This whole idea of holding advertisers responsible for the content of the shows they run their ads on is really not effective, in my view. If you don't like the content of a show, then don't watch it. Glenn Beck gets very high ratings, and as long as it does, there will be plenty of companies willing to reach his audience. If you want to hurt him, the only way to do it is to convince people not to watch his show.

Being of a more conservative and libertarian viewpoint, there are a number of shows that I wouldn't waste my time watching, like the “Ed” show, or whatever it's called. I watched that once for a few minutes and couldn't believe how stupid it was. I have never watched it since, but it never occurred to me to boycott or pressure his advertisers. What a ridiculous waste of time that would be!

As for Glenn Beck, I have listened to his radio show, and watched his TV show many times. I don't agree with everything he has ever said, but I get information from many sources – TV, newspaper, web, radio, books – and I've never had the feeling that he was intentionally lying or trying to mislead. I actually find it refreshing to have someone who is actually trying to teach his audience about who the founders of the U.S. were and what they gave us. The things that I have heard people complain about as being lies are really matters of interpretation, or things that Beck was joking about, or sometimes exaggerating for effect, as we all do. It's pretty easy to tell which is which, but his critics are looking for the slightest thing and such things will be easy to find with any program.

Also, Beck makes it clear that his analysis is always opinion, and he encourages his listeners and viewers to research for themselves. I find that refreshing. Many people have become interested in things they should be interested in because of his shows. Even his critics should be happy about that, unless they don't want people to know the truth.

As for those who accuse him of having purely monetary motives, it should be obvious, if it's true that his show went without advertisers in the U.K. for a number of months, that that isn't the case. If he is really only in it for the money, then he's the best actor I've ever seen. The truth is, however, that I go to work every day mostly for the money – if I didn't need the money I think I would be doing other things – even though I like most of what I do, I don't think I would be reporting to an office very day. Before you hurl that accusation, perhaps you should look in the mirror first.