Steve's* Talk Radio News of the Day
*An extreme far-centrist foundation!
Larry Elder Reloaded
Is A Talk Show Host Responsible To Know What Of He Speaks?

by Steve Young

June 3, 2003 -- LOS ANGELES (apj.us) -- The Sa-a-age from South Central just can't help himself.

KABC's syndicated L.A. talk show host, Larry Elder, finds Hollywood and its ilk so tempting and so moist with liberal syrup that it's difficult to keep from jumping at the chance to get the fixin'-to-boycott troops to turn in their AMC tickets to the next (put you own liberal actor's name here) movie, even when Elder has no idea what he's talking about.

Last time it was an episode of David Kelly's "The Practice" which he ripped for what he said was its anti-Bush, liberal bias.

Only one problem with his argument. HE FORGOT TO WATCH THE EPISODE IN QUESTION. To make matters worse, instead of bringing on a writer or producer, or network executive in charge (or even a spokesmodel from the network) -- somebody who has something to do with conceptualizing, writing or approving the airing of the show -- he brought on Michael Badalucco, one of the show's actors -- a guy who memorizes the lines given to him -- to debate the issue. And Larry had to admit he hadn't even seen that particular show.

And because of that small oversight (non-sight?), Larry was unable to inform his audience that the point in question was actually argued during the show. Both sides were aired. Which, I'm told my Robert McKee story structure teachers, builds conflict, the very essential of any good story.

Having a fictional drama present a point of view might be open for debate -- but when the show provides both points of view, shouldn't that be mentioned? Why did it take Berdalucco bringing that up before Elder's audience was told? Isn't this omission by a supposed nonfiction talk show more of a mislead than a fictional drama should be responsible for?

This past week Larry's debate centered on the new film, "The Matrix Reloaded," and its alleged alluding to the President (and/or the Prez's Pop) as being in the same domain as the master of d'evil, Adolf Hitler.

Once again, Larry did not see the film.

He left the facts of the story up to his listeners (a truly objective source) and also read a letter from Warner Brothers, the producers of "The Matrix Reloaded."

I come not to argue the intent of the film's producer, or even what showed up in the film, as I did not see it (I'm waiting for the free download).

But I did listen to Larry's show. And I did contact his show's screener who told me that Larry did not see the film.

As we've been told aplenty, talk show hosts are not informers. They are infortainers, just as I am not a journalist, but a journaltainer. Certainly we tainers need not speak from facts -- so why even attempt to gather them? But if you're going to attack something for what you say they're doing it might help to actually see what it is they did. It's amazing what a sound bite pulled from the midst of a plethora of sound won't give you. Say, like context. It could even provide something else that was said that either contradicts or shows an attempt at balance in what was presented by the film or TV program.

I mean, really -- how much work do you have to do to legitimately back up the supposition that Hollywood leans liberal? What are you going to challenge next? Gays in the arts? Jews in the garment industry?

Why leave yourself open to some cranky columnist who just waits for the opportunity to tear your credibility to shreds when a quick look-see would have CYA?

Larry also ran sound-bites from left-winged partisan classics like "Two Weeks Notice," a film that didn't last as long as its title, and "The Smart Guy," a WB show that was canceled to the Disney Channel graveyard over three years ago. In both cases Elder mentioned "...remember that one," as if any of us had seen them, let alone recollect the sound-bite. "Remember that one?"

I wrote for "The Smart Guy" -- and I can't remember "that one!"

Why does Elder continue to take exception with stories without first checking the actual story?

Elder often chastises his adversarial callers for not being well-informed -- or at least as well-informed as the information his producers or the Media Research Center supply to him. Doing conscientious investigation and having all the facts at hand before calling a talk show always seems to be the responsibility of adversarial points of view. It's so little to ask of the caller to have your "facts" in order before making the call. Certainly Elder wouldn't prepare less than what he demands of his listeners?

Unless -- and this is just clear speculation on my part -- Elder chose to cover this subject and chastise Hollywood just to lambast liberals.

Please don't tell me that radio talk has come to this.

Steve Young is an award-winning television writer, director / writer of "My Dinner With Ovitz," contributing editor for the WGA's "Written By" magazine, and author of "Great Failures of the Extremely Successful" (Tallfellow Press), and writes assorted gems at JewishWorldReview.com.

Check out Steve's Web site at www.greatfailure.com!