Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Michael Medved Believes TV Makes People Gay and Causes Abortion

Posted by Guest Blogger at 10:42 AM on June 18, 2007.


Melissa McEwan: A recent Medved piece is so terrible, so fact-mangled, so deranged, so rife with stinking horseshit, that it's almost beautiful in its grotesquery.
douchinator
Medved

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

This post, written by Melissa McEwan, originally appeared on Shakesville

What can I say about Moustacheford Douchington III that either Spudsy or I haven't already said? The guy is a total intellectual trainwreck, whose pop-psych observations about pop culture are so resoundingly fatuous and/or blatantly wrong that I'm consistently amazed he's actually being serious and isn't some flesh-and-blood Frankenstein's monster pieced together from Onion columnists wrought to life by a mad scientist in a meth lab.

His most recent endeavor, Why TV Addiction Links to Liberalism, is so terrible, so fact-mangled, so deranged, so rife with stinking horseshit, that it's almost beautiful in its grotesquery.

Relying on a study by the ridiculous Culture and Media Institute, whose sole purpose is to provide idiotic findings to Townhall columnists, Medved says:

Does heavy TV viewing push people toward more liberal opinions? Or is it the impact of pre-existing leftist attitudes that lead viewers to invest more of their lives on television?
Analysts may argue about causation, but there's no real doubt about correlation: an important new study from the Culture and Media Institute shows that those who describe themselves as "heavy" TV viewers embrace distinctly liberal attitudes on a range of crucial issues, placing them well to the left of those who report "light" TV viewing.
Absolutely right. There is indeed no real doubt about correlation. Except here's the problem about writing an entire article based on correlation after dismissing the relevance of causation: WHO GIVES A SHIT?! It's totally meaningless! There's absolutely no point whatsoever, aside from trying to give breath to the idea that heavy TV viewing and liberal opinions are inextricably linked. But correlation doesn't de facto remotely imply a direct link. Evidently Medved never took Sociology 101 or only listened until he heard "There is a correlation between ice cream sales and murder" and spent the rest of the class--and his life--wondering Does ice cream cause murder or do murderers celebrate with ice cream? If he'd paid attention to this classic of correlation, this greatest hits of sociological gotchas, he'd have found out that the missing link is heat. As the temperature rises, so do ice cream sales and murders.

Nonetheless, I look forward to his next column, "Why Heavenly Hash Links to Homicide."

Special props to Medved for completely flubbing (and profoundly misunderstanding) the opening line of Anna Karenina, which is Mr. Shakes' favorite book and favorite opening line of all time, and also for this gem:

People who see themselves as alone in the world, with no network of spouses or fellow congregants, frequently turn to government as a source of support and comfort--just as they'd turn to television as a source of phony companionship. It makes sense that loneliness and helplessness and disconnection would breed both liberalism and heavy TV viewing; just as a vibrant family life, and communal participation, would produce less television and more conservative self-reliance.
How much wrongity-wrongness can he fit into two sentences? Yeeeeeeeessss, the archetypical "crazy loner" is both liberal and pro-government. Uh-huh. Like, say, Ted Kaczynski the Unabomber (anti-leftist anarchist) or Timothy McVeigh the Oklahoma City bomber (anti-government separatist and registered Republican)? Or, for example, any number of deeply misogynist, decidedly illiberal, and famously isolated and unsocial serial killers? Or the kids who take guns to school and shoot up their classmates? All of them were yelling "¡Che está con nosotros!" right? Yeah, it makes "perfect sense" disconnection would breed liberalism.

Helplessness is a whole matter unto itself; people can be helpless in numbers. (See: Katrina.) In fact, there are lot of helpless communities in America, either regionally or by virtue of identity or circumstance. But that inconvenient fact undermines the grand conservative meme of individual success and bootstraps and blah blah blah, so better to lump it in like just another character flaw to be despised by the brilliant vibrancy that is American Conservatism.

I really wish Michael Medved would change his name. I'm ashamed to share my initials with him.

Digg!

Tagged as: media, conservatives, television, homophobia, medved, cultural critcism

Melissa McEwan is the founder and editor of Shakesville, an award-winning blog with a diverse group of international contributors and an eye on progressive politics and culture. A freelance writer and graphic designer, McEwan lives in suburban Chicago with two cats and a Scotsman.


Going Extreme: Demint Says Recruiting Electable Moderates "Doesn't Make Any Sense"
You thought only the left formed up into circular firing squads.
Post by Jed Lewison. November 8, 2009.
House of Representatives Passes Health-Care Reform Bill in Historic Vote
With the vote of a single Republican, Democrats passed the Affordable Health Care Act for America.
Post by Adele Stan. November 7, 2009.
Anti-Woman Amendment to Health Care Passes House
The Stupak amendment -- an anti-choice measure that could virtually eliminate insurance coverage for abortion -- will be attached to the health-care reform bill.
Post by Adele Stan. November 7, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Is he speaking from his own experience?
Posted by: lessbread on Jun 18, 2007 1:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
 

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

GEE, MAYBE HE'S ON TO SOMETHING.
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jun 18, 2007 2:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You just never know. ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ODD
Posted by: paulaH on Jun 19, 2007 4:10 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I know a number of liberals and about the same number of conservatives and guess what? The conservatives watch alot more TV than the liberals. As a matter of fact, a percentage of the liberals don't even own a TV, whereas I know not a single conservative that doesn't. The program choices, too, are dissimilar. The liberals I know tend to watch Discovery and History channel more than the others. The conservatives watch Survivor and the Bachelor.

I'm not sure where he got his idea that TV makes people liberal since it's the conservatives that are the most addicted. After all, those are the ones who get all of their news from FAUX News rather than the assorted newspapers and online sources most liberals use.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ODD Posted by: VannaLaRoche
Michael take your medveds
Posted by: Astroboy on Jun 19, 2007 4:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Television by and large reflects society to a much greater degree than it influences it.
If it wants viewers, it must appeal to us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But Liberals Founded America!
Posted by: thornwolf on Jun 19, 2007 5:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Men of liberal persuasion founded America on liberal principles. And that was before television! How then to explain Michael Medved? And why do people like him hate America so? Are they afraid? Maybe that's it; they're afraid. Poor scared little people of faint heart and no faith, afraid something might turn them gay or that they might somehow become infected with liberal passion.

So sad. They deserve our pity as much as our scorn. If only they weren't trying so hard to ruin everything, I might cut them some slack. As it is, they can take their perversely hideous line of bull and shove it.

This liberal watches almost no tv at all, and when I do it's History Channel or Science Channel or something like that, so Medved's overly clever little conclusion falls out the window. How about Medved posts his tv picks for us? I'll bet he can't take the heat.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another scary correlation
Posted by: Uncle Crabby on Jun 19, 2007 6:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Education in a university environment does exactly the same thing. It seems that, the smarter you get, the more progressive you tend to be.

If we could just get rid of TV, education, the internet, and free thought, we would then have the right thinking environment Mister Medved craves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Practically no TV for a decade...
Posted by: indradawn on Jun 19, 2007 7:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I almost never watch any TV (save for the VERY occasional Daily Show or TNG rerun), and haven't for the last ten years. I'm about as left-leaning as they come. But I do love ice cream. Uh oh...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So be it
Posted by: outlander55 on Jun 19, 2007 8:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Analysts may argue about causation, but there's no real doubt about correlation: an important new study from the Culture and Media Institute shows that those who describe themselves as "heavy" TV viewers embrace distinctly liberal attitudes on a range of crucial issues, placing them well to the left of those who report "light" TV viewing."
Most of the TV that I watch is news. CNN, Bloomberg, World News International, and the BBC. If being informed means that I am "liberal", then so be it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As a Rock-Ribbed Right Wing Conservative . . .
Posted by: arcanaut on Jun 19, 2007 10:15 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I watch a fair amount of TV, but not "Survivor" or "The Bachelor" (ugh!). I watch Fox News, MSNBC, Comedy Channel, Cartoon Network, and HBO (Big Love, the Sopranos). AMC, Turner Movie Channel. History Channel, Discovery, Food Network. But I like podcasts more. But I watch a fair amount of TV, and I sure watched a lot more TV growing up (including a ton of CNN and PBS), and it didn't turn me into a liberal.

Michael Medved's correlation is, ah, dubious at best, but the author of this article sounds a whole lot like Michael Medved, only facing the other ideological direction. If the author is ashamed to share initials with Medved, then you'd think she'd be ashamed to to share a similar penchant for smearing, name-calling, and hyperbole.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Medved: Television causes...
Posted by: jimmyaj on Jun 19, 2007 11:50 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only consistant relationship to television I've ever observed is that the time spent watching it is an approximate inverse of the watcher's IQ (i.e., more TV, lower IQ). It's a mental timefiller for people who can't otherwise think. The only reason to watch TV is to observe all the crap being pushed on our society.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't sweat the small stuff
Posted by: dkm on Jun 19, 2007 2:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Melissa, calm down. The guy is such a jerk he doesn't deserve your notice. Remember that Duke guy down in Louisiana who was such hot stuff for the pointyheaded sheet wearers a few years ago? Once the MSM stopped featuring him, he dropped off the map. The same thing applies to this mental midget who has you all worked up. He really isn't worth your time. The same goes for all the other jerks on Faux news and the various call-in radio programs. Don't give them the benefit of your attention.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If Moron Medved ........
Posted by: tap17x on Jun 20, 2007 9:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.............didn't have his head stuck way up his ass, he would realize that the greatest threat to cramped conservatism is free thought, education, and exposure to a variety of influences. Somehow I became liberal and stayed that way even though I have no TV.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]