The New York Times and other media outlets reported today that Rush Limbaugh has signed a contract extension through 2016 worth about $400 million. Perhaps with an eye toward higher marginal tax rates in the years to come, about $100 million is in the form of a signing bonus.
I think Rush Limbaugh could lay claim to being the original blogger. The core of his 3-hour weekday show is Limbaugh's commentary on and parody of what newsmakers have said. Roll an audio clip. Criticize or find an inconsistency in the speaker's argument. Lampoon the speaker in the process. Reaffirm ideological views. Roll another clip. He makes no apologies for his conservative ideology and his partisan edge. You find a lot of this in the blogosphere, except that Limbaugh constructs and distributes his work as audio rather than as text.
Consider this quote from this Sunday's New York Times Magazine cover story by Zev Chafets.
“Rush is a master at framing an issue and creating a community around it,” says Susan Estrich, who ran Michael Dukakis’s 1988 presidential campaign and has since become a talk-show host herself.
That sounds a lot like what many successful bloggers do. Listeners can "comment" by calling the show and asking the host a question.
Consider as well this statement by Karl Rove:
“Rush has completely remade American politics by offering an alternative to the networks and CNN,” [Karl] Rove told me. “For 20 years he has been the leader of his own parade.”
Many bloggers would also characterize their work as providing such an alternative. Same objective, different medium.
Here's my favorite excerpt from the article:
At dinner the night before, Bill O'Reilly’s name came up, and Limbaugh expressed his opinion of the Fox cable king. He hadn’t been sure at the time that he wanted it on the record. But on second thought, “somebody’s got to say it,” he told me. “The man is Ted Baxter.”
Read the whole thing.
Rush may have made the most money....
Think of what we'd all have missed if he'd given up on radio to take that big-paying job as a potato chip distributor.
Yes, Rush sure has made a lot of money radio-blogging since then.
But as to the first bloggers ... Orwell wrote a book called "The British Pamphleteers" that traces pamphleteering back to the 1600s (covering the American revolution and all).
Substitute the word "blog" for "pamphlet" and there you pretty much are, with the blogging technology that goes back 400 years....
~~~
The pamphlet is a one-man show. One has complete freedom of expression, including, if one chooses, the freedom to be scurrilous, abusive and seditious; or, on the other hand, to be more detailed, serious and 'highbrow' than is ever possible in a newspaper or in most kinds of periodicals ...
"Above all, the pamphlet does not have to follow any prescribed pattern. It can be in prose or in verse, it can consist largely of maps or statistics or quotations, it can take the form of a story, a fable, a letter, an essay, a dialogue or a piece of 'reportage'.
"All that is required of it is that it shall be topical, polemical and short..."
~~~
And like bloggers, the pamphleteers produced 99% forgotten drek -- but the best of them rose to be not without some influence on the course of events.
Yes, But Could You Leave Comments on Pamphlets?
e-Pamphleteers
Fair point about comments, and a big one in some cases -- though it kind of reduces the likes of Prof Mankiw, Don Luskin and Instapundit to being mere pamphleteers.
Well, if they don't want my wisdom on their web pages I'll stay here and annoy you... ;-(
Hey Big Spender
It also sounds like he's headed down the Ed McMahon road; spending the money as fast as he earns it.
Big spender
Ed's problem looks like he kept spending it as fast as he earned it after he stopped earning it.
Rush does look like a fan of Max Bialystock's advice about "when you've got it..."
And he can afford all this after paying three ex-wives? Well, no kids, no college costs...
A Few of his Favorite Things
No kids, but a private jet here...a 24,000 sq. ft. beach front mansion there; pretty soon you're talking real money.
What's your point?
So what if he's spending as fast as he earns it? I guess you've missed the details of how he's donating to worthy charities at rates that far exceed the vast majority of all of us.
If any of you think you can do a better job, let us all know when you have signed a contract of Rush's magnitude and we'll all take copious notes......
To those who are given much . . .
"he's donating to worthy charities at rates that far exceed the vast majority of all of us"
If I were making Limbaugh's wages I'd be donating to charitable neoconservative think tanks too, and in fact at a much higher rate than Limbaugh (I don't require a private jet).
His generosity (whatever rate it is) might look nice to some, but the truth is he should be giving, and if he wasn't spending it as fast as he made it he could set up foundations, invest, and make his donations grow to be much more. But short-sighted living is so American, and Rush is a red blooded American if nothing else.
Limbaugh is a windbag who has only served to polarize Americans . . . to the point where we're more polarized than at any time since the civil war.
Congratulations to him . . . he's secured his place in history as a fomenter of discontent and extremist politics, and for being a guy who, without the protection of his wealth, would be in prison for illegal purchase and use of drugs.
Post new comment