Front Page
NMJ Search
Editorials
Commentary
Archive
NMJ Radio
Constitutional Literacy
Islamofascism
Progressivism
Books
NMJ Shop
Links, Etc...
Facebook
Twitter
Site Information
About Us
Contact Us
  US Senate
  US House
  Anti-Google






Archive Email Author

About Daniel Greenfield
Daniel Greenfield writes a daily blog column on issues involving Islamic Terrorism, Israeli and American politics and Europe's own clash of civilizations. Born in Israel, Mr. Greenfield currently resides in New York City. He is a contributing editor at Family Security Matters and has a weekly column titled Western Front at Israel National News. His pieces have also appeared in the New York Sun, the Jewish Press and at FOX Nation. http://sultanknish.blogspot.com
Social Bookmarking
Print this page.
How Maddow’s MSNBC Takeover Dooms the Left
Daniel Greenfield
March 3, 2014
Liberal media succeeds best when it isn't identified as such. The reason for that can be seen in numerous polls where Americans of both parties identify themselves with conservative values.

The left is adept at selling its agenda through biased mainstream media coverage, but when it discards the disguise of objectivity on radio or television the end result is shrill, irritating and off-putting.

The playwright and director David Mamet achieved an epiphany while listening to NPR. Unfortunately for NPR the epiphany was that he was no longer a liberal. "I felt my facial muscles tightening," he described, "and the words beginning to form in my mind: Shut the f___ up."

The unfiltered left with its onslaught of sanctimonious bleating often brings out that reaction.

It's why Air America not only couldn't compete with Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and other conservative talk radio hosts, but it couldn't even remain solvent. MSNBC, the bastard child of a ridiculous union between Microsoft and NBC, spent years drifting in search of an identity only to become the new Air America.

Why does the left, which is so adept at putting its agenda across in mainstream media outlets fail spectacularly when it puts away the disguise and begins saying what it really thinks?

George Orwell described the phenomenon in his book The Road to Wigan Pier. The behavior he is describing is so familiar that it's worth pausing to remember that it was written 77 years ago in 1937.

"I do not think the Socialist need make any sacrifice of essentials, but certainly he will have to make a great sacrifice of externals," Orwell wrote, explaining why the left was failing to make headway with more sensible people. "If only the sandals and the pistachio-coloured shirts could be put in a pile and burnt, and every vegetarian, teetotaler... sent home to Welwyn Garden City to do his yoga exercises quietly!"

Earlier, Orwell had denounced them as "vegetarians with wilting beards... earnest ladies in sandals, shock-headed Marxists chewing polysyllables, escaped Quakers, birth-control fanatics."

Orwell would have found MSNBC familiar, not just because of its inversion of language and perpetual politicization of everything, but that same inbred club of irritating fanatics holding forth to a small audience that agrees dogmatically with their obsessions in every regard.

After drifting without an identity, MSNBC was reborn as a liberal news network and then finally as a network of sandal wearing transgender vegans and shock-headed Marxists chewing polysyllables.

Orwell was encouraging the left to get in tune with the working class, but MSNBC has gone in the opposite direction, shoving out hacks like Ed Schultz and Alec Baldwin, who for all their faults were somewhat more relatable than Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes and Ronan Farrow. Joe Scarborough is talking about running for office which will leave Chris Matthews and Al Sharpton as the only high profile MSNBC yappers who couldn't be mistaken for Pajama Boy in a dark ObamaCare briefing.

MSNBC reinvented itself around Rachel Maddow. Its new talkers, Chris Hayes and Ronan Farrow, are cut from the same cloth, delivering nasal lectures with a tone somewhere between passive aggressive argument and ironic detachment. Imagine Air America crossbred with NPR and then mated with Pitchfork Magazine. Their horrible abortion would be MSNBC's bland hipster ethos of earnest liberals earnestly talking down to their audience while Al Sharpton tries to figure out how a teleprompter works.

The Maddow MSNBC is a leftist student newspaper stridently denouncing racism, sexism, homophobia, claustrophobia, transphobia, pipelines, microaggressions, white privilege, cherry pies, political incorrectness, model trains and obesity. Unlike the left's highly successful mainstream media apparatus, it is overcrowded with professors of political correctness and Twitter activists who can't talk to people, only at people, who assume that everyone who matters already agrees with them and that this self-important population is already watching MSNBC.

MSNBC has lost the ability to talk to ordinary people. Even other liberals are beginning to evince a distaste for it.

The hipster breakdown of MSNBC has bigger implications for the left. Behind the scenes, the Obama campaign looked a lot like MSNBC. The original Obama campaign was better known as the Howard Dean campaign, but even Democrats found Dean ridiculously irritating.

Obama was the perfect front man because he had the wiring of a Rachel Maddow or Chris Hayes, but when audiences showed up, they didn't see a man in retro glasses sneering at them because they don't understand what the asterisk in trans* stands for.

In his time as community organizer, Obama had learned to do what Orwell had advised the left to learn to do and what the average progressive has never learned to do, talk to ordinary people without making them react as if they were listening to a particularly annoying NPR broadcast. Obama Inc. may have been indistinguishable from the new MSNBC behind the scenes, but it had a human face on it.

Obama's victories have given the left an unreasonable degree of confidence in their ideology, but it wasn't their ideology that won two elections. Polls show that most Americans are not especially fond of what the left stands for, but they do vote for candidates who appear to care about them. The left didn't win on the issues. It won because it found a good front man for its bad issues who would keep finding entertaining ways to distract the public from the complete implosion of his progressive policies.

The left confused political victories with ideological victories. It assumed that because Americans had been manipulated into temporarily liking Obama, that they also liked everything that the left stood for. MSNBC is what the left actually stands for and it's a miserable catalogue of petty fascism by control freaks whose only knowledge of life comes through the lens of their favorite pseudo-Marxist theories.

The undisguised left cannot win an election outside of its safe territories where its politicians huddle in padded corners with bearded activists deciding whether they should ban donuts, plastic bags or politically incorrect pop songs next. In these territories where the Subaru station wagon is king, where everyone wears outdoor hiking gear everywhere they go and talk about mulching and recycling as if these were spiritual activities; MSNBC streams over every Roku box.

Occasionally a parka wearer driving a Subaru will find his facial muscles twitching and the words beginning to form in his mind, "Shut the f___ up"; but then he will be taken away for a three week course of wheatgrass juice colonic therapy that will leave him a proper Pajama Boy again.

Outside MSNBCland, the left remains unlikable; its army of activists infiltrates and takes over, but without a charming front man to juggle some torches and distract the crowds from the unemployment rate and their staggering health care premiums, the campaign folds like Howard Dean after a bottle of tequila.

MSNBC has decided that it's safe to go Full Rachel Maddow. That is a mistake for which the left will pay the price where it always does, in the hearts of its countrymen who frown and change the channel.

Americans do not care for the ideology that consumes the professional leftist because they know that a man cannot serve two masters. Either he is an elected official who answers to the voters or he is an ideologue who answers to his professors of political correctness. That is why even career leftists like Obama attempt to pass themselves off as practical men. They understand that to identify as a rigid fanatic is political suicide.

Americans find that type of Socialist, whether he calls himself a progressive or a liberal, about as appealing as they do MSNBC.

This article was originally featured at FrontPageMag.org. Refer to original article for related links and important documentation.








The BasicsProject.org informational and educational pamphlet series is now available for Kindle and iPad. Click here to find out more...

The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org are not funded by outside sources. We exist exclusively on donations from our readers and contributors.
Please make a sustaining donation today.







Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of NewMediaJournal.us, its editorial staff, board or organization.  Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to NewMediaJournal.us.  NewMediaJournal.us is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations.  NewMediaJournal.us is not supported by any political organization.  Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by NewMediaJournal.us is copyrighted. NewMediaJournal.us supports BasicsProject.org and its goal: the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


The Media Journal.us © 1998-2014    Content Copyright © Individual authors
Powered by ExpressionEngine 1.70 and M3Server