Image 01 Image 03

Media Matters to declare victory over Limbaugh regardless of reality

Media Matters to declare victory over Limbaugh regardless of reality

“Even if Limbaugh wins in the end, he loses.”

As longtime readers know, Media Matters was the driving force behind the attempt to force Rush Limbaugh off the airwaves through secondary boycotts of advertisers.

Unlike more noble boycotts in American history, the Limbaugh boycott movement did not urge consumers to boycott Limbaugh’s show, it sought to undercut Limbaugh’s platform by scaring advertisers away from the show through explicit and implicit threats to boycott the advertiser.  This, unfortunately, has become the modus operandi for all manner of left-wing boycotts of conservative speakers.

Media Matters’ boycott-guru Angelo Carusone helped organize and coordinate the supposedly independent Limbaugh boycott movement in the days after Limbaugh’s comments about Sandra Fluke (for which he apologized) based on pre-existing Limbaugh boycott plans.  The Fluke controversy was the excuse, not the reason, for the boycott.

The Limbaugh boycott movement has scared away some advertisers, such as high-profile advertiser Carbonite, which later had to admit to investors that dropping the Limbaugh sponsorhip damaged Carbonite substantially.  Those sponsors have been replaced.

Most of the much-ballyhooed list of advertisers who have “dropped” Limbaugh in reality consist of advertisers who never advertised with him to begin with or who have policies against advertising on politically controversial programs of any nature.  Hyping long lists of advertisers who “refuse” to advertise on Limbaugh is meaningless.

In a very predictable irony, Media Matters’ efforts did damage to liberal talk radio as well.   Advertisers who “refused” to advertise on Limbaugh generally have walked away from all talk radio — conservative and liberal alike.  So says liberal radio talk show host Tom Hartmann (via Hot Air):

THOM HARTMANN: David Brock and Media Matters were leading the boycott Limbaugh crusade, which did presumably some damage to Limbaugh’s show. I can tell you it did a lot of damage to progressive talk radio, because a lot of advertisers, right across the board, said just pull me out of all talk radio. I don’t know Limbaugh’s numbers, but I do know that, on our side, progressive talk radio took a hit as a consequence.

Meanwhile, Limbaugh continues to dominate talk radio ratings, as groups of anti-Limbaugh dead-enders continue to spend their days tweeting and emailing advertisers.  It’s unclear how much financial damage has been done to Limbaugh, but the controversy has given Cumulus radio an excuse to blame Limbaugh for broader business problems.

Most recently, Cumulus leaked that is would consider dropping Limbaugh from the 40 Cumulus radio stations which carry Limbaugh.  That’s a drop in the bucket of stations, and Limbaugh would be picked up by stations in those markets eager to expand their own listener base.  It all appears to be part of contract negotiation posturing — in which Limbaugh would seem to have the upper hand because the listeners are loyal to him, not to Cumulus.

Cumulus does not have a meaningful replacement for Limbaugh.  Attempts to substitute Mike Huckabee in some markets have resulted in failure.

Yet what’s interesting is how Media Matters’ is spinning this as a lose-lose for Limbaugh – even if Limbaugh “wins” he “loses.”

Media Matters’ Senior Fellow Eric Boehlert writes, For Rush Limbaugh, The Damage Is Done:

One week after it was first reported that talk radio giant Cumulus Media might cut ties with Rush Limbaugh and pull his show from 40 of its stations nationwide, the end result of the contractual showdown remains unclear. But we do know this: The damage has been done to Limbaugh and his reputation inside the world of AM radio as an untouchable star.

By opting to publicly negotiate its contract and making it clear the broadcast company is willing to walk away from his program, Cumulus has delivered a once unthinkable blow to Limbaugh’s industry prestige. (Cumulus is also threatening to drop Sean Hannity’s syndicated radio show.)

Even if Limbaugh wins in the end, he loses. Even if Limbaugh manages to stay on Cumulus’ enviable rosters of major market talk stations, Limbaugh comes out of the tussle tarnished and somewhat diminished.

That’s not how Media Matters expected the Limbaugh boycott movement to end — with Limbaugh victorious but “somewhat diminished.”

In fact, it is Media Matters which emerges “somewhat diminished.”  Media Matters threw its weight into the effort to take out the big right-wing kahuna, and it failed. 

Portraying losing as winning doesn’t change that.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Henry Hawkins | August 8, 2013 at 10:57 am

MM = another Baghdad Bob

casualobserver | August 8, 2013 at 11:45 am

Except for the most ardent MM devotees, Boehlert’s words make it perfectly clear they are the loser in the battle they have started. After such intense focus and effort, all he can use to rationalize his victory is ethereal nonsense such as ‘prestige’. Not financial results (except for Cumulus when the dust settles). Not performance results (listeners). Not even ratings results. He’s left with the “feelings” part of his argument. In essence, he wants the devotees to “feel” good because they have hurt Limbaugh in the eyes of….well, the devotees. Not anyone else who might tune in or buy products.

Utterly pitiful.

Kingsley Amis is to Ian Fleming as George Orwell is to Eric Boehlert.

… I can tell you it did a lot of damage to progressive talk radio, because a lot of advertisers, right across the board, said just pull me out of all talk radio. I don’t know Limbaugh’s numbers, but I do know that, on our side, progressive talk radio took a hit as a consequence.

So there IS justice in the universe! Bwha-ha-ha. I can only hope that Rush reads that quote on the air sometime, it’s priceless.

Boehlert has to say something — he’s a “senior fellow” after all, and odds are neither the Boston Globe nor WaPo is going to hire him any time soon…

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | August 8, 2013 at 1:03 pm

When Prof J was in Israel, he may have missed this Alan Colmes post. Colmes was trying to correct all the misinformation spewing from Media Matters and others in the leftsphere about what is happening with Rush and Hannity. Unsurprisingly, Media Matters doesn’t care about the truth. It cares about separating rich left wingers from their money.

Spiny Norman | August 8, 2013 at 1:20 pm

Why does the phrase “circular firing squad” come to mind?

NC Mountain Girl | August 8, 2013 at 1:24 pm

Many ad buyers avoid controversy, which all too often gets defined solely by the left leaning mainstream media. Thus left wing venues with a decidedly off kilter slant on things may still be graced by ads from major companies while even moderately conservative venues are often left scrambling for ad dollars from companies promoting dubious cures and doomsday investment ideas. It is deliciously ironic that this boomeranged and some ad buyers now find all political radio too controversial.

SmokeVanThorn | August 8, 2013 at 2:18 pm

As opposed to Boehlert, who can’t be further diminished.

Rush to Media Matters Punks: “Do you feel lucky, Punks? Go ahead…Make my F’ing day. I spill at lunch more than your entire net worth.”

My day’s schedule usually doesn’t allow for his show but I recently caught him for the first time in awhile. Clearly the boycott’s taken an effect. I think that, smart man that he is, he saw this coming at him and he did a review, hired a consultant and had a come to Jesus moment. My prediction is that the show will survive and the boycott’s actually improved it by forcing Limbaugh to concentrate on the blocking and tackling of getting a good 3 hours out to the audience. If I had the funds to do it, I’d advertise my business on it.

Portraying losing as winning doesn’t change that.

Fantasy is pretty much all Boehlert has to work with.