Ben Shapiro’s Primetime Propaganda: The True Hollywood Story of How the Left Took Over Your TV, released at the end of May, quickly became a sensation in the television industry last month, in large part thanks to its brilliant marketing campaign, which, as Ben mentioned during our interview, was inspired by Andrew Breitbart’s brillant, drip-drip-drip rollout of James O’Keefe’s ACORN sting in the fall of 2009. Just as O’Keefe exposed ACORN’s corruption, and Breitbart the Obama-friendly Ruling Class tilt of the media, Shapiro recorded many of the TV industry’s biggest behind the scenes players admitting on tape that of course primetime television skews left, as do the hiring practices of the industry that produces it.
Much like Bernard Goldberg’s earlier exposes on television’s news departments, this didn’t exactly come as a shock to any conservative who had been following television for the last several decades. But having industry insiders come clean was certainly a welcome change, and a turning point for both the industry and its critics.
But why does that bias exist, particularly when historically, so many of TV’s biggest hits have been more or less apolitical? That’s the subject of the first half of Shapiro’s book, which is a brilliant history of the politics and worldview of the primetime television industry, from the days of Uncle Miltie to M*A*S*H to Murphy Brown, all the way to the Obama era.
In very tangible way, this portion of Shapiro’s book is both the sequel and conservative counterweight to former SDS member Todd Gitlin’s left-leaning earlier guide to the industry, Inside Prime Time, which has served as a college textbook (including one of the courses I took on the media a quarter century ago.)
When Gitlin wrote Inside Prime Time in 1983, cable was beginning its ascendency, but there was still plenty of money to be made by everyone in the TV industry. Today, as Shapiro writes, the handwriting is on the wall for television as we know it — and the last chapter of his book describes a sense of cultural exhaustion that pervades the industry today, in much the same way that so many of the products advertised on the networks aim for a rather venerable demographic. And when those viewers shuffle off to the great living room in the sky, television as we know it may begin to ebb away. (In a way, that process has already slowly begun, since terrestrial over-the-air-TV is no more.)
What comes next? As Shapiro writes in Primetime Propaganda:
As the television industry morphs into an Internet/television cyborg, the market is beginning to open for nonliberal creators and executives. The process we are watching in relation to the print medium applies also to television—more and more creative minds and sponsors are being given the means and the methods to contribute by the cheapness and convenience of the Internet. The Internet is Prometheus, and it has brought fire down from the television gods. All that is left is for men and women with diverse political viewpoints to learn how to use it.
If you’re thinking of taking him on the offer, Shapiro’s book should required reading to avoid the network mistakes of the past. And for the would-be television mavens of the future to avoid the biggest mistake conservatives make when they go into the entertainment industry: producing strident agitprop, instead of telling a great story that can grab an audience emotionally (or make them bust a gut laughing, or both), but one that just happens to be conservative.
In the meantime, click here to listen to our interview:
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
(20 minutes long; 18.3 MB. Want to download instead of streaming? Right click here to download this week’s show to your hard drive. Or right click here to download the 5.75 MB lo-fi edition.)
Greetings:
One of the things that has helped me cut back on my television viewing time is that ability of broadcast programs to insert their political “credos” in their stories. The Progressive (neé Public) Broadcasting System is especially inclined and astute in this regard, but even your basic crime drama (or drivel, if you prefer) is now similarly afflicted.
This past Independence Eve, do to a total failure on the part of my social secretary, I ended up seeing a program called “Blue Bloods” (she still thinks Tom Selleck looks like me) broadcast by our local CBS affiliate, KPIX. The gist of the story was that a homeless street person is killed by a trio of white male 21st Century yuppie-equivalents. The victim turns out to be a multi-tour US Marine veteran who had been awarded, among other medals, a Silver Star. The body was found by an older security guard who, unprompted, admits that when he returned from his tour in sunny Southeast Asia, had “problems” for a couple of years. The investigation of the murder so affects the detective investigating it, an Iraq veteran, that he has an emotional breakdown.
Now, when I returned from my tour of sunny Southeast Asia, it seemed to me that any Viet Nam veterans on TV were climbing up on bell towers, or some such, to do some random population control. But, nowadays, we’ve progressed or progressived, to where veterans are seriously damaged victims which allows not only the moral superiority reward of warm feelings of compassion toward the victimized but also, a bit more subliminally perhaps, the resurgent “This is what war will do to you” message. Join the military; Free PTSD.
As Bob Dylan so wonderfully sings, “It ain’t dark, but it’s getting there.”
I think you misjudged this episode and, indeed, a series which is rife with conservative values. The detective did *not* have an emotional breakdown, rather that he was too emotionally invested in the case. That some come back from war “damaged” is an old story, quite familiar to those who spoke of “shell shock” in earlier generations. But the underlying message was honoring those who serve.
The whole family is about duty and service, the young lawyer-turned-cop telling a woman under his protection in one episode that no one in his family ever talked about what they make. A four-generation nuclear family committed to their faith and each other, the liberal sentiments of the ADA always answered by “how the real world works” conservatives, etc. What more could you want?
Greetings:
I’ll certainly admit that the outlined episode was the only one of the series that I have seen, so I can’t speak to your initial assertion about the series overall. One of the reason’s that I watched it at all was because of Tom Selleck’s work in the “Magnum P.I.” series in which he portrayed a veteran.
That stated, the detective challenged a suspect to a fight, beat the suspect bloody, and then sat on his chest crying. Mmmm, sounds like an emotional breakdown to me.
My bottom line take on the program is this: three veterans, three damaged human beings, and on Independence Eve. Thanks, Hollywood.
I wrote briefly about Blue Bloods, contrasting it to The Mentalist. These are very clear examples of the range of cop shows available on television. Both have followings. The blog link is here: http://clarespark.com/2011/05/20/the-mentalist-melville-blake-and-israel/.
“But why does that bias exist, particularly when historically, so many of TV’s biggest hits have been more or less apolitical?”
Two things happened:
In 1970, the networks started using demographic ratings for the first time. Prior to that, Nielsen had rated shows based on total number of viewers regardless of age. And because retirees have more time on their hands to watch TV, shows catering to older, more conservative folks were rated as hits, such as Lawrence Welk.
Then in 1970, the networks and their sponsors started looking much more at the 18-45 year old demographic as reported by Nielsen. Because younger folks buy more stuff than older folks. And so shows started targeting that demographic: Young and hip (which in practice means more liberal than retired and elderly). Good-bye to Lawrence Welk, hello to M*A*S*H with its youthful hip antiwar mindset.
And the same thing happened with TV shows as with movies: A new generation of writers and producers with different formative experiences. In the 1950s and 1960s, writers and producers still remembered World War II, in which America was the “good guy.” The new generation of writers and producers for the 1970s and 1980s were too young to remember World War II. Their formative experience was Vietnam, which left many of them radicalized.
I served three magical mystery tours in the garden spot of the Orient. I, too, have observed the way the leftist media treats veterans now as compared to the way Viet Nam vets were treated.
The Viet Nam War was fought to stop a Communist country (North Viet Nam) from invading and conquering a free and sovereign nation (the Republic of Viet Nam). The American left treated this action as “illegal” and the participants (like 11B40 – the infantry NCO’s MOS – and myself). For decades, the American left’s bias towards the ideology of North Viet Nam and its prejudice against American veterans of that war was obvious. (See also John Kerry and Jane Fonda).
The mantra “support our troops” used today was absent during the Viet Nam War. Instead, we were “baby killers” and “war criminals”.
The Democrat Party, in January 1975 (violating the Paris Treaty), refused to come to the aid in any manner when North Viet Nam’s final offensive into the south occurred. Infantry and armored divisions over ran the south. American air and sea power could have decimated that offensive, but the Democrats said, “No more American involvement in Southeast Asia.” 56,000+ Americans died so that the American left could enjoy a socialist military victory by the North Vietnamese communists.
I’ve spoken to many Vietnamese here in the Houston area who survived that conflict and made it to this country. Without exception, they understand that the Democrat Party and the American leftists killed their country.
As a good nutshell definition of Leftism is that it politicizes everything, there is no such thing as an ‘apolitical’ movie, book, or anything else. As we saw from the recent Ivy-League study claiming that 4th-of-July celebrations are inherently Conservative/Republican, those old movies showing America as a not-so-bad place, were Right-wing agitprop to any Leftist. The ultimate goal of all American Leftists is the detruction of normal American society. This is because every serious Leftist is one who cannot or will not observe the mores and norms of his society. Rather than adapt, he decides to destroy that society and its religion, traditions, history, and economy. Sort of like T.H.R.U.S.H. with assorted perverts instead of criminals (although criminals are also an important group of misfits who are potential Leftists).
The current propaganda theme is homosexuality. On every show there now must be a homosexual character, the men are usually not effeminate (unless they’re funny or creative) and the homosexual women are always beautiful (contrary to overwhelming experience).
Another propaganda theme is women are equals physically. I watched NCIS LA where the lead female agent is sparring against the ex-Seal agent and nearly matches him, he has about 80lbs on her too. CHAOS (great show btw) has a deputy director of the CIA that is about 30 yrs old and female. Every detective, police chief is always a woman. I have no problem with women succeeding in male dominated careers, but it’s getting to be absurd.
But the mother of propaganda? The All in the Family Show.
In the movie “The Way of the Gun”, the two protagonists are outside a club when a woman starts screaming at them to get off her car (her boyfriend wasn’t so pushy). The woman, probably in the throes of feminist empowerment, kept up the ranting until one of the protagonists punched her in the nose.
That painful and bloody lesson didn’t shut her up, but did get both guys jumped on by the crowd. Great movie!
First you will have to find creative conservatives, even the sound of it is funny.
“First you will have to find creative gays, even the sound of it is funny.”
“First you will have to find creative blacks, even the sound of it is funny.”
“First you will have to find creative Asians, even the sound of it is funny.”
“First you will have to find creative Mexicans, even the sound of it is funny.”
“First you will have to find creative Muslims, even the sound of it is funny.”
Hmmm.. not sure I agree, but cool.