Review by Doug Gibson
The cover of journalist Matt Taibbi's book, "Hate Inc.: Why Today's Media Makes Us Despise One Another," OR Books, 2019, is an iconic representation of today's boutique small-sectors-sought "journalism" of the type hawked on cable TV news, much of the Internet, and many of the most prominent newspapers, within opinion and even news pages.
Sean Hannity and Rachel Maddow, Taibbi notes, are working very hard to turn us into ideological teams battling other ideologues that they describe as dishonest, loathsome and even downright dangerous to the future of our nation.
A key theme of Taibbi's book is the secret for success -- in today's broadband Internet world -- for media is to make us very angry and resentful. THEY WANT US TO BASE OUR POLITICS ON WHO WE HATE (emphasis intentional). Whether it's Fox News rallying the new Trumpian conservatism (and that gets the highest ratings) or MSNBC rallying progressives, or CNN clamoring to accommodate the outrage from anti- and never-Trumpers, they are all satiating their audience with fear and outrage, 50 percent of it subtle, the rest more blatant.
This has spread to major newspapers. The New York Times and Washington Post have become opposition media to the current administration and the majority of the Republican Party. There exists print media as pro-Trump and Republican as the aforementioned are pro-Democrat, but they are less influential than the Post or the Times. Fox News Channel is still the major engine for movement conservatives.
This is how Taibbi, who writes for Rolling Stone, describes "outrage media" and its red and blue armies and officers such as Hannity and Maddow, etc. Taibbi is no conservative. In fact, I see him as a man of the left, and I doubt he would disagree. Another theme of "Hate Inc." is all this back and forth rancor and fearmongering that triggers we corporals and privates of social media and cable news watching distracts us. Here's another key theme of Hate Inc. -- that outside of high-emotion issues (abortion, anthem kneeling, the Russian collusion pitch, illegal immigration ...) the parties are not too different on economic issues, foreign policy, defense, and criminal justice.
This places Taibbi in what I would describe as a reform progressive movement that while opposed to conservatism, Trumpism -- Glenn Greenwald and Krystal Ball are pundits who fall into this category -- frequently annoy conventional liberalism with their criticism of establishment pols such a Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. The previously mentioned "hot-button" issues, Taibbi argues, are embraced by an aging media which struggles in the post-Sept. 11 Internet world for customers, readers and watchers.
Finding a theme that heats up an audience and builds circulation is the primary goal, rather than any consistency in doctrine. Taibbi notes that many media organs were tolerant of, even friendly toward Donald Trump, during the 2016 presidential race. One example is Morning Joe on MSNBC, and its media star Joe Scarborough. Once Trump won the election, wide swaths of the elite media, sensing anger from their loyal consumers, moved to a far more consistent negative portrayal of the president. It's a marketing decision that continues today. A similar example is right-wing media often swallowing with enthusiasms the many inconsistencies of President Trump, as well as many rightists cheering his budget-busting economic plans.
Taibbi, I would argue, would see that even despite this constant media rancor, and assorted hyped party-versus-party squabbles prior to passage, that the Covid-19 stimulus package just released is still far from providing reasonable economic security to the many millions either thrown out of work or bankrupted by the crisis. It's a middle-of-the-road package that fits within approved economics of the major parties, which enjoy sizzling the steaks but then share the barbecued meat equally.
It wasn't always this way for the major media. In the old days, Taibbi, argues the main problem with media was that it had a "fairway" of accepted media debate. Stepping out of the "fairway" resulted in a consensus that the viewpoint was out of the mainstream; adherents could be compared to "John Birchers" or "communists." "Meet the Press" and "Face the Nation" were more cordial.
While the loss of media gatekeepers, thanks to the Internet, has widened the fairway beyond what anyone envisioned several generations ago, the establishment, at least within the Democratic Party, can quell an uprising. Witness how quickly Bernie Sanders went from solid front-runner to has-been and Biden from has-been to presumed nominee a month-plus ago or so. I'm not spouting any conspiracy theories. It's just a fact that in today's Democratic Party if a candidate like Sanders gets too close, the party leadership will mobilize, convince candidates to drop out, thereby providing the majority that any front-runner would have in a two-person race against a socialist.
"Hate Inc." is a fascinating read. I enjoy Taibbi's intellectually rambunctious and snarky style. The book was originally a series of online posts and it has a going-here going-there style. It travels across the world, to Vietnam, Afghanistan, ... even to England long ago where Taibbi describes how minor disturbances in locations were hyped as a major safety danger. Over-hyping is another theme of the book, though. If an issue can get the masses angry, or at least enough of the masses worked up, they may forget about their real problems. Taibbi is quick and snarky in criticisms of colleagues, but he is honest enough to criticize himself as well.
I think enough of us from all sides of the ideological aisles who are skeptical of pols and major media will find "Hate Inc." a read worth pondering.
