Many years ago when Geraldo Rivera was a correspondent for ABC’s 20/20, he chased a pimp down the street during a hilarious ambush interview attempt that began with a fast walk, followed by a jog and then became a full sprint. Had this been in the age of You Tube, the Internet would have been overloaded with viewers. Instead, the video was passed among television newsman as an example of “Geraldo” style jouralism. I’m a longtime critic of the technique, although it was a hallmark of my early career as an investigative reporter in Miami.

Nonetheless, ambush journalism is sometimes the only way to serve the public interest. Such is the case with Tea Party candidate Sharron Angle—the Republican candidate opposing Harry Reid for a U.S. Senate seat in Nevada. TV crews have begun stalking Angle because of her refusal to answer questions about previously stated radical views that seem to advocate taking up arms against our government.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/29/us/politics/29angle.html?th&emc=th

By limiting interviews to right-wing radio shows sympathetic to her views and to appearances on Fox “News,” Ms. Angle re-enforces the old axiom that “the truth hurts.” Her rhetoric is already part of the public record. Among other things, she has called for phasing out Medicare and Social Security, eliminating the EPA and the U.S. Department of Education and making alcohol illegal. While serving in Nevada’s 42-member state Assembly, she voted “no” so often that legislators described votes as “41 to Angle.” 

So given this public record, newsmen have a simple question for the candidate. “Do you really believe your rhetoric, Ms. Angle, or are you truly a right-wing lunatic.” Senate President Harry Reid—an incumbent whose re-election was in serious jeopardy—must fall to his knees daily and thank God for delivering Angle as his opponent in the November elections.

Also remaining close-mouthed in the presence of newsmen is Kentucky U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul—another Republican with strong support from the tea party movement. Early gaffes about civil rights and his defense of BP in the wake of the Gulf coast oil spill disaster led Paul to become extremely cautious in granting interviews to reporters representing the mainstream media. Early on, Paul cancelled an appearance on NBC’s Meet the Press, apparently fearing he would make a fool of himself.

More recently, the Louisiville Courier-Journal disclosed that Paul was not certified by the medical clearing house that oversees his Bowling Green practice as a ophthamologist. Instead, he is certified by the National Board of Ophthamology, an organization he created and heads as President. He has refused to answer questions about his self-certification.

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20100614/NEWS0106/6140307/Rand-Paul-s-ophthalmology-certification-not-recognized-by-national-clearinghouse

When tea partiers are asked about the secrecy of candidates they support, the responses are predictable. “You can’t trust the liberal media.” The “liberal media myth” is a fable fostered by Rush Limbaugh, his idiot clones on Fox “News” and all the Rush wannabes ranting daily on AM radio.

I make no bones about my own progressive political views, which in large part have been hardened by the aforementioned stable of loonies. I know name-calling is counter productive, but at my age it’s better than sex. Indeed, wing-nuts and politicians they endorse have given up on any pretense of civility. So why not join the crowd? More dangerous than the loss of civility is the reality that many journalists have given up on demanding accountability, which allows evasive candidates like Sharron Angle to conceal their true positions on issues.

Maybe it’s time for more reporters to put on Geraldo Rivera running shoes and begin chasing down politicians for answers to tough questions.

My memoir, Odyssey of a Derelict Gunslinger, is available at amazon.com and independent bookstores. It offers much more than $19.99 worth of laughs. The book is an account of my illustrious (I choose the adjectives) career.

Glenn Beck has reached a milestone by signing up the 400th radio station for his syndicated show. Being a fair guy and knowing that a few drooling right-wingers scan this blog, I refer readers to Glenn’s website listing all the stations that air his rants. 

http://media.glennbeck.com/content/radio/

Happy now?

The headline of today’s blog post refers to the dilemma faced of AM radio station ownrs. Over the past two decades, listeners have deserted AM radio with the speed of folks fleeing a theater following a shout of “fire.” That is, of course, until Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and other talk show hosts representing the lunatic fringe came along.

In a strange turnabout, listeners tune in to hear these characters shout “fire.” They have become the ”saviors” of AM radio. Otherwise, folks listen to FM stations, satellite or personal digital collections. Air America was once a liberal alternative. But nobody cared. Or listened. The network went into bankruptcy earlier this year.

There are also a few stations that depend on ESPN for programming. However, all sports, all the time can get boring for people who don’t go to sleep wearing baseball caps and/or football helmets.

That brings me to Savior with a capital “S.” Many AM stations around the country have been “saved” by religious programming. In fact, Jimmy Swaggart Ministries controls 28 radio stations—AM and FM—mainly in the south and midwest. And his programs are carried by many other stations. In fact, radio was the financial salvation of the disgraced preacher’s ministry following sex scandals that nearly destroyed Swaggart’s $150-million a year organization.

Moreover, religious and Gospel music programming has salvaged untold numbers of AM and FM radio stations—especially in rural areas. On long drives, it is interesting and sometimes entertaining to scan stations and listen to preachers of every persuasion. Radio time is relatively cheap on small stations. So just about any pastor can afford to spread his or her message on the airwaves. And they can recoup the investment with a pitch to listeners for contributions. Long before TV evangelists spiritually manipulated audiences for a few dollars, preachers found radio to be a lucrative venue.

The irony in contemporary radio is that the Becks and Limbaughs violate every principle of Christianity. Their messages of hate, distortion and misinformation contaminate the airwaves. Even more curious is that a large segment of their listening audiences profess to be “good Christians.” Yet, they have no qualms about proselytizing the gospel of the loonies.

By the way, is Rush Limbaugh gay? I don’t have any evidence to suggest that he is, but why shouldn’t I ask questions and spread unfounded rumors in the same manner as Limbaugh and his ilk. After all, he paid Elton John a million dollars to play at his recent wedding to bride number four. And right-wing homophobics like Limbaugh often get caught in gay scandals. Just asking. Sometimes, I can’t resist taking cheap shots.

Anyway, this whole issue of choosing between Glenn Beck, et al, and Jesus causes me to wonder about my own choices as the owner of a radio station on the brink of bankruptcy. I’ve been in that position.

After starting my broadcasting career almost a half century ago in a tiny radio station in Northern California, I began harboring a dream of ownership. In my minds eye, I could see me in the owners chair, making all the decisions about programming and format. Twenty years later, I fulfilled my wish. A partner and I bought KCLF, an AM station in New Roads, Louisiana. Its signal barely reached across the Mississippi River to Baton Rouge, where I was then a mini-Mike Wallace exposing crime and corruption in the Capitol City.

Absentee ownership of KCLF provided me an AM radio education. I learned it was a shortcut to bankruptcy. My big mistake was programming the station with what I liked—old time rock and roll from the fifties and sixties. In a small community with a large population of African Americans and an equal number of young people, all of whom preferred FM, I was doomed from the get-go. The station eventually put me in bankruptcy court.     

Glenn, Rush and the others were not around to offer me salvation. Although KCLF carried a few religious broadcasts, Jesus was not present enough to keep the creditors from the door. Its now easy for me to criticize station owners who opt to carry hate-filled programming to avoid financial ruin. But in retrospect, WWJD? What would John do? Or have done? 

I’m lucky. I never had to make the choice.

My memoir, Odyssey of a Derelict Gunslinger, is available at amazon.com and independent bookstores. It offers much more than $19.99 worth of laughs. The book is an account of my illustrious (I choose the adjectives) career.   

Aside from drunken stunts during my booze years, one of the most embarrassing moments of my career was providing the first ever public forum for a pimpled face 19 year old lunatic named David Duke.

In 1969, I was host of a radio talk show on WJBO in Baton Rouge called Topic, a public affairs program that featured in-studio guests along with call in questions and comments from listeners. Although the practice is almost unheard of today on AM radio, I tried to present balanced views—partly because of the FCC’s Fairness Doctrine that was then in effect. So it is not surprising that I sometimes got careless when booking guests with contrasting viewpoints. Such was the case with David Duke. He contacted me following a show in which the head of an LSU student group voiced criticism of U.S. involvement in Vietnam. As I write in Odyssey of a Derelict Gunslinger, the show was an embarrassment to me and the station. 

     David Duke won Topic’s title as the most uncontrollable guest to ever appear on the program. It was his first exposure to an audience larger than a few people who had heard him rant and rave on LSU’s Free Speech Alley. Claiming to be a spokesman for the National Socialist Movement, Duke seemed relatively articulate, and I didn’t check his background until the day of the show. That’s when I realized he was a member of George Lincoln Rockwell’s American Nazi Party. Though disconcerting, I figured to easily send Duke away with a swastika tucked up his ass. After all, I considered myself an accomplished interviewer accustomed to one-on-one confrontations with crazies.

He did me in, responding to rational questions with irrational speeches. But as a free speech advocate, I toughed it out. Using terms like “nigger” and “kike,” the racial slurs and anti-Semitic comments were so inflammatory, I asked if he were under psychiatric care.

When David Duke emerged years later as founder of the National Association for the Advancement of White People, a Ku Klux Klan Wizard, a successful political candidate and a symbol of racism in America, I was embarrassed to admit that I provided an early forum for his malevolence.

More disturbing was the reaction of several call-in listeners, who agreed with his views. These same listeners would picket the station a few weeks later when I refused to bring them on as guests.

I don’t recall the precise reason for denying their request, but they were probably advocating the return of slavery or something equally as stupid. The lesson I learned was that there is an audience for every cause, no matter how crazy. David Duke’s supporters expanded for beyond “Free Speech Alley” and WJBO listeners. After getting a facelift, beefing up his frail body and refining his racist rhetoric, he became a factor in Louisiana politics—serving a short term in the state House of Representatives and then running a credible campaign for governor in which he received more than 600,000 votes, prompting him to brag that he received 55% of the white vote. Duke was beaten by notorious political scoundrel Edwin Edwards in a campaign that featured bumper stickers supporting the three-term governor stating, “Vote for the Crook. It is important.” 

Duke has since faded from the political scene, but clones march on as radio and television personalities, and political candidates. The tone of racial hatred is not as overt as David Duke’s rhetoric. But listening to Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich, I hear subtle echoes of David Duke. They exploit the hysteria that prompted Arizona to adopt draconian measures to deal with illegal immigrants—a law that empowers lawmen to profile Hispanics.

At the National Rifle Association’s annual convention in Charolotte, North Carolina this past weekend, the gun-toting advocates were dazzled with disinformation dispensed by the trio of Palin, Beck and Gingrich. Miss Sarah claimed that Barack Obama wanted to ban guns and ammunition, Beck did his gig about the nation heading for socialism, and former House Speaker Gingrich discussed the threat of U.S. Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan. The NRA is a particularly gullible audience to right-wing propaganda. Members apparently live in fear. Why else do they want to carry guns into Starbucks, churches, and other locations they perceive as dangerous?

Indeed, fear has taken a segment of society to the brink of panic. The David Dukes of today exploit the fears of people caught in the throes of economic uncertainty and fear of an unprecedented unknown—a black President. In troubled times, there are always people willing to cash in on fear. As Paul Krugman writes today in the New York Times, “Right-wing extremism may be the same as it ever was, but it clearly has more adherents now than it did a couple of years ago.” 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/17/opinion/17krugman.html?ref=opinion

David Duke was last reported living in Salzburg, Austria and running an Internet blog, although he still claims to be a resident of Mandeville, Louisiana. But no matter where he is, the professional hater must be proud of those following in his footsteps.

My memoir, Odyssey of a Derelict Gunslinger, is available at amazon.com and independent bookstores. It offers much more than $19.99 worth of laughs. It is an account of my illustrious (I choose the adjectives) career. 

I’ve changed my mind. The Fairness Doctrine needs to be reinstated, either by the Federal Communications Commission or an act of Congress. My previous blog posts have been wishy-washy on the issue. But no more. I’m convinced that a lack of balanced dialogue on the nation’s airwaves—compounded by viral Internet rumors—has created an era of public affairs’ ignorance, incivility and government distrust.

The Fairness Doctrine was repealed by the FCC in 1987, which was then under the chairmanship of Mark Fowler, a former Ronald Reagan campaign official and confidante of the President. I doubt it’s a coincidence that Rush Limbaugh’s radio show went into national syndication the following year. Until August 1988, the opinions of the ex-disc jockey and eventual pill-head were confined to Sacramento, California. 

When the FCC revoked a 40 year old policy requiring licensed broadcasters to display a modicum of fairness in airing views about politics and public affairs, AM radio was resurrected from near death. The condition had been caused by the superior quality of FM bands. Hence, many AM stations were relying on religious broadcasts to avoid bankruptcy. That is until Limbaugh took over for Jesus. 

Instintively or by sheer luck, he recognized that outrageous opinions attracted more listeners than reciting Biblical passages. Soon, Limbaugh wannabes—many of them unemployed disc jockeys—began refining their acts. In 1989, for example, Sean Hannity ran a job wanted ad in Broadcasting Magazine, declaring himself as “the most talked about college talk show host in America.” The conversation about Hannity must have been about his limited experience of getting fired for attacking gays after less than a year on the air in Santa Barbara. Hannity’s second broadcasting job was in Athens, Alabama, a town more tolerant of his intolerance. 

In the late eighties and early nineties, Glenn Beck was still boozing, drugging and pulling stupid stunts that got fired from disc jockey jobs. He says he got sober in 1994. By then, the repeal of of Fairness Doctrine had already turned AM radio into right-wing propaganda outlets. Free of FCC constraints, station managers were devoid of conscience and will to hire any lunatic with the ability to attract listeners and help produce profits. CNN Headline News gave Beck his TV break. Then it was onward and upward to Fox “News,” the network with the highest tolerance for insanity.

Before Fox, Limbaugh was the first choice of the wing-nuts.  The election of Bill Clinton was fine fodder for him. He had already feasted on Presidential candidate Michael Dukakis four years earlier by exploiting Willie Horton—the black convict, who raped a woman while on furlough from a Massachusetts prison wile Dukakis was Governor of the state. But Willie Horton propaganda was mild compared to the disinformation campaign that was launched following the 1993 suicide of Clinton legal counsel, Vincent Foster. In a twisted manner, Foster’s death raised questions about a Clinton investment ten years before in a minor real estate development called, Whitewater Estates. Limbaugh went on the attack. 

He helped spread rumors that Foster—clinically diagnosed as depressed—was murdered to cover-up Whitewater misdeeds. Or worse, to hide a love affair with Hillary Clinton. It was the genesis of a seven-year, $70-million investigation that eventually focused on whether the President had a crooked penis, or if Monica Lewinsky had knee calluses. The subsequent impeachment of the President for lying about his sexual peccadillos resulted in an innocent verdict. But the bogus scandal, at least in my opinion, was enough to elect George W. Bush President. He took the nation to war and created economic chaos.

Meantime, talk radio continues to flourish by exploiting brain-lazy radio listeners and TV viewers who accept without question the lies, half-truths and propaganda of failed disc jockeys. Don’t  get me wrong. Although my opnions are 180 degrees from the commentaries of Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity and other right-wing talkers, I would never deny them the right to rattle on. Thanks to freedom of speech, I built a successful career as an investigative reporter. Indeed, I was a radio talk show host for years when the three icons of the craft were in kindegarten and/or elementary and high schools.

My program was one of the first, if not the very first, radio talk show in Baton Rouge. The WJBO show aired during a volatile era when civil rights, school desegregation  and other contentious issues were being debated in Louisiana. Yet, I never found the Fairness Doctrine to be a burden.  Although many guests on the show were controversial—as well as my opinions—I tried to give  listeners balanced views. This was not out of necessity or fear of the FCC, but because it was the right thing to do. Most people who sought to voice opinions as guests on the show were given the opportunity—multiple times, usually. Hence, I interviewed Nazi’s, KKK Grand Dragons, black militants and an array of bed-wetting liberals. 

As a result of my experience, it surprised me to learn that WJBO’s program director was a featured speaker at the Tea Party’s April 15th tax day demonstration on the steps of the Louisiana Capitol building. But my old station is the Baton Rouge outlet for Rush Limbaugh and others of his ilk, so it is pretty obvious that the views of the station’s program director must reflect the crap he puts on the air. I should probably be more generous in my criticism. WJBO let me promote my book during an interview on its morning drive time program. Slice, slice. There goes the nose right off my face.

Regardless, I can’t get the yearning for the old days when fairnesss meant more than profits.

My memoir, Odyssey of a Derelict Gunslinger, is available at amazon.com and independent bookstores. It offers much more than $19.99 worth of laughs. It is an account of my illustrious (I choose the adjectives) career. 

And now we know. Despite Rush Limbaugh’s macho posturing, he is really a closet supporter of health care reform. The truth emerged this week when Limbaugh promised to leave the country if Congress passes the health care package. His startling announcement will no doubt cause many opponents of the the bill to re-think their opposition.

I can only presume that Rush experienced an epiphany during a New Year’s  visit to the “socialist” state of Hawaii, which offers universal health care similar to the plan supported by the Obama Administration. Following his December 30th, 2009, treatment for chest pains thought to be a minor heart attack, he praised the Honolulu “socialist” hospital for the care he received.

Rush is a pretty shrewd guy. For years, he has exploited the worst fears of his audience with moronic analysis of public affairs issues, his racist comments, personal attacks on Democrats, and a lack of compassion for people at the bottom of the poverty scale. Now we know that he was simply using scare tactics to make a few bucks. It is the “ditto-heads, who are the simpletons since they believed he was a serious about his opinions.

In salesmanship, Rush’s techinique falls into the category of a negative pitch. For example, when car buyers are at the brink of a purchase but can’t quite make up their minds, a salesman may say as a last resort, “This car seems a little too expensive for you. Why don’t we look at something a bit cheaper?” At this point, pride causes a lot of people to respond, “Sure I can afford it.” To prove the point, they buy the car.

By emphasizing the negatives of health care, Limbaugh convinced listeners that they can’t afford the President’s plan. But the backlash by the GOP politicians and tea partiers was more than he bargained for. Realizing he needed to do something desperate to get the bill passed, he promised to do what many of us have hoped for years would happen. He pledged to leave the country. Costa Rica is his intended destination. It is a beautiful place with rain forests, beautiful beaches and hospitable weather. I’m certain Rush will enjoy his new home.

Unfortunately, I have bad vibes about the country. Costa Rica is the only place I ever walked off an assignment—at least during the 39 years I’ve been sober. In 1998, I traveled to Costa Rica to do a CNN story about child prostitution. I was working for the first time with a new producer in our Special Assignment Unit. She was a veteran reporter, who I wrongly assumed to be competent. I didn’t know that her skills and journalism ethics were non-existent. Nor did I realize that she knew nothing about production planning. Indeed, only one member of our crew spoke any Spanish at all, making it nearly impossible to effectively interview non-English speaking Costa Rican’s she lined-up. Even worse, a Honduran human rights advocate with pre-conceived notions about the direction of our story accompanied us. At the same time, I discovered my producer had previously been involved as an activist in the 1980’s and early nineties ”recovered memory” craze in which children were manipulated into making sexual allegations that turned out to be fantasies prodded from them by inept therapists.

None of the above caused me to depart Costa Rica in a huff, although I was sorely tempted when the producer suggested I wear a hidden camera and microphone while shopping for under-aged girls in whorehouses. I refused. The final straw for me finally occured during a stake-out of a place where police had earlier found a sixteen year-old prostitute. I did a telephone interview with the pimp who ran the house. He answered questions, claiming the girl produced a birth certificate indicating she was eighteen. However, the guy refused to do an on-camera inteview. The next next afternoon, our  producer decided to station a camera on a public sidewalk outside the gate of the house of ill-repute. An hour passed and nobody emerged. However, the cops were summoned. Hearing the producer’s explanation, they cautioned us remain on the sidewalk and left. So we continued to idiotically stand there with the camera pointed toward the doorway. I asked what this charade would accomplish. The pimp was obviously staying inside. The producer only shugged. In disgust, I said, “Adios (one of the few Spanish words I knew), stopped by the hotel to get my baggage, and headed home.

A postscript. As the result of a series of events, CNN’s then president, Rick Kaplan, named the incompetent producer to head the Special Assignment Unit. She was an old friend of Kaplan. Thus, her competence made no difference. A few days after the appointment, the network offered to give me a bonus and continue paying my salary for two years if I would consent to stay at home. I considered the proposition for all of 30 seconds before again saying, “Adios.” My Spanish was getting better.

I hope Rush Limbaugh has better memories of Costa Rica. While in exile, he will need to master Spanish in order to accomodate radio listeners—no easy accomplishment for a man his age. My suggestion is that he move to Australia.

By the way, I need to clarify yesterday’s post in which I questioned whether Wyoming was a real state, or a myth. I have never been to Wyoming, nor knew anyone personally, who claimed to be from the state. But relying on my skills as an award-winning investigative reporter, I have now determined it was admitted to the union in 1890. I guess the ancestors of Wyoming natives Dick and Liz Cheney failed to inform them of this development. Hence, they have not yet grasped the freedoms guaranteed by our country.

Fox “News” now promotes itself as television’s most trusted network—a dubious honor that is sort of like McDonalds bragging that its arches were still standing along a stretch of the Mississippi Gulf Coast beach following Hurricane Katrina.

According to poll figures, 49% of those surveyed trust Fox, compared with 39% for CNN—the longstanding “most trusted network.” Farther down the trust ladder were NBC, CBS and ABC. The ten point spread between the two leading cable networks is significant. But more noteworthy—at least in my opinion—is the distrust numbers. Thirty-seven percent do not trust Fox, 41% don’t have faith in CNN, and at the low end of the scale, 46% distrust ABC.

Numbers are boring. My eyes glazed while writing the previous paragraph. However, the survey says much about the nation’s collective state of mind. For anyone with a propensity for exploiting the fear, anger and distrust of our fellow countrymen (countrywomen, too, since I want to be politically correct), now is the time to get into the agitating business.

If there is any doubt about the rewards of anger manipulation, consider the success of Fox “News.” It is the home of Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and a stable of right-wing droolers who run around with pom poms, acting as cheerleaders for conservative movements such as the Tea Party Nation.

Literally.

A Fox producer was recently videotaped stirring the Tea Party crowd into a rah, rah mood prior to a live shot. In my days at CNN, that kind of crap would have been a firing offense—no explanation sought. Indeed, the network even outlawed re-asks, a standard production technique following single camera interviews. For editing purposes, the camera was turned toward the correspondent and he or she repeated the questions previously asked.

Shut up, gunslinger. That’s too much information. Nobody cares.

So, back to the issue at hand—the exploitation of hard times in America. Characters like Glenn, Sean, Rush Limbaugh and a cast of AM right-wing radio agitators share the DNA—metaphorically, if not in fact—of the original broadcasting hate-monger, Father Charles Coughlin.

The Roman Catholic priest took to the airwaves in 1923 in Detroit, just three years after Pennsylvania’s KDKA aired radio’s the nation’s first  commercial broadcast. Father Coughlin’s mixed bag of political views gave voice to the fears of listeners. During the Great Depression, his audience was second only to FDR’s fireside chats. At the peak of the cleric’s popularity, he received an estimated 80,000 letters a week.

Coughlin was an early and ardent supporter of President Roosevelt’s New Deal, but later reversed course to become a leading critic of the program. Instead, he embraced Huey P. Long’s populist Share Our Wealth Society, which lost steam in 1935 after the man known as the ”Kingfish” was assassinated  in a corridor of  Louisiana’s Capitol building. 

For four decades, the priest stoked the fires of discontent in the nation. Like an early day Pat Robertson, he even founded a radio network as a venue to proseltyze his outlandish views about Wall Street, New York bankers and an array of other targets. His anti-semitism included leading protest demonstrations against Jews immigrating to America. At the same time, he rationalized the conduct of Hitler and Mussolini. 

Father Coughlin departed the airwaves in 1946 to avoid being defrocked by the Detroit Catholic Diocese. He became the pastor of a small church in Detroit and died 1976 in a nursing home.  

But there have been many broadcasting successors to Father Coughlin, each more outrageous than the last—especially since the Federal Communication Commission underwent surgery two decades ago for removal of its testicles. Fox “News” now carries forward the priest’s legacy. 

In a contemporary era of discontent, the network is a propaganda outlet of  Republicans. Fox explains the futility felt by people in superficial and simplified terms, pointing fingers of blame mostly at Democrats. When self-declared clown, Glenn Beck, and former bartender, Sean Hannity, spout the Fox (GOP) party line, 49% of its viewers believe them. Or so states the recent poll. Amazing!

The results of the survey seem to give credibility to P.T Barnum’s famed observation that “a sucker is born every minute.”

Four decades ago when I was a very young man—an age perspective that is quite subjective—I was the host of a daily radio talk show on WJBO in Baton Rouge called, Topic. In those days, AM radio was dominant and news departments represented a major commitment by stations to their listeners and communities. Topic’s format featured in-depth interviews with newsmakers, followed by caller participation. Talk shows were then cutting edge broadcasting. In fact, Topic was selected by Associated Press as Louisiana’s best news program.

In 1970, my guests one afternoon were representatives of an LSU political group advocating U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam. The students were tame compared to the sometimes violent protests across the country. The next day, I received a telephone call from an LSU student who said he had a contrasting point of view and asked to appear on the show. Finding guests for the daily show was my responsibility—no easy chore. The young man said he represented the National Socialist Movement. The group’s name sounded vaguely familiar, but I didn’t immediately determine in what context I recognize the title. And besides, the Fairness Doctrine, which was then in effect, required FCC licensed broadcasters to present contrasting points of view on controversial issues. I figured this guy fulfilled the station’s obligation.

The day before my guest was scheduled to appear, I checked with LSU to find out something about the National Socialist Movement. The office that oversaw student organizations said it was not a registered student group. So I called a member of the anti-war group. He informed me that the National Socialist Movement was better known as the American Nazi Party. And my guest was a raving lunatic named David Duke, whose primary venue was LSU’s Free Speech Alley.

But not to worry. I was an experienced interviewer, who planned to rip young Mr. Duke apart. It didn’t happen that way. In four years of doing the show, he was most uncontrollable guest I ever encountered. And the most embarassing. Using Topic as a forum, he insulted nearly every listener—the exception being a group of bigoted morons who agreed with his assaults on Jews, African-Americans and anyone sympathetic to their causes. Giving David Duke one of his first exposures beyond Free Speech Alley—maybe his first exposure—is not a highlight of my broadcasting career.

The David Duke incident illustrates both extremes of the FCC’s Fairness Doctrine, which was repealed in 1987. On the positive side, I felt an obligation to present a contrasting point of view, even one that was at the outermost edge of sanity. On the negative side, the Fairness Document was much abused. During my Topic days, there was a small group of crazy women in Baton Rouge that regularly changed the names of organizations they represented and demanded I have them on the show to respond to whatever guests they disagreed with. When I finally refused, they printed placards and picketed the station. I appreciated the publicity.

Depending upon one’s point of view, the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine has resulted in good and/or bad elements that are loud and visible today. At the time fairness was abandoned and the FCC had dental work that rendered it toothless, radio station KFBK in Sacramento had a loud-mouth talk show host named Rush Limbaugh. Any constraints he felt about expressing his conservative views were removed. A year later, he was hired by WABC in New York City. To paraphrase Paul Harvey, “You know the rest of the story.” AM radio became a propaganda arm of the far-right.

I don’t support the restoration of the Fairness Doctrine—at least in the manner it was enforced in the past. By the same token, I don’t believe the term “fair and balanced” should be antiquated. At present, it is a phrase that is only heard as a laugh line when referring to Fox “News.”

No wonder voters are so often ill-informed.