LOGICAL FALLACY MONGERS IN AMERICAN

CONSERVATIVE MEDIA

Logical fallacies have become such a part of American media infused lives, that they are accepted as valid points of view by many.  These illogical arguments are daily used by “Right Wing” pundits to garner support for their conservative agenda. 

Critical thinkers should easily see through these lines of thought, but Americans are so thoroughly bombarded by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly, that many do not think for themselves and accept the opinions of these sources and their ilk as indisputable fact.  Many invalid points are repeated by so many so often, that they appear to have backing simply because they are espoused so many times. 

In a broad sense this gives weight to the Band Wagon fallacy.  The “bandwagon” argument arises from the tendency of individuals to join a school of thought and thus “hopping on the bandwagon” due to the popularity of an individual or premise. (Curtis)

This paper will not try to define what is “news” and what is “opinion” in today’s programming, but will explore common fallacies that are fielded by the above named journalists and also their satirical use by Stephen Colbert on the Comedy Central television show The Colbert Report.

The most glaring fallacy used by Rush Limbaugh is the Abusive Ad Hominem Fallacy. “A debater commits the Ad Hominem Fallacy when he introduces irrelevant personal premisses about his opponent.” (Curtis)  He is creative with this ruse and is not always direct. 

He is able to impugn the President, his administration or liberal members of congress with his manner of speech or the bastardizing of their names.  The Illinois Senator Dick Durbin is referred to as Senator “Turban” (as a not so subtle way to connect him to Arabic and Muslim ideology) and quotes from Senator Barney Frank are repeated in a lispy fashion as if to call attention to Mr. Frank’s sexual preference. 

Mr. Limbaugh also attempts to cast a very negative light on supporters of the President by referring to them as Obama Nazis.  This last implication is particularly curious as the second definition of “Nazi” in the Encarta Dictionary is “racist; somebody regarded as having right-wing political views, especially on race and immigration”. (Encarta Dictionary) This definition certainly does not fit with Mr. Limbaugh’s usual description of our “Liberal, Socialist, Left Wing” President.

Another creator of conservative logical fallacies on radio and on the “small screen” is Glenn Beck.  He uses emotion as misdirection and often appears to cry.

“An appeal to emotion is a type of argument which attempts to arouse the emotions of its audience in order to gain acceptance of its conclusion.” (Curtis)

He is a shameless self promoter and spends a great deal of airtime on all the electronic media to hawk his latest book.

As alluded to in the below observation of his “Pay for View” simulcast to 440 theaters nationwide, he will toss the red herring across his stage and retrieve the stinking fish in any manner he pleases to reel in his already hooked audience.

“This fallacy comes from the sport of fox hunting in which a dried, smoked herring, which is red in color, is dragged across the trail of the fox to throw the hounds off the scent. Thus, a "red herring" argument is one which distracts the audience from the issue in question through the introduction of some irrelevancy.” (Curtis)

“There were no tears. Perhaps Mr. Beck dialed things back because the show is largely a promotional vehicle for his new book, “Glenn Beck’s Common Sense,” which he hawked from the stage and which was advertised relentlessly during that 15-minute break.

There’s some cognitive dissonance there: one of his big applause lines, which is also one of his few clearly stated points, is “we need to stop spending.” On everything except Glenn Beck’s books and DVD’s, apparently.” (Hale)  

“One of Mr. Beck’s favorite rhetorical tactics is a combination of misdirection and guilt by association: he doesn’t say nasty things about ethnic minorities or homosexuals, but he will slip in a reference to how all our cars will soon be built by undocumented workers, and he will, in a long, lame anecdote about “liberal” artists and the Metropolitan Museum, switch into a high, lisping voice for just a second.

Mr. Beck’s appeals to racial solidarity are delivered in the same winking way: speaking of the “grand, magnificent” founding fathers, he leans toward his visibly homogeneous Midwestern audience and says “and we’ve lost touch with how much like us they were.” (Hale)

This tired, old tactic is used masterfully by Mr. Beck.  His books are bestsellers.  His show on TV regularly dominates in his market and time spot. (Gorman)

The third named purveyor of conservative logical fallacy is Fox News personality Bill O’Reilly.  He has the true appearance of a factual news anchor.  He sits at a desk, wears a business suit, does interviews and discusses topics with expert panels of fellow “Right Wing” bloggers, authors, and journalists. 

This fox in sheep’s clothing will often lead viewers down the primrose path with his smooth style and deft use of the straw man fallacy.  He will calmly endorse opinions; and state his own based on the worst case scenario for Democrats and liberals. 

He stuffs straw into the negative aspects of any liberal policy or ideal and will construct an opponent from the proposition of many to slander a single, progressive politician.

"Straw man is one of the best-named fallacies, because it is memorable and vividly illustrates the nature of the fallacy. Imagine a fight in which one of the combatants sets up a man of straw, attacks it, then proclaims victory. All the while, the real opponent stands by untouched.” (Curtis)

However, he is not above the Abusive Ad Hominem fallacy.  When interviewed by Jon Stewart on The Daily Show he deadpanned the following remarks.

“Bill O'Reilly stopped by "The Daily Show" Thursday for the first time since the election and stayed two segments. In the first, Jon Stewart comforted him about his pre-election fears over Barack Obama, even giving him a stuffed animal to snuggle.” (Huffington Post)  Prehaps this is a nod to the “stuffed” nature of O’Reilly’s Straw Man fallacies?

Later, talking about the secular revolution in America, O'Reilly told Stewart, "If you go to Alabama, you're going to be killed... they'll stone you to death." (Belief in a concept may have bad consequences…so the concept is bad.) (Curtis)  This is an appeal to consequences fallacy.

The argument turned to the traditions of America, with Stewart arguing the next step is gay marriage, which O'Reilly called, "your Greenwich Village opinion." O'Reilly then denied there was diversity in the Village to a jaw-dropped Stewart and insisted America is a center-right country.” (Huffington Post)

In eighteen short words in the previous quotation, he manages an Argument from Adverse Consequences and implicates Stewart in guilt by association to personally slam his host.  Guilt by association arguments lump an individual into a group and their ideals even if he may only have tenuous associations with them. An Argument from Adverse Consequences gives weight only to undesirable outcomes. (Curtis) 

Thankfully at least some saterical comedy is injected into this fallacy filled pool by Comedy Central’s Stephen Colbert, a self professed “Fundit”. On his television show The Colbert Report, he takes on the persona of a conservative opinion monger and rides the fallacy train to the inth degree. 

Inflated “Right Wing”  rhetoric is delivered with a nod and a wink but lies in bed so closely with the ideology of talk radio and the Fox News network that it seems as if the script is directly quoted from those sources. Some of his character’s philosophy is contained in the following quotes.

“these standards we have set up a fabulous government in Iraq.”

Stephen Colbert, Speech to White House Correspondent's Dinner, April 30, 2006

      ____________________

“matter what happened Tuesday.”

Stephen Colbert, Speech to White House Correspondent's Dinner, April 30, 2006

____________________

“in 'reality.' And reality has a well known liberal bias.”

Stephen Colbert, Speech to White House Correspondents' Dinner, April 30, 2006

____________________

“the devil's sentences.”

Stephen Colbert, The Colbert Report

                                              ____________________

“saying about those who forget history. I don’t remember it, but it’s good.”

Stephen Colbert, The Colbert Report, March 10, 2008

(Colbert)                                                                                                        

For those who appreciate a satirical point of  view, Mr. Colbert easily trumps the liberal use of fallacy by his conservative peers.  He is able to stretch the point beyond the ridiculous to showcase the bias of the “Right Wing” media and leaves us laughing in his wake.

As we are exposed to political media, we should know that there is a difference between fact and opinion, and also be aware that we may be easily led by anyone who professes to hold our own views. 

It is too easy to always agree with those who state shared ownership with our own ideals.  Any statements that don’t seem well reasoned should bear the light of critical illumination without collapsing.

Learn more about this author, Sam van Almen.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

---

Add your voice

Know something about A country divided: Political tensions building in America?
We want to hear your view. Write now!