservatives have been yelling about President Obama being a secret Kenyan bent on sending granny to the Death Panel, comparing him to Hitler and Mao and Stalin and who-knows-who-else – and that, apparently, is matched in intensity and paranoia by liberals pointing out this unhinged behavior? Insane.”
Von Drehle seemed to be more eager to point out to FCP all the nice things Beck says on his show: “work hard; love your country; be kind to each other; spend more time with your kids.”
“What about comparing Obama’s non-existent death panel to Nazi eugenics?” FCP asked.
“That probably would classify as not productive in my book,” the Time writer replied.
These are some of the other lovely things Von Drehle managed to say about his subject:
* He is the hottest thing in the political-rant racket, left or right. A gifted entrepreneur of angst in a white-hot market.
* A man with his ear uniquely tuned to the precise frequency at which anger, suspicion and the fear that no one’s listening all converge.
* Beck is 45, tireless, funny, self-deprecating, a recovering alcoholic, a convert to Mormonism, a libertarian and living with ADHD.
* He is a gifted storyteller with a knack for stitching seemingly unrelated data points into possible conspiracies — if he believed in conspiracies, which he doesn’t, necessarily; he’s just asking questions. He’s just sayin’.
*Beck describes his performances as ‘the fusion of entertainment and enlightenment’— and the entertainment comes first. “
* “Beck is a “radio nostalgic,” in love with the storytelling power of a man with a microphone.
After all those glowing tributes, I guess David just didn’t have enough space left for Glenn’s most memorable sound bites–like his declaration that we “at least in this country [need to] start having the necessary discussion of, do we want communists in the United States government”–a question asked in a segment which was bolstered by actual sound bites of some of Joe McCarthy’s finest moments at the Army/McCarthy hearings.
Von Drehle also forgot to mention that in 2005, Beck said, “you know it took me about a year to start hating the 9/11 families. I don’t hate all of them. I probably hate about ten of them. But when I see a 9/11 family on television, or whatever, I’m just like, ‘Oh shut up.’ I’m so sick of them because they’re always complaining. And we did our best for them!” (To which Stephen Colbert memorably added: “Good point! [Beck’s] 9/12 project is not for people directly affected by 9/11–just for people building their careers on it.”)
Unfortunately, Beck’s mock poisoning of House Speaker Pelosi on air and his comparison of the Holocaust museum shooter to Thomas Jefferson also managed to escape the Time writer’s attention. (Jamison Foser has the whole list of omissions here.)
Von Drehle does mention in passing that Beck is currently the object of one of the most successful advertizer boycotts in history, sparked by Beck’s assertion that Obama is a racist who harbors “a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture.”
Von Drehle identified the boycott as “a boon” to Beck’s ratings; but he didn’t say that it now includes more than sixty corporations, including Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway and Procter & Gamble.
FCP asked Von Dehele if sixty wasn’t a rather large number–one perhaps worth mentioning in his piece. “Well,” he replied. “There are millions of companies.”
Von Drehle also seems to think that the progressive hosts on MSNBC are really just like the right-wing crazies on Fox. But when FCP pressed him about that, he admitted that had no basis whatsoever for making any comparison:
“I haven’t seen Keith Olbermann for at least a year and a half,” the Time writer said. “And I’ve never seen Rachel Maddow. I have four children and a wife. I don’t sit around watching cable TV. I don’t understand why anybody watches any of these shows. I know what these opinions are based on: they’re based on nothing.”
Of course, Olbermann’s and Maddow’s opinions are actually all relentlessly fact-based–the real kind, not the sort routinely invented by Limbaugh, Beck and their scores of imitators. And Maddow is easily the most intelligent addition to television in the last five years. But Von Drehleis too busy raising his children to have noticed any of that.
Perhaps it would help if Time had chosen someone who actually watches cable TV to profile such an important cable personality?
Probably not. The magazine’s delightfully post-modern TV critic, James Poniewozik, has already written several hard-hitting assessments of the Beck oeuvre, including this one: “Sure, he may be selling a sensationalistic message of paranoia and social breakdown. But politics, or basic responsibility, aside, he has an entertainer’s sense of play with the medium of TV that O’Reilly, or perpetual sourpuss Neil Cavuto, don’t.”
So why do magazines like Time put glowing profiles of Beck on their covers, while newspapers like The Washington Post invite him to lead chats on their websites?
For the very same reason that Beck tells disgusting lies on his program so frequently: there is money to be made. News stand sales for Time as Beck’s fans gobble up copies of the magazine, and web hits for the Washington Post.
And that, frankly, is the most disgusting fact of all.
Once again, it falls to Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart to do the real journalism on this subject. To find out what Beck actually does, see two of Colbert’s finest contributions to the Glenn Beck story, here and here.
Update: The indispensable Scott Horton has another vintage Beck performance here. Horton also links to an extremely sane and sensible piece by ex-George W. Bush speechwriter David Frum. The headline: Gop Surrenders to Beck’s Mob Rule. Frum’s bottom line: “Glenn Beck is not the first to make a pleasant living for himself by reckless defamation. We have seen his kind before in American journalism and American politics, and the good news is that their careers never last long. But the bad news is that while their careers do last, such people do terrible damage…We conservatives are submitting our movement to some of the most unscrupulous people in American life. This submission disgraces conservatism, discredits Republicans, and damages the country. It’s beyond time for conservatives who know better to join us at NewMajority in emancipating ourselves from leadership by the most stupid, the most cynical, and the most truthless.”
Frum’s great piece was posted one week before Von Drehle’s; and yet, Time managed to ignore this article of sanity as well.