What “let’s have a conversation” really means

I got an email today from Books a Million recommending a series of books to “start a conversation.” All of the books promoted a liberal point of view.

That’s what some people mean when they say “let’s have a conversation.” It excludes certain points of view from the outset.

People who fall for this stuff have apparently not been paying attention for the past 30 years.

12 thoughts on “What “let’s have a conversation” really means”

  1. QUOTE: That’s what some people mean when they say “let’s have a conversation.” It excludes certain points of view from the outset.

    Indeed, what you suggest is correct. Yet, doesn’t the knife cut in many directions? I keep waiting for venues like “The Daily Wire” to include moderate and liberal perspectives in their discussions/debates. Yet, I doubt it will ever happen…except to cast dispersion upon or mock.

    ISTM, each platform is only interested in reinforcing their point of view (aka echo chamber), not having a fulsome exchange in the marketplace of ideas.

    1. Yes, it is frustrating when a station has a panel made up of four variations of one flavor. But it’s undeniable that the liberal perspective dominates in the culture. Books a Million (or any other company) would never suggest a reading list on race that is one-sided to the right.

      1. Books a Million (or any other company) would never suggest a reading list on race that is one-sided to the right.

        Wouldn’t the same go for Fox News, with its reach to multi-millions of daily viewers? I’m still waiting for them to “suggest” anything that’s affiliated with the left. Again, my point is that those with great influence rarely act to create a true marketplace of ideas (and let the consumer decide). They typically work to perpetuate their agenda (right, left or moderate) and that usually results in reinforcing echo chambers.

        Yet, as they say, charity begins at home. Would you consider structuring the Pigweed & Crowhill podcasts or Crowhill Report weblog to occasionally recommend reading, introduce perspectives or have a guest speaker that was liberal (or significantly different that your typical fare)?

        1. Podcasts and blogs are expected to — in a way they’re even supposed to — have a point of view. A retail book store is not.

          Books a Million has every right to have a point of view, if they want to alienate the population that doesn’t agree with them. And if that’s their call, fine. I hope it destroys them as a lesson for others.

          But the larger point is that when a liberal says “let’s have a conversation,” he doesn’t mean it.

          Which brings us to Fox News. They have obviously chosen to be a conservative news station. Some people believe news stations should try to be more neutral, and I would prefer that — if they were actually neutral. Usually they just pretend to be.

          When it come to a conversation, some Fox news hosts do bring on liberal guests and commentators. Sometimes (like in Sean Hannity’s case) only to interrupt them and yell at them, sometimes (like in Tucker Carlson’s case) to let them speak and then laugh at them, but other times (Bret Baier) it’s a little more fair.

          1. Isn’t it possible to have a point of view and inclusive of a variety of content? I happen to think so but organizations typically don’t because their intent isn’t to create a true marketplace of ideas. That’s their right. Still, when “most” (left, right and moderate) say “let’s a conversation” they don’t mean a fulsome review of various perspectives…Books a Million and Fox News are just two examples. So, if that means that Books of Million should suffer loss as a lesson, the same would apply to Fox News and others who operate in such a manner. As the expression goes…“pox on all of your houses”.

            1. CORRECTION

              Isn’t it possible to have a point of view and inclusive of a variety of content? I happen to think so but organizations typically don’t because their intent isn’t to create a true marketplace of ideas. That’s their right. Still, when “most” (left, right and moderate) say “let’s have a conversation” they don’t mean a fulsome review of various perspectives…Books a Million and Fox News are just two examples. So, if that means that Books of Million should suffer loss as a lesson, the same would apply to Fox News and others who operate in such a manner. As the expression goes…“pox on both of your houses”.

      2. I don’t know the ins and outs of the demographics of readers, but maybe on the whole the reading public leans towards the left. The more bookish conservatives whom I know make concessions to the left which you won’t find among the cruder element.

        1. A casual search on Books a Million includes conservative authors such as Candice Owens, Ben Shapiro, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Dan Crenshaw and even the likes of “Diamond and Silk”. Interestingly, in their “What We Are Reading Next” section, there’s books featured by conservative authors such as: David Horowitz, Dinesh D’Souza and Newt Gingrich. As a private company, founded and headquartered in Alabama, owned and operated by a Southern family, my guess is that Books a Million isn’t a bastion of liberalism. I suspect they are trying to do what most businesses do, market to their consumers and make a profit.

    2. I am subscribing to a redneck magazine. It’s called “I’ll tell you what!”

Comments are closed.