It was an ordinary day at Le Conte Junior High School in Hollywood. Spring of 1973. My friend Scott Pearce was fiddling with a quarter he’d taken from his pocket. He examined it more closely, and his typically friendly countenance turned maniacal. He ran over to me and, in the style of an overwrought anticommunist commentator, yelled, “Look at this! They’re everywhere! This American quarter has the initials ‘JS’ on it. Joseph Stalin!”

I took the coin from his hand and looked it over. As he said, the initials “JS” were embossed right next to the image of George Washington. It took me just a beat to call up the image of the towering neon sign on the rooftop of the evangelical Church of the Open Door in downtown Los Angeles. I responded in a similar John Birch Society-embracing tone, “That doesn’t stand for Joseph Stalin. It’s ‘Jesus Saves’!” The class erupted in laughter, as did Scott, who looked astonished at my comeback.

I’d moved from Inglewood to Hollywood in the middle of eighth grade, and fortunately made friends quickly. I also enjoyed terrific political conversations.

Larry Mantle photographed in 1970

(

Courtesy Larry Mantle

)

This was Hollywood in the 1970s, so it’s no surprise the prevailing conversations leaned heavily liberal. The same was true at home, where my parents' politics were left of center and heavily pro-civil rights.

My friend Scott was a first-rate public speaker who went on to a career in law. George Ledec was our house environmentalist, conversant on a range of state and federal laws. He later became an environmental economist for the World Bank. Rob Crowell loved to debate politics, described himself as a socialist in junior high and became a pastor. There were many other formidable early teenage intellectuals at LeConte — each rooted in a decidedly non-conservative perspective.

I remember thinking that there must be counterarguments to examine. At the local library I checked out Sen. Barry Goldwater’s The Conscience of a Conservative. Goldwater had been demolished in the 1964 presidential election by Lyndon Johnson. Even many conservatives were wary of his uncompromising stances. Though I was aware of the criticism, I thought his book was as good as any to expose myself to conservative ideology.

Barry Goldwater Jr., right, with Valley Times Publisher Ben Reddick, when his father declared his candidacy for the Republican nomination in 1964.

(

Valley Times Photo Collection

/

L.A. Public Library

)

At home over family dinners, I started talking about Goldwater’s arguments. To my parents’ credit, they accepted my exploration, despite it running counter to their politics.

After trying out my material over dinner, I started introducing an occasional conservative argument at lunch with my friends. They seemed to enjoy our new verbal jousting, but couldn’t believe I thought the points I was raising had any merit. I extended my arguments to the classroom, to be met with the eye rolls of teachers. But it did subtly start shifting our frequent classroom political conversations.

When my friend George would go into detail about the need for government regulation of wetlands, I’d counter with how development helps build tax rolls to fund the programs liberals love.

Larry Mantle with Rosa Parks following an "AirTalk" interview

(

Courtesy Larry Mantle

)

Larry Mantle interviews Julia Child.

(

Courtesy Larry Mantle

)

I myself didn’t necessarily align with any one ideology — I just couldn’t get comfortable with hearing only one side of an issue.

For me, it was about hearing a wider range of ideas.

A few years later, I planned to enter the ministry and enrolled in a religious college in preparation. The political climate there was quite different from my Hollywood middle school. And I found myself again in the role of contrarian. I just couldn’t let conservative arguments go without challenge.

At the time, my U.S. government professor, Dennis McNutt, was a member of the Orange County Republican Central Committee. I loved debating him, though his political knowledge far surpassed mine.

I heard from him again about a year ago, when he emailed to tell me that he frequently listens to AirTalk and appreciates our coverage of politics and local issues. My high school government teacher, Judy Campbell, also listens regularly and attends our live AirTalk events. It’s a great feeling to have in our audience those who taught me so much.

The case against echo chambers

Larry Mantle and Rep. Darrell Issa (R) at the 2012 Republican National Convention.

(

Courtesy Larry Mantle

)

My discomfort with ideological echo chambers continues. There are certainly places to get strong progressive and conservative takes that straightforwardly confront opposition arguments. Unfortunately, others stack the deck in such a simplistic way that they’re little more than appeals to the fanbase. They may provide comfort in the company of the like-minded, but don’t help us work our way through legitimate competing arguments and differences in values.

This was on my mind even back in 1985 when I was working as the News Director of KPCC (now LAist) on the campus of Pasadena City College. Bob Miller, then our general manager, joined me on a walk to our cars in the staff parking lot. He started with complimenting my work, then said he wondered if there was something more personality-oriented that I might want to do on our air.

I was ready for the question. I’d long thought there was a great opportunity to talk about issues and news of the day with our well-informed and conscientious public radio listeners. I pitched Bob on a daily interview call-in program combining notable guests with listener calls.

KPCC got its start on the campus of Pasadena City College where "AirTalk" launched in 1985.

(

Courtesy Pasadena City College

)

()

He asked how quickly we could launch. I was stunned. I never expected he’d OK a significant show launch right on the spot. A month later, April 1, 1985, AirTalk launched as an evening drivetime program. With the launch of Southern California Public Radio in January 2000, which expanded the newsroom and ambition of the KPCC signal, we moved to mornings.

Over these 40 years, news media have dramatically changed. I grew up on The Big News on Channel 2, the nation’s first one-hour local TV newscast. It was a serious broadcast that dealt with local issues. There weren’t extended car chases or “happy talk” anchors. I read the Los Angeles Times daily and treated myself to buying the Herald-Examiner, with its grittier style, when I had a coin for the newsrack. I appreciated distinct journalistic voices, but I didn’t like anyone telling me there was only one moral or rational conclusion to come to.

That was at the front of my mind from the first time I went on the radio. I wanted to host a program that I would want to listen to. I could only hope that others would also be interested.

AirTalk’s approach of providing an array of voices and opinions was seldom challenged in the 20th century. In recent years, a new school of thought has arisen: the idea that it’s journalism’s job to fight back against pernicious arguments and misinformation. I don’t see it as a fight. Our job is to challenge arguments, not stack the deck against ones we think are weaker. There’s no question that effective journalism requires weighing of evidence, but the ultimate decision must be the audience’s.

Distrust of traditional media is rampant

Larry Mantle interviews Terry Gross, whose long-running NPR interview show "Fresh Air" features prominent people from all walks of life.

(

Courtesy Larry Mantle

)

The “Voice from Nowhere,” “both-sidesism” and “false equivalency” are just a few of the critical descriptions for traditional, non-advocacy, journalism. They describe an approach so focused on “balance” that demonstrably false arguments are given equal weight with provable ones. I think it’s a sometimes-legitimate criticism that’s also misused against solid journalism that refuses to demand the audience respond with moral indignation. There’s plenty to be indignant about, I don’t think you need someone else to tell you what should trigger that reaction.

The criticisms that “mainstream” media are generally liberal or that we’re part of and beholden to the corporate/governmental power structure have been around since long before I started in this field. What’s changed is that distrust of traditional media is rampant. We’re not just seen as biased, but intentionally deceiving the public. I don’t know how our profession rebuilds trust in this polarized era. I don’t think it happens by abandoning our efforts to reflect a wide range of perspectives to focus on advocacy.

The work of building trust never ends

One of the things I appreciate most about hosting AirTalk for all these years is building trust with listeners. Hopefully, they don’t perceive me as trying to influence their views. My goal, like LAist’s overall, is to reflect the terrific breadth of our region and to provide in-depth discussions of critical issues and fun personal reflections. Both are important in building community and getting to know each other. It makes coming to work every day incredibly rewarding.

I appreciate this opportunity and know how fortunate I am. It’s deeply gratifying to work within an organization with so many talented and dedicated people. It’s been a terrific four decades with, hopefully, several more years to come. Thank you for giving me the chance to fulfill the hopes I had for AirTalk in 1985.

Watch live

9 to 11 a.m. today: Join us this morning for a look back at the early days of AirTalk, some of the most memorable moments on air, and surprise special guests to commemorate the occasion. It will also all be live on LAist 89.3 of course! AirTalk wouldn’t have it any other way.