As the midterm election gets closer, Fox News is rethinking their programming strategy. Whereas they used to air all of Donald Trump’s cult rallies in full and uninterrupted, they are now skipping them in favor of their regularly scheduled propaganda. The White House says that they are going to “look into” this betrayal by their State TV division.
Apparently the lower ratings and loss of ad revenue was hitting them where it hurts. Plus, by foregoing the live show they can selectively edit clips from Trump’s public tantrums to remove the most embarrassing parts. That leaves them free to embarrass themselves with the juvenile ravings of their Lunatic Fringe Players in Fox primetime.
Chief among the cast of Fox’s unreality circus of Trump-fluffers is Tucker Carlson. His show has become the official mouthpiece of America’s white supremacists. He spends most of the hour with a curious expression on his face that is part confusion and part disgust for his victimized guest.
However, on Friday evening, Carlson managed to sink to a new level of absurdity with a segment attacking Democrats – and particularly women – as practitioners of the dark arts. The discussion was marginally about opposition to the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh. But there was a much more sinister tangent that Carlson felt compelled to explore. His theme for the night was that “The party that conducts witch hunts also conducts witchcraft.” (video below)
“The question now is, is Kavanaugh’s powerful legal mind strong enough to withstand the forces of witchcraft? It’s a real question now. A coven of self-described witches in New York is planning a rally next week to put a hex on Justice Kavanaugh. You can buy a ticket to attend the ceremony for ten bucks. A quarter of that goes to Planned Parenthood to help them continue to fund their human sacrifice rituals.”
Let’s just set aside Carlson’s crass and offensive attack on Planned Parenthood as standard right-wing assholiness. What’s really important here is that Carlson has broken the liberal coven conspiracy wide open. No wonder Fox News has stopped covering Trump’s Kool-Aid parties live, when they have probing investigations like this to report. And lest you think that this is just some comic relief on Carlson’s part, note that he called it “a real question” and later said that “I think it’s the creepiest thing I’ve ever heard. And by the way, what if it’s real? I’m serious!“
With Trump’s public appearances becoming tedious affairs that the public (and Fox News) is tuning out, and Kanye West is the best hope the Republicans have for exciting their base, they are resorting to desperate tactics like this to avoid a bloodbath on November 6th. It’s such a dimwitted strategy that you have to consider the possibility that it was a witch’s spell that compelled them to pursue it.
Trump delivered another tedious and repetitive stump speech at one of his, now frequent, cult rallies Wednesday in Erie, Pennsylvania. It was a showcase for all of his “greatest hits” featuring “Build the Wall,” “Lock Her Up,” “Witch Hunt,” and many more. However, there was difference with this revival meeting that sets it apart from most of those in the past.
Politico reports that the Trump Broadcasting Network’s State TV (aka Fox News), declined to air the event live and uninterrupted as they usually do. Fox News has been a devoted servant of this administration when it comes to disseminating propaganda via their airwaves. They even promote on air with chyrons that read “Trump Rally Live & Only on Fox News, Other Networks Ignore Presidential Rally.” But it’s possible that Trump’s floundering popularity and financial concerns may be influencing their programming going forward. Politico notes that:
“As he’s ramped up his rally schedule ahead of the midterms, viewership numbers for the raucous prime-time events have been roughly similar to — sometimes dipping below — Fox News’ regular programming, and the network has recently stopped airing most evening events in full.”
That’s right. Trump is losing fans on the network that has been his official fan club for more than two years. This cannot be good news for the President, especially since he is increasing the number of these affairs specifically to boost the campaign prospects of Republican candidates in the cities where he is performing.
Consequently, Trump is compensating for this reduced coverage by calling into Fox News programs by phone. In the past three days he’s done that three times, ringing up his buddies Jeanine Pirro, Shannon Bream, and the “Curvy Couch” potatoes of Fox and Friends. But this is not likely to satisfy the White House. They have grown accustomed to the fawning attention they get from Fox News and expect it to continue. And they aren’t sitting around waiting for Fox to correct the situation. According to Politico:
“One senior White House official was unsure why the network would decide to cut away from presidential rallies, saying officials planned ‘to look into that’ and wouldn’t be surprised if White House communications director Bill Shine, a former Fox News executive, was in touch with former colleagues about the trend.”
Let that sink in. The White House believes that they have some sort of right to free airtime on Fox News, and if they aren’t getting it they will take action to set the network straight. Notice that they aren’t talking about looking into CNN or MSNBC. They are focusing on their wholly owned platform for media exposure and dispatching Bill Shine to address this outrageous policy shift. Shine is the former president of Fox News and Trump’s current deputy chief of staff for communications. And if you think that this isn’t explicitly about having an impact on the upcoming midterm election, just take it from the mouth of a GOP campaign operative who worries about the loss of Trump’s TV time because:
“‘It exposes us to a national audience that we normally don’t get to,’ a Senate Republican campaign staffer said of the coverage of Trump rallies. ‘We tend to see lots of new sign-ups and small-dollar donations. There’s obviously folks streaming [rallies] online, but being able to be onstage with the president in front of a prime-time audience is huge for a campaign trying to reach conservatives across the country who will open up their wallets.'”
Among the other observations made by Politico are that Trump’s rallies are drawing fewer viewers. “His events at times popped for more than 4 million viewers on Fox News,” a source said. Which is “a number he hasn’t come close to in 2018.” What’s more, “network officials’ fear was that too much repetition would lead to lower ratings,” and that Fox News could lose millions of dollars in ad revenue because they “can’t take commercial breaks while Trump is speaking.”
Perhaps the decision to cut back on live rally airings led to Trump making a blatant promotional pitch for Fox in order to get more airtime via flattery. He gave a shout out on Wednesday to Foxies who he praised for maligning Democrats as “the Dimms,” saying:
“The great Lou Dobbs, he says that, right? Sean Hannity says that. ‘The Dimms.’ Judge Jeanine says that, doesn’t she? Laura [Ingraham]. Laura. How good has Laura been, right? Do we like Tucker? I like Tucker.”
Actually, only Lou Dobbs says that, but getting the facts straight has never been of much concern to Trump. All he wants is to have his face in front of the Deplorables who are glued to Fox News all day and night. He wants to make sure his perverse and incoherent message is being injected into the already acutely ill-informed brains of Fox’s loyal audience. And if Fox News thinks they can get away with reducing his airtime, they better be prepared for more of this:
.@FoxNews has been treating me very unfairly & I have therefore decided that I won't be doing any more Fox shows for the foreseeable future.
Yeah, that’ll happen. More likely Fox will cave in to Trump’s tantrum and resume their live broadcasts. They can make up the lost revenue with the tax cuts Trump will promise them. And their hosts who get preempted by the rallies will all get “exclusive” interviews. That’s how State TV works. Trump is learning well from his friends in Russia and North Korea.
On Tuesday, the morning crew at Fox News invited their primetime colleague, Tucker Carlson, to visit with the “Curvy Couch” potatoes of Fox and Friends for a masters class in mind-numbing hypocrisy. Of course, that’s standard fare on Fox News, but this episode stretched the boundaries of the journalistic quackery that Fox is famous for. And it gave Carlson an opportunity to expound on something other than his white nationalist dogma.
The segment that featured Carlson was focused on criticizing the New York Times for a recent report about Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh. The story concerned an incident in 1985 when Kavanaugh was involved in a bar fight investigation. Co-host Ainsley Earhardt introduced the segment with a graphic showing the Times’ headline: “Kavanaugh was questioned by police after bar fight in 1985.” So it was a pretty straight forward account of something that no one disputes took place.
Nevertheless, Fox and their friends were aghast that anyone would bring up an incident that occurred when Kavanaugh was only twenty years old. As everyone knows, it’s improper to investigate a public figure’s past unless they are Democrats. In which case, you can go all the way back to their birth certificate. Consequently, Carlson reacted with shock and sarcastically proclaimed that “I wish they’d have told me that. I never would’ve supported him.” He dismissed the article as “stupid and irrelevant” and generally mocked the Times for having published it. But the discourse sunk even lower as this exchange with Steve Doocy demonstrates (video below):
Carlson: This is the problem with so much of our coverage, and so much of the way we think about things. No self awareness at all. […] If you’re writing that story does part of you think “Is this why I got into journalism? To carry water for a political party? To be a propagandist? To write something so stupid that I can’t look in the mirror without self loathing?” Doocy: Don’t you know the answer to that question? Carlson: Some people never pause to ask “What am I doing with my life?”
Imagine having such a pitiful lack of self awareness that you can ask about the self awareness of others while you’re oblivious to what you’re saying at that exact moment. Tucker Carlson was actually chastising the Times for “carry[ing] water for a political party” and for being “a propagandist.” Those are two things that Fox News in general, and Carlson in particular, are best known for. So if Carlson thinks that someone being that big a suck-up “can’t look in the mirror without self loathing,” then he’ll have to remove every mirror from his home and office in order to get through the day. And knowing his degree of narcissism, that’s a lot of mirrors.
It was also somewhat curious that Doocy asked Carlson if he already knew the answer to his own questions. That sounds like Doocy was accusing Carlson of the political sycophancy he was complaining about. Which would be wildly out of character for Doocy. Regardless, Carlson just laughed it off with his patented smuggery. And in the end, none of them realized that what they were criticizing was what has been the central mission of Fox News for twenty years – if we’re allowed to go back that far.
Tucker Carlson kinda loses it over a “stupid and irrelevant” NY Times headline about Brett Kavanaugh's drinking: Whichever “propagandist” wrote it has “no self awareness at all” and should quit journalism and become an insurance salesperson. pic.twitter.com/4fD8btEIyw
On Friday the New York Times published a bizarre story about Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. The article alleged that Rosenstein had floated a suggestion to secretly record Donald Trump to gather evidence of his mental infirmity. There was reportedly further discussion of invoking the 25th Amendment to declare the President incompetent and remove him from office. That hardly seems like an allegation that needs any additional proof.
“…the only other beneficiary of it would be the White House. It gives Trump an excuse to fire Rosenstein and appoint someone in his place who would put the brakes on the investigation of special counsel, Robert Mueller. But it would be somewhat hypocritical for Trump to do that on the basis of a story from a news source that he considers fake and failing. Consequently, he might need some support from his cheering section (and shadow cabinet) at State TV, also known as Fox News.”
It looked like Trump was getting the support he would need to fire Rosenstein from a bevy of Fox News hacks. They included Laura Ingraham, Gregg Jarrett, and Jeanine Pirro. But all was not as tightly synchronized as one would expect of the Fox propaganda machine. Later that evening when Sean Hannity’s program came on, he had a decidedly different take on the matter. He looked squarely into the camera and delivered a personal message to Trump saying “Under zero circumstances should the president fire anybody. The president needs to know it is all a setup.” Hannity asserted that the whole thing might be an insidious attempt by the “deep state” to bait Trump into firing Rosenstein and then initiating impeachment proceedings against him for doing so.
Despite the absurdly Machiavellian flavor of that conspiracy theory, it appears to have taken hold and altered the Fox News playbook for this issue. Ingraham deleted her tweet without any explanation. And Pirro posted a subsequent tweet adopting Hannity’s framing. She even went a little further to speculate that Rosenstein was the Times’ anonymous source. Tucker Carlson was already on board having opined that it was former Deputy Director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe, who leaked the memos to the Times since he “has every incentive to want to see the president impeached.”
So now we have achieved the full hive-mind harmony that is required of a socio-political cult. This unanimity of viewpoint makes it possible for the borg Family to advance their robo-mission unencumbered by independent thought. And surprisingly, the leader of the Family has remained silent. Trump has not addressed the Times’ article directly since it’s publication. He did make a sideways reference at a rally that simply accused his Department of Justice of having a “lingering stench.” Which is something that, were he more self aware, he would realize was emanating from himself. But for the time being, Rosenstein’s job is safe due to the paranoid musings of Trump’s State TV (aka Fox News).
The Senior Douchebag of Fox News, and host of Tucker Carlson Tonight, has been making news this week. In an “interview” with Stormy Daniels’ attorney, Michael Avenatti, Carlson was beaten to a pulp and exposed as an intellectual lightweight who has no grasp of facts or common sense. It was delicious to see him squirm and stutter.
You would think that after such an embarrassing display, Carlson would try to rehabilitate his tattered reputation. You would be wrong. On Friday’s episode, Carlson hosted Univision anchor Enrique Acevedo for a discussion on immigration. Carlson began his inquisition by framing the entire debate as a measurement of the immigrant population of the country. His premise was that the more immigrants, the worse off the nation is. And he expressed a longing for the past, which he perceives as being more homogeneously white. It wasn’t. It’s just that the majority white population was more in control. But Carlson viewed that as better:
“When I was born in this country, the percentage of people who were living here, who were foreign-born, was under five percent. It’s now about fourteen percent. So that’s a three-fold increase. That’s a huge change – huge change – in less than fifty years. Is the country better or worse for that, would you say?”
Acevedo responded that the country is better off, as is the economy. Well, he tried to respond, but Carlson cut him off after about twelve seconds. Then, when Acevedo tried to inform Carlson that two-thirds of GDP growth since 2011 was due to immigration, he was interrupted again after twelve seconds. Does Carlson have an “interrupter clock”?.
The debate then shifted to the immigrants themselves, and whether they merited entry to America. Carlson argued that most immigrants were poor and undeserving of entry. You know, the “huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” He couldn’t comprehend the reality that even poor immigrants contribute to the country, either by filling jobs that Americans won’t do, or by rising up through hard work and innovation to found companies like Apple and Google.
Carlson then asserted that there is something undemocratic about current immigration policy because all the polls say that Americans want less of it. That, however, isn’t true. In fact, most polls show that broad majorities of Americans (75%) favor immigration in general, and are opposed to a border wall in particular.
But Carlson never lets facts get in the way of his rank bigotry. In the following exchange, Carlson let slip that he looks back longingly on a bygone era when white nationalists like himself reigned unencumbered by those pesky minorities demanding civil rights. Acevedo asked Carlson what period in the past he was advocating as superior to the present. Carlson replied:
Carlson: When I was born it was fine. It was a better country than it is now, in a lot of ways. Acevedo: In what sense was it a better country? By what metric? Carlson: It was a more cohesive country. Acevedo: It was a less diverse country, maybe? Carlson: No. It’s not about race. The middle-class was vibrant when I was born. It’s dying now. And [cutting him off] we’re out of time.
To the extent that the middle-class is less vibrant today, it’s due directly to the policies of Carlson’s Republican Party. Their agenda of tax cuts for the rich and regulation cuts for corporations is the single biggest factor in the shift of wealth from the middle-class to the top one percent. America’s economy is booming, but average Americans aren’t seeing any of the benefits. It’s a certainty that Carlson doesn’t want to roll that back.
As for his nostalgia, Carlson was born in 1969. That was just a few years after the Civil Rights Act was passed. The country was still unwinding the decades of Jim Crow laws that dominated most of the South. Martin Luther King was assassinated only one year prior and his work was far from over, as evidenced by his murder. There was one African-America senator, and only six members of the House. But that’s the wonderfully “cohesive” time that Carlson wishes America would return to. With this rhetoric it seems that he’s not even trying to disguise his racism anymore. And Fox News is apparently cool with that.
The single most repulsive character on the Fox News Cartoon Network is, without a doubt, Tucker Carlson. He has assumed the position of the Grand Wizard of the white nationalist movement with his frequent tirades that literally regurgitate the racist tropes of the hate mongers of the right. A recent example of that took place just last week on a show where Carlson couldn’t figure out how diversity strengthens America.
But what occurred on Thursday night’s episode went even farther into the abyss off wingnuttery (video below). Carlson hosted Michael Avenatti, the lawyer for Stormy Daniels, in a what turned into a demolition of Carlson’s already splintered reputation. It began with Carlson introducing some of the ground rules for the TV debate. He said that Avenatti…
“…”has now agreed to appear on our set provided we give him time to state his case, and of course we’re happy to do that. In the past he’s also demanded that we stop referring to him by a certain unflattering nickname [Creepy Porn Lawyer]. We haven’t agreed to that demand, but tonight, as a gesture of goodwill, we will not use that nickname, because we’re always grateful when guests are brave enough to show up in person, including in this case.”
So Carlson made two promises in order to get Avenatti to agree to appear on the program. And Carlson almost immediately broke both of them. His first interruption occurred within seconds of Avenatti’s response to the first question he was asked. And from the start, Carlson’s program featured chyrons that repeatedly used the “Creepy Porn Lawyer” epithet. It was a demonstration of the infantile nature of Carlson and the State TV outlet that employs him. Avenatti weighed in following the show:
The extent there was any doubt as to the lack of professionalism of @TuckerCarlson or @FoxNews before tonight, there is no longer. What happened with the chyron tonight was a disgrace. Complete garbage – trash television. A new low.
Carlson asked his first question, which had to do with what the rational response would be to an act of cyber war by Russia. Avenatti began his answer by saying that “Well, Tucker, I understood that I was coming on your show tonight to talk about the case involving my client…” And that was as far as Avenatti got when Carlson burst in with his first interruption. Avenatti told Carlson that:
“You’ve gotta stop interrupting me, cause one of the conditions of me coming on tonight was that you were not going to do what you do routinely to guests, which is talk over them and interrupt them. So just let me finish with my answer.”
Then Carlson asked his question again, and Avenatti got a little further into his answer when Carlson again broke in, and Avenatti scolded him saying “There you go interrupting me again.” It’s clear how this interview was going to go from just these first few minutes. Avenatti was trying to give substantive responses to Carlson’s inquiries, but Carlson obviously didn’t like that Avenatti’s points included condemnations of Trump for colluding with Russia. So Carlson had to prevent that sort of truth from getting out to his willfully ignorant audience.
Despite Carlson’s introduction that claimed that he didn’t want to engage in insults, he excused his interruptions as “clarifications” because, as he stated, Avenatti didn’t understand the questions. But Avenatti wasn’t going to sit there and have Carlson call him stupid. He shot back at Carlson with a question of his own: “Why don’t you call Trump the creepy porn president” due to his having unprotected sex with a porn actress while his wife and four month old baby were at home. Carlson got glassy-eyed and stuttered as he tried to change the subject. Then, after acting like a wild buffoon, Carlson told Avenatti to “settle down.” It was hilarious.
Then Carlson goes totally off the rails with an assertion that makes no sense at all. He said that Avenatti should be paying his client, Stormy Daniels, because he has an expensive suit and she’s performing in strip clubs. Huh? What does that have to do with anything? Does Carlson think that any lawyer who is better off financially than his client should be giving the client money?
Avenatti then nailed Carlson for not knowing that Trump’s former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, pleaded guilty to two campaign finance felonies. Carlson tried to claim that they were not violations, but you can’t plead guilty to something that isn’t a crime. Having lost this point, Carlson swings back to why Daniels is performing in “depressing strip clubs,” as if it were Avenatti’s role to tell her what to do. Avenatti replied that she’s doing what she wants and that “This is America” and “if a women wants to perform in a strip club she does so even though people like you demean her.”
You know that Avenatti was winning this debate by the way that Carlson was losing his composure. He actually ended up yelling at Avenatti because he refused to allow Carlson to continually interrupt him. And when Avenatti grew tired of Carlson’s belittling of his client, he asked Carlson about his own porn habits. That shut Carlson up momentarily. And when Avenatti asked Carlson if he thought that people who view porn should watch his show, Carlson whimpered “I’m not even sure what that question means.” Then Carlson cut Avenatti off from responding to his closing lecture by declaring that he was out of time.
There is one lesson that everyone watching this segment ought to take to heart: No one should ever – for any reason – appear on Tucker Carlson’s program. He will lie to your face about the conditions of the agreement to appear. And then he will endeavor to steer the conversation to whatever tangential topic he thinks he can best malign you with. Avenatti actually handled Carlson brilliantly throughout the “interview,” but it was still an exercise in futility that accomplished nothing. Carlson’s mind can not be changed, and neither can the minds of his dimwitted viewers.
While there is a scant amount of comic relief from seeing Carlson squirm, it’s still unproductive and only serves to spike his ratings. That potentially gives him attention from a larger pool of Deplorables when he should be booted off the air for advancing the agenda of neo-Nazis and violent, racist extremists. The sooner he gets canned for advocating his race war, the better for America.
The enthusiasm with which Fox News has been embracing the racist themes of white nationalism has been observable for years. It was a constant feature on Bill O’Reilly’s program, as it is on Laura Ingraham’s. However, their adoption of this abhorrent political movement is accelerating on a daily basis throughout the Donald Trump presidency. And it’s unchallenged leader in this crusade is their primetime anchor, and man with “resting douchebag face,” Tucker Carlson.
Carlson is having trouble understanding why diversity strengthens America. In Friday’s episode of his White Nationalism Hour on Fox News, Carlson played a video montage of President Obama and others praising the benefits of a diverse nation. After which, Carlson complained that he doesn’t “know exactly what it means other than ‘stop talking or else.'” How he got that from people advocating for more voices joining the public discussion is a mystery only a Grand Wizard can solve. But his whole segment on diversity was a holy mess of bigotry and ignorance. For example (video below):
“How, precisely, is diversity our strength? Since you’ve made this our new national motto, please be specific as you explain it. Can you think, for example, of other institutions – I don’t know – marriage or military units, in which the less people have in common the more cohesive they are. Do you get along better with your neighbors or your co-workers if you can’t understand each other, or share no common values?”
This is way to easy. First of all, is Carlson really using the military as an example of an institution where these is no diversity? America’s armed forces were desegregated in 1948 by President Harry Truman. And ever since then they have been a model for desegregating other sectors of public and private society. Does Carlson think our troops would be better off going back to forced separation based on race? Of course he does. That’s actually his point.
What’s more, Carlson also seems to be criticising the acceptance of interracial marriages. That’s another barrier that was legally overcome by the Loving v. Virginia decision by the Supreme Court in 1967. And it’s another human rights advancement that Carlson apparently wants to rollback.
His language in the sophomoric question he asks is revealing in itself. He implies that the purpose of encouraging diversity is “cohesiveness.” No, that’s the purpose of segregation and whites-only lunch counters. The purpose of diversity is expanding everyone’s understanding of a broader perspective of the world. It’s to combat exactly what Carlson thinks are obstacles to understanding each other. But in Carlson’s view our differences in skin color represent insurmountable conflicts in values. What freaking hell hole of a planet does he live on?
The fact that Fox News allows these types of flagrant white supremacy diatribes to go out on their network is an indication of their support for such repulsive tributes to prejudice and hatred. Tucker Carlson is just a petulant little jerkwad who’s views are aligned with the Klan. But Fox News runs a major cable “news” network that influences a significant faction of America’s Deplorables. And such a network must not be permitted to advance these hateful, ignorant notions without consequence. Their advertisers need to be shamed and shunned. The cable operators who carry the network need to hear from their subscribers that this hate speech is unacceptable.
Most importantly, conscientious people in public life must not grant Fox credibility by appearing on their racist programs. The network needs to be frozen out of decent society. Let them wallow in the filth of their regular cast of bigots. They can host Ann Coulter and Sebastian Gorka and Donald Trump and other white supremacists exclusively. That way it will always be easier to recognize the sleazeballs by their presence on the avowedly racist cable network.
This week the flagrant white nationalist sentiments of Fox News were on full display. “The America we know and love doesn’t exist anymore,” primetime host Laura Ingraham said Wednesday night. “Massive demographic changes have been foisted on the American people, and they are changes that none of us ever voted for, and most of us don’t like.” Who she means by “us” is the minority of rancid bigots who think they own the country and can demand that its residents all look like them.
The America the rest of us (the majority) know and love is one that values diversity and welcomes people of all nations, ethnicities, faiths and race. Every poll shows that most people regard immigration as a positive contribution to a stronger and greater nation.
On Fox News, however, there is a decidedly different approach to the composition of the American populace. In addition to Ingraham, they have Tucker Carlson, with his own primetime slot, delivering a blatant message of white nationalism every night of the week. A large percentage of his program is consumed with stories about how white people are the real victims of prejudice. According to Carlson, white Americans suffer an unbearable burden due to the curse of their lightly pigmented skin. Poor babies. And it’s no coincidence that Donald Trump has adopted this same white nationalist theme as a primary component of his presidency.
Tom Kludt and Brian Stelter of CNN addressed the hateful programming of Fox News in an article that sought to explore the network’s record on race. Early on they hit on the explanation for how Fox can get away with producing and airing such programming:
“The Fox News audience is almost 100% white, according to Nielsen. And on the channel’s highest-rated shows, the politics of white anxiety play out practically every day, as hosts and guests warn about the impacts of immigration and minimize or mock the perspectives of people of color.”
That’s right. With an audience that is so blindingly white, Fox literally has no incentive to care about the welfare of people of color. They won’t suffer in the ratings for having offended anyone with their constant flow of bigotry. So why should they bother to temper their commentaries for an audience that is tuned in elsewhere (mostly MSNBC). Stelter elaborated on Fox’s audience composition in a tweet:
Composition of the Fox News audience, 2018-to-date, total day: 94% White, 3% Hispanic, 2% Asian, 1% Black https://t.co/Uf4w2wu0Y5
But it’s even worse than that. Fox doesn’t just have to appeal to overwhelmingly white viewers. They have to appeal to white viewers who aren’t offended by racism. Many Anglo-Americans are decent folks who embrace the whole of humanity. They wouldn’t stand for a network that insults and demeans anyone. So Fox’s viewers have to appreciate the naked prejudice that is so integral to Fox News. In other words, the Fox News audience is affirmatively pro-hate.
Appealing to that demographic is the only way the network can survive. And the absence of African-Americans, Latinos, and other people of color, as well as white folks who value tolerance and inclusion, explains how Fox gets away with it. That presents a problem for fighting back against this racist network. We can hardly pledge to boycott a channel that we already don’t watch. But we can refuse to patronize their advertisers and to let them know that. And we can make sure that the world knows that any business that advertises on Fox News is supporting hatred and intolerance.
UPDATE: On Thursday night’s episode of The Ingraham Angle, Laura Ingraham gave a weak walkback of her open embrace of white nationalism on Wednesday. She even tried to brush off the praise she received from former KKK Grand Dragon, David Duke. However, when you draw praise from someone like that, you have to admit that you said something wrong. She wouldn’t admit it or apologize, and therein lies the disingenuousness of her response.
This weekend Donald Trump massively accelerated the level of nonsense that has been the hallmark of his presidency. Among the cognitive lapses he displayed while embarrassing America in Europe were his defensive response to the indictment of twelve Russians for interfering with the 2016 presidential election, and his anti-First Amendment rebuke of the the “fake news” network CNN in favor of the “real” network, Fox News. But he was just getting started.
There were several instances of acute mental confusion that Trump exhibited this weekend. But let’s begin with the most disturbing one, even though it may not be the most substantive. In an interview with British Trump-fluffer Piers Morgan, the President was asked “What is the incentive for America to do a great deal with the United Kingdom?” And this was Trump’s – – – answer?
“We would make a great deal with the United Kingdom because they have product that we like. I mean they have a lot of great product. They make phenomenal things, you know, and you have different names — you can say ‘England’, you can say ‘UK’, you can say ‘United Kingdom’ so many different — you know you have, you have so many different names – Great Britain. I always say: ‘Which one do you prefer? Great Britain?’ You understand what I’m saying?”
No. Nobody understands a single thing that you’re saying. But that’s only because you aren’t saying anything that is remotely intelligible. But other than that, it’s perfectly clear.
From there we go on to an interview Trump gave to CBS anchor Jeff Glor. Trump made several bits of “news” in this brief dialog. Like when he said that his father was born in the EU (Germany). Except that his father was born in New York. Trump will literally lie about anything. There are no limits to the outright absurdity of his frightening foolishness. For example:
GLOR: “What’s your goal from the Putin meeting?” TRUMP: “I’ll let you know after the meeting.”
Well, that’s comforting. It shows how seriously Trump is taking this summit with the dictator of the nation that is occupying Crimea, helping Iran in Syria, and that attacked America’s democracy. And then there’s this:
GLOR: “The Russians who were indicted. Would you ask Putin to send them here?” TRUMP: “Well I might. I hadn’t thought of that. But again — this was during the Obama administration.”
He hadn’t thought of the most obvious response to a historic indictment of a foreign nation’s criminal cyberwar against the United States? What the hell is he thinking of? Pee-pee tapes? And even after being given the idea, Trump still only says that he “might” bring it up. Then he goes on to blame President Obama for the whole mess. It may have happened DURING the Obama administration, but it was being done FOR (and with?) the Trump campaign. And then there’s this:
TRUMP: “I think the DNC should be ashamed of themselves for allowing themselves to be hacked. They had bad defenses and they were able to be hacked. But I heard they were trying to hack the Republicans too, but — and this may be wrong — but they had much stronger defenses.”
So now the DNC is responsible for Putin’s hacking of Democrats on behalf of Donald Trump. Classic “blaming the victim.” And Trump has the audacity to make this allegation even while admitting that “this may be wrong.” What sober-minded world leader would say things publicly that he doesn’t know are true? BTW, according to the Justice Department, the GOP was hacked, so their defenses were no better than the DNC. But Russia was only using hacked info against the Democrats. Whatever they hacked from Republicans is probably being used to blackmail Trump. And then there’s this:
GLOR: “Who is your biggest competitor? Your biggest foe globally right now?” TRUMP: “Well I think we have a lot of foes. I think the European Union is a foe, what they do to us in trade. Now you wouldn’t think of the European Union but they’re a foe.”
Indeed, we do have a lot of foes. Especially many of our former allies since Trump took office. But the first one he thinks of to mention is the European Union? Certainly not China, or North Korea, or Iran. And as for Russia, last week Trump referred to Putin only as a competitor, saying explicitly that he was “not my enemy.” Trump even went out of his way to congratulate Russia on Twitter Sunday morning. But the EU is a foe? And then there’s this:
TRUMP (On UK protests): “There are many, many protests in my favor.”
Um OK.
Amazing turn out in the thousands and inspiring spirits at the Trump protest in Sheffield yesterday. But in the name of fairness I have to mention the pro-Trump contingent present. Almost enough for a game of five-a-side. pic.twitter.com/LOrm7pJUU2
— Daniel Dylan Wray (@DanielDylanWray) July 14, 2018
— Sister Resister ??????? (@GoodTroubleGran) July 13, 2018
Following the Putin/Trump performance review on Monday, Trump is now scheduled for a lavish tongue bathing by Fox News shills Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson. Because who else would he turn to? And Vladimir Putin will also be visiting Fox News for an interview with Chris Wallace. So it’s an all-Fox, All Russia, all Trump festival of flagrant propaganda. I can hardly wait.
When Fox News was treated badly during the Obama administration, the rest of the media would quickly come to their defense with unqualified support for the free press. And as an expression of their gratitude, Fox News has made sure to viciously slander their media colleagues at every opportunity. They are fulfilling their role as the State TV division of Donald Trump’s White House, where the media is considered to be “the enemy of the American people.”
On Friday Brian Flood, a Fox News media reporter, did an analysis of old tweets by his counterpart at CNN, Oliver Darcy. The story was intended to reveal some sort of hypocrisy on Darcy’s part for being critical of CNN prior to joining them, but then failing to be critical of his new employer.
Really? Fox News is surprised that an employee of CNN isn’t bashing his own network? In a perfect world every media critic would hold all reporting to the same standards for ethics and professionalism. But for Fox News to lash out at Darcy for this reason is laughable. Fox is the most insulated pseudo-news enterprise ever created. Not only will they never criticize their own reporting, they won’t even correct or apologize for blatant errors of fact.
The examples Flood sited of Darcy’s criticisms of CNN were not exactly blistering They included a critique of Kathy Griffin appearing in a bra on the New Year’s Eve telecast. And mocking CNN’s use of a “Breaking News” banner that’s nearly a permanent fixture on the screen (which Fox News does as well). And a comment on CNN’s website that chided the network for posting a flurry of pro-Clinton stories. Would Flood have preferred that Darcy approved of that partisanship?
In addition to the awkward spectacle of Fox News complaining about a CNN reporter criticizing CNN, Flood also flagrantly misrepresented a tweet wherein Darcy allegedly accused CNN of letting “people just make stuff up on the airwaves.” In fact, the tweet wasn’t a hit on CNN, but was chastising a pro-Trump shill who was a guest on the network. And the charge that Darcy doesn’t criticize CNN now is also untrue. A quick search turned up this example wherein Darcy took CNN to task for taking Trump out of context. When CNN was reached for a response to Flood’s story, they said:
“Oliver was critical of CNN before, just as he is now. CNN is a place where opinions and ideas are valued. And we encourage staff to share their thoughts about the organization – both positive and critical. While this might seem like an exotic concept to you, we’d headline it ‘Media Reporter Does Job.’ This is a nothing story.”
However, if Fox News thinks it’s relevant to take old, negative comments from a network correspondent and insist that they have some significance today, then they had better look in the proverbial mirror. Fox’s newest star host in primetime is Tucker Carlson. But there was a time when Carlson had a less than flattering opinion of Fox News. In fact, he called them “a mean, sick group of people.” That’s a far worse, and far more personal assault than mocking a “Breaking News” chyron.
Perhaps even more troubling than what a current Foxie said long ago, is what former Foxies are saying right now. Lt. Col. Ralph Peters was Fox’s military strategist for many years. He recently quit the network saying that he was “ashamed” to be associated with it, and that it has become “a propaganda machine for a destructive and ethically ruinous administration.” He also called Carlson a Nazi apologist. I’m waiting for Fox’s searing article on those commentaries by people associated with Fox News.
