… coming to dominate most of the must fertile niches in communication — newspapers, television, etc. An aspiring Blue in 1980 knew where to go — it was just a matter of getting there. By contrast, those exact niches were unavailable to aspiring Reds and so they had to learn how to cross adaptive valleys. Find unexploited niches and figure them out. This will mean both that the Reds will populate the less valuable and harder to exploit channels an…
I’d add one other thought here. Eggcellents describes the radio talkers as “far right”. I think that an insufficient classification. If you’re an actual consumer of rightist talk radio, you know that that there are vast differences between Hannity (GOP necon) to Limbaugh (social center-right criticism) to Prager/Medved (focus on morality and culture) to Ingraham/Hewitt/Levin (conservative legal criticism) to Bennett (heavy emphasis on policy)
Point here is that each one of the national talkers were unleashing their trebuchets at different bulwarks of the Blue Church, and using different communication styles ranging from the provocative to the analytical; this made the medium much more effective than it would be if they were all concentrated at the same target. It also broadened the recruitment for the Insurgency. So, using myself as an example, I find Limbaugh, Levin and Hannity to be unlistenable; but I enjoy Prager, Medved and Ingraham very much.
From what I can tell, the pundits of the Blue Church, in contrast, repeat the same talking points again and again; their offensive response is to try and take out one trebuchet, and pretend the others don’t exist. Thus, they are redundant, and quickly become dull and ineffective, accounting for the failure of Air America and MSNBC’s flagging viewership.