THE BASIS POINT

Free Speech, Free Market, and Political Propaganda

 

Still keep thinking about conservative TV host Laura Ingraham bullying a kid last week because that kid, David Hogg, came out of nowhere as a gun control activist in the wake of a horrific shooting at his school six weeks ago.

Her bullying was about how David, a 4.2 GPA student, got rejected from some colleges he applied to. Within days, he responded with more activism to get most of her large advertisers to drop her. Only then did she issue an “apology” which was a joke.

A couple thoughts here.

1. Note to anyone/everyone issuing apologies: saying ‘I’m sorry you’re hurt or upset by what I did’ isn’t an apology. Either say you’re sorry for what you did or STFU.

2. There isn’t anything more first amendment and free market than how Hogg is responding to the shooting and to the political media machine he’s now part of.

Item 2 above is worth noting after another political commentator Joe Concha said the following about the Ingraham/Hogg dust up, which is dead wrong.

And therein lies the rub: As stated, Hogg should be treated as an adult. It’s the arena he chose to enter and had every right to do so, given his abilities and what he experienced. But if a boycott succeeds here, it sets the kind of precedent that will forever change what the First Amendment is supposed to stand for.

Ingraham wrote an ill-advised tweet that had zero upside. She’s apologized since.

Hogg won’t accept and will continue to push back, via social media and a Friday morning CNN interview, an effort that won’t end until Ingraham vanishes from the airwaves.

If someone is offended by her program or her as a person, don’t watch or listen and allow the free market eventually to decide if she’s worth keeping on.

But the effort to silence a voice, to essentially end a career, based on something like this sets not only a dangerous but completely un-American precedent.

Why is Concha dead wrong here?

Because free speech and free market issues are about government vs. people/businesses. Ingraham against Hogg is person vs. person using free speech to debate in a free market. Hogg winning so far has real economic impact for Ingraham. Their media debate has nothing to do with government silencing either one of them, and Ingraham vs. Hogg is the very definition of free speech and free market. End of story.

 

WANT TO OUTSMART YOUR FRIENDS?

GET OUR NEWSLETTER

Comments [ 0 ]

WHAT DID WE MISS? COMMENT BELOW.

All comments reviewed before publishing.

12 + 1 =

NEED CLARITY IN ALL THIS CONFUSION?

GET OUR NEWSLETTER.

x