Top Twelve Contemporary Hate-Mongers

Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) have released a report on the top twelve hate-mongers in the American media.

Given the substantial American media content in Canada, there is direct relevance to civil rights here (some of them are even Canadian).

Here’s the list, in no particular order:

  1. Sean Hannity
  2. Daniel Pipes
  3. Bill O’Reily
  4. David Horowitz
  5. Debbie Schlussel
  6. Pat Robertson
  7. Michael Savage
  8. Steven Emerson
  9. Michelle Malkin
  10. Glenn Beck
  11. Robert Spencer
  12. Mark Steyn

It’s a distinction of dubious quality, but one that will go down in history as voices of intolerance and hatred.

Photo of Steve RendallOne of the report’s authors, Steve Rendell, said,

We found prominent right-wing pundits and activists using misinformation and innuendo to broadcast hate against an entire community… and major media have either fallen asleep at the wheel or, in many cases, have actively helped to spread the smears …We’re talking about double standards.

We’re not talking about people raving on a street corner downtown. These are people who either have a powerful platform at their disposal or are allowed unfettered access to powerful platforms by reporters and editors in what are considered mainstream publications…

Media need to step up and do their job of separating fact from innuendo and can tell the impartial experts apart from the smearcasters.

The entire report can be found here, with case studies available on the new FAIR site dedicated to the subject.

FAIR has made their email address available for comment.

6 Comments on "Top Twelve Contemporary Hate-Mongers"

  1. Dear LawIsKewl:

    Please use a dictionary or proper spell-check. A person who sells fish is a fishmonger, not a fish mongerer.

    According to, it’s Middle English, give or take AD 1000. C’mon: it’s 2008, and you can look stuff up in 10 seconds if you’re unfamiliar with usage, or proper engrish as she are spoked.


    Binks, WebElf

  2. Ann Coulter must be off her game. She’s slipping.

  3. I don’t know, I really don’t see, say, Michelle Malkin going down in history as a voice of intolerance and hatred. I don’t see her going down in history, period.

    More importantly, the actual FAIR report itself seems is quite sloppy. Here’s an example, the report has this to say about Daniel Pipes:

    Some strains of Muslim-bashing share a good deal in common with the racist pseudo-science of eugenics–most notably Mark Steyn’s writings about the “demographic decline” manifest in Europe’s growing Muslim population. Pipes struck a similar note with his warnings (National Review, 11/19/90) that “Western societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene” and that “Muslim customs are more troublesome than most.”

    Thanks to internet database technology, I was able to retrieve the original article. After saying those things, Pipes goes on to state:

    Still, none of this amounts to Richard Condon’s notion of “another terrible threat” like the Soviet danger. Muslim immigrants will probably not change the face of European life: pubs will not close down, secularist principles will restrict the role of religion, and freedom of speech will remain a fundamental right. The movement of Muslims to Western Europe creates a great number of painful but finite challenges; there is no reason to see it as leading to a cataclysmic battle. If handled properly, the immigrants can even bring much of value, including new energy, to their host societies.

    The United States faces less of a problem, thanks to a long tradition of immigration and the healthy attitudes that go with it. Being an American depends far less on ancestry than on shared values, and this encourages enfranchisement. Meritocratic ethics and an open educational system are also important. Should fundamentalist Muslims move to the United States and choose to remain outside the mainstream culture, that too can be accommodated, as the Amish Mennonites of Pennsylvania and the Hasidic Jews of New York City make clear.

    [emphasis added]

    So basically Pipes point is the, uh, opposite of what is attributed to him. This is especially ironic as the report condemns Pipes for quoting someone without adding the exculpatory context.

    Bottom line, “hate monger” is a term that should only be thrown around with ironclad evidence.

  4. That was pulled directly from Pipes’ site.

    He has a pretty good track record for promoting hatred and intolerance. That much is not under dispute. And there is plenty of other material to back that up.

  5. Hitchins said that Pipes is “a person who confuses scholarship with propaganda and who pursues petty vendettas with scant regard for objectivity.”

    These people will go down in history because they will be noted as the founders of an intolerant ideology that will cost millions of lives around the world.

  6. you must update to include Pamela Geller, Brigitte Gabrielle. These two aRE OFF THEIR ROCKER.

Comments are closed.