So, Chris Hitchens was just on Hannity and Colmes debating the legacy of Jerry Falwell with Ralph Reed and the hosts. Predictably, Reed and (especially) Hannity were not so much concerned with the substance of Hitchens’ scathing attack on the late rev than with its impropriety, its insensitivity to Falwell’s family and loved ones, and so on. And you know, maybe there’s something to that. But I’m pretty sure you don’t get to work yourself into a righteous lather on this point when you’ve just invited someone on your national television program for the very purpose of repeating that attack. Especially if you’re not really going to substantively refute that attack, but only stress how much better it would be to observe a grace period of decorous silence.
I’m Shocked You Would Say What We Brought You On to Say!
May 17th, 2007 · 2 Comments
Tags: Journalism & the Media
2 responses so far ↓
1 Tony // May 17, 2007 at 9:18 am
Given how long Falwell didn’t wait to attack gays, feminists, and liberals after the Septermber 11th attacks, I don’t see how Hitchens can be blamed for doing the same.
2 FinFangFoom // May 17, 2007 at 1:00 pm
But by attacking Hitchens on a narrow moral vector that in many (other) situations would be valid, Hannity gets to pump up the self-righteous anger of his viewers thereby letting them avoid thinking that , “gee, maybe Falwell was a dick.”