I'm not a big fan of the vitriolic (thank the
American Freethought podcast for getting that word stuck in my head!) Sometimes people who should seemingly be the levelheaded spokespersons of free thought end up simply being the sharp tongued critics of the
simple closed minded.
I keep wanting people like Richard Dawkins or PZ Myers to "take the high road" but they don't. Sure, it's OK for them to act how they want, but I feel what is needed is more good-cop/bad-cop interaction and let the intellectuals remain intellectualish sounding.
Sort of like a radio shock-jock and his/her trusty level-headed sidekick. Think of combining PZ Myers with Howard Stern. Offset that with someone who is good at debating the closed-minded without losing their cool. (re-reading this I realize that PZ is actually very level-headed and does keep his cool, so maybe my analogy isn't correct)
I personally can't stand Howard Stern because he is doing the same thing he did when I was in high school in the 1980's. But imagine if his shtick was bashing the hypocrisy of the religious right (or the left in Obama's case)? Have guests from all points of view but stack the deck against the pro-religious the same way Sean Hannity cherry picks his left-wing callers.
I can imagine the ratings would jump simply from the controversy. Every time there is a new cult leader found abusing children (I include Catholic priests in that description) there would be a new topic to rail on. People would protest the radio station to have them taken off the air. The FCC would fine for saying god damned a lot. And if the ratings dipped they could have some lesbians on (Stern loooooves lesbians!)
So, forget
atheist ads on buses....what we need is an in-your-face shock-jock on the radio...
What do you think?
