The Democratic National Convention doesn’t get the love from news/talk radio that the Republican event does. And that’s not some earth-shattering revelation.
It makes absolute 100% sense that news/talk radio — which is roughly 95% conservative — would treat the once-every-four-year event like NBC treats the Olympics.
But you know what? I have a radical thought: I believe conservative news/talk radio should embrace, and maybe even exceed coverage it provides for the Republican National Convention for the other side of the political aisle.
It is no secret that politics is now covered similarly to sports in this country. Every single issue now comes down to “Who won, who lost, what does it mean for the winning team, what does it say about the losers,” and other various breakdowns that have been staples of the sports media world for decades.
As a sports radio host, do you know what I found was the most informative and educational segment of the week? When we’d bring on an expert about the opposing team. As a Cleveland Browns or Ohio State Buckeyes pundit, it would be preposterous to pretend like I was the world’s foremost expert on the Baltimore Ravens or Michigan Wolverines. Someone else knows them better than I do. And it’s important to know what your enemy thinks, feels, believes, and stands for.
Sun Tzu, the great Chinese military philosopher wrote in The Art of War, “If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
And I think that rings true in today’s political climate — especially from a conservative media angle.
I don’t think it’s unfair to argue that conservative news/talk radio hosts don’t have a great pulse for the thoughts, feelings, and beliefs of the other side. They can say they do, but they really don’t. Because each side plays this game of “I can’t believe there are millions of people who are going to vote for the opposition. There’s no possible way another person can feel differently than me.” And yet, in every presidential election, there are millions of people who cast ballots for that exact person.
In sports, there’s an age-old adage that whether you’re a newspaper writer, talking head on the radio, or whatever the case may be, you should still show up in the clubhouse/locker room, or attend press conferences, and face the music if you’ve been critical of someone. You’ve had your public say. If the other party wants to address you or address your comments, they should be able to reciprocate.
But that doesn’t happen anymore in news media, especially in the conservative news/talk space. Rarely are those with dissenting views welcomed into the ecosystem. In fact, calling it an ecosystem might be kind. It is often an echo chamber rather than an ecosystem. I’d argue, though, that both American politics and American news/talk radio would benefit from more discussions (or maybe more aptly put confrontations) with those we disagree with.
You want to see Kamala Harris debate Donald Trump on Fox News, don’t you? I do. But you’d likely never welcome her, her running mate Tim Walz, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, AOC, or any long litany of Democrats to your show. Why not?
If you don’t dive inside the proverbial lion’s den, and ask the questions that you often claim you’d ask (or are critical of questions others actually do ask), I don’t think you should get to parade around as some sort of conservative crusader fighting John Q. Everyman.
I think the quick response to saying “Hey, you should really put as much effort into covering the DNC as you did the RNC” is “My listeners don’t care about the liberal convention.” I’d say that’s incorrect. If they’re as politically involved as your show content suggests, they absolutely do care. And if they’re as passionate as you pretend to be on the radio every day, they have many emotions about the event. But they trust you, their favorite radio host. So by saying “Hey, we’re going to go to the DNC, and here’s why,” it’s easily digestible and understandable.
And isn’t that half the battle? Many times, listeners turn to news/talk radio hosts to make the news, politics, policies, and happenings of the world understandable.
Plus, what should the tent poles of the medium be? In my opinion, it’s be informative, be entertaining, be interactive, and be educational. All of those things are more attainable by actually attending the convention — even if it’s the other side of the political aisle that you vehemently disagree with — than by sitting in your studio and lobbing political grenades.
Afraid someone from the other party is going to confront you about something you’ve said? Why? That confrontation is likely to get more notoriety and attention for your show/station than anything else.
In a hyper-politicized world and climate, you shouldn’t be afraid to say the things you believe. And if you really believe them, you shouldn’t be afraid to face the music for what you say. While I might not agree with some of the things Charlie Kirk, Matt Walsh, or Ben Shapiro say, it’s undeniable that they go out and defend their positions at almost any opportunity. I find it admirable.
Go to the frontlines of the opposition. Be the person your listeners can rely upon to entertain, inform, and educate. That’s what you’re supposed to provide in the first place. In the future, go do it one of the two grandest political stages imaginable. You, your show, your station, your listeners, news/talk radio, and American politics will all be better because of it.
