Writes Robert Wenzel, editor of Economic Policy Journal:
“Earlier this week EPJ contributing columnist Ilana Mercer appeared on RT’s show “Crosstalk,” which is hosted by Peter Lavelle. After seeing an earlier edition of “Crosstalk,” I gave Lavelle and the show an enthusiastic endorsement. But, a funny thing happened on the way to Ilana’s participation on the show.
Lavelle provides brief but detailed background introductions of the two other guests appearing on the show with Ilana, when he gets to Ilana, he merely states that she is a paleo-libertarian journalist and writer. He fails to mention her important book …”
Here’s what happened on the way to the show: Participants are required to return brief answers to questions to indicate their positions. I complied promptly and with brutal honesty. As did I twice provide producers with a bio.
At the studio, I was told by Mr. Lavelle not to worry. He had prerecorded our credentials. Right away I suspected the worst when he proceeded to wax about the other two’s affiliations (but not mine), and their yet-to-be published books (but not my own published work). I have some experience with media’s reaction to my opinions. This is precisely why I mentioned my book first up. I had the feeling that it would go unmentioned.
Except for the “paleo” appellation, 100% of my bio was left off.
As I mentioned in discussion with Robert, it is not my affiliations RT had a problem with (WND, Economic Policy Journal, Jerusalem Institute for Market Studies), but my position and book (published in 2011) on the topic.
Mr. Lavelle intended to present me as a voice from the (Pacific Northwest) wilderness. Had the other two panelists not been the unsharpened pencils they were—I would not have gotten to speak up about the little I did.
The TV embed is reproduced in this EPJ article.
Not that I want feminists on my side, but were they in the habit of standing up for ALL women, they might have protested the marginalization of the only woman on this panel (even though my gender had nothing to do with my marginalization, not that that would have mattered to these generally intellectually dishonest fems, provided I was parroting politically pleasing opinion).
UPDATE: Granted, Mr. Lavelle may never intend to invite me on “Crosstalk” again for reasons noted above. However, he risks not getting controversial guests with whom he disagrees to revisit his set. Who would go through that exercise again for such shoddy treatment? Not me. It is, moreover, dishonest to lure guests to a studio (at the early AM), when there is no intention to treat their work with respect. When you make the effort, you expect that your work, which has gotten you the invite, will be at the very least mentioned.