Fox news has made a fortune by giving their viewers what they want: entertainment! The average Fox news opinion show is part Jerry Springer, part WWE, and part Ringling Brothers with a smattering of breaking news and human interests stories. This is their right. They can provide whatever service they choose. It's up to us to know better.
Fox news has created and disseminated some of the most vitriolic and harmful propaganda on television the last 20 plus years. Sean Hannity is the current leader of the assault on decency and the truth.
The Fox formula is genius: for 22-23 hours a day "opinion" shows cloud the water. The few non-partisan journalists on staff get about 2 hours to cleanup the mess. This is what passes for a news organization these days.
Sadly, the few shows on the network grounded in objective facts are the least watched and most despised by the average Fox news viewer. Sheppard Smith is the most hated person on the network by Donald Trump's base. Smith's propensity for grounding his arguments in facts irks some of Fox's more partisan viewers. Watching side by side video of Smith debunking Hannity's lies is amusing, but also depressing. The fact that Hannity is allowed to be so reckless with the truth proves the network is more concerned with entertainment than information.
Laura Ingraham is very displeased with Lebron James. She channeled her inner Ann Coulter to challenge the intellect of a man who has shown himself to be a better person than the president she can't find any fault in. She doesn't like multimillionaire athletes using their platform to critique the reality show host she helped get elected president. How dare these uneducated thugs express their opinions about anything other than basketball? They need to stick to entertaining us. This sentiment gets recycled every time athletes and entertainers offer opinions the conservative media dislikes. Conservatives hate celebrities unless they agree with them. These are the same people who were silent when Ted Nugent told President Obama to, "suck on my machine gun." Laura "Susan" Ingraham's comments typify the hypocrisy of Donald Trump's most ardent supporters. For years, Donald Trump was a regular guest Fox and Friends. He used his time to tell any unchecked lie about President Obama that popped in his head. This phenomena didn't end. The president lies and spews hateful venom every time he finds himself in close proximity of a microphone. His lies are consumed as easily as oxygen. His rancor is passed off as straight talk. The profanity he uses is understood as passion. Conservatives have defended every offensive thing that has come out of his mouth and attacked anyone who dares call him out on his bigotry and ignorance. This is no different. Just for the sake of reference, I want to point to some important numbers about Donald Trump and Lebron James. Maybe Laura is ignorant about their record.
Sexual assault allegations: Donald Trump 19 Lebron James 0
Domestic violence allegations: Donald Trump 1 Lebron James 0
Pu$$y grabbing" confessions: Donald Trump 1 Lebron James 0
Payouts to Porn stars: Donald Trump 2? Lebron James 0
Laura Ingraham constantly defends one of these men.
Donald Trump is on a 23-0 run. I stopped keeping track to avoid an even bigger blowout. This is who Lebron James was talking about when he questioned our current president's level of concern for average Americans. If Donald Trump never said any of the offensive things he has publicly said about Blacks, Muslims, or Mexicans his track record with women would qualify him as a trash human being. Yet, the right circles the wagons to protect a man who has attacked every thing they claim to hold sacred.
This past Monday
Pat Robertson offered his Christian Broadcast Network audience a conspiracy
theory, as a legitimate response, to Fox News contributor Eric Bolling’s
suspension from the network for allegedly sending unsolicited nude photos to at
least three female coworkers. Robertson said:
If you wanted to destroy the Fox News, you really
wanted to destroy them, what would you do? Well you would send some salacious
material, ostensibly from one of their popular co-hosts or hosts and you’d send
it out and then get it publicized and then you have some woman complain that
she had gotten this salacious material from this particular co-host.
Sadly, there
are Evangelicals who will accept Pat Robertson’s theory as fact. The ungodly union
between the reactionary wing of the Evangelical movement and the conservative
media has produced an analytical paralysis in the minds of those who only receive
information from sources inside their bubble. This paralysis obscures rational thought
and hinders dialogue. It’s easier to believe conservative media outlets are the
victims of a sinister liberal plot than to address the misogyny and patriarchy
that seem to be constitutive parts of their political and religious dogma.
Eric Bolling’s
suspension comes a month after Charles Payne’s suspension pending the findings
of his sexual harassment allegations. In April of this year Bill O'Reilly was
fired from the network after it was revealed that he and 20th
Century Fox had been settling sexual harassment cases since 2004. In July of last year, the recently deceased, Roger
Ailes was forced to resign as CEO of Fox News amid his sexual harassment scandal
involving female employees at the network.
None of this
history matters. A closed mind rarely sees patterns. These sexual allegations
are not viewed as a sign of a toxic atmosphere. The “good guy” is a victim of
an illegitimate media. This is the kind of thinking that allows people to look
at videos of unarmed people shot by police and disconnect what they are seeing
from any historical context.
The allegiance
some Evangelicals have pledged to the conservative media is so strong that it
ignores, tolerates and even defends sexual assault. The "Access
Hollywood" audio of Donald Trump admitting to sexually assaulting women
didn't faze this crowd. Bill Clinton’s 20-year-old consensual affair with
Monica Lewinsky is more offensive to many of them than Donald Trump hanging
around the dressing rooms of young women or his willingness to just, “Grab ’em
by the p___y.”
There are religious
and secular people who, foolishly, believe these Evangelicals can be reached with
better arguments. These good folks are prisoners of their own hope and optimism.
There is a hatred at the core of this kind of Christianity. Pat Robertson was
talking to people who spent eight years believing every nonsensical story about
FEMA camps, gun grabs, Sharia law and a host of other lies fed to them by the
conservative media.
In America,
our hatred is often hidden behind the Bible or wrapped in a flag. More than 80%
of our fellow citizens identify with some denomination of Christianity,
yet the rhetoric disseminated from Christian television, social media, too many
pulpits and from our elected officials doesn't comport with the
gospel of Jesus. Pointing this out is useless. There are Evangelicals who
believe the media is fake news, science is a form of secular opinion and universities
produce more snowflakes than data. This isn’t hypocrisy. It’s a pernicious
worldview that can’t be penetrated with a better argument. The church and the truth
are collateral damage.
Bill O'Reilly's sophomoric
attempt to shade Maxine Waters wasn’t funny: you don't go after our Auntie no matter what! He thought he was being clever with
his James Brown joke, but ended up stepping in a pile of his own oral feces.
He tried to diminish the points she was making about the Trump administration and got away with it. We should call out his ignorance, but we can't allow it to overshadow the statements that put it on display. a lot of the outrage I’ve seen on social media has been just
as distracting as his failed attempt at humor. After 20 plus years in public life we know O'Reilly is a bigot and that Fox news will defended him no matter what he says or does; these facts have no bearing on this issue. Representative Waters was
engaging in a monologue on the House floor about the legacy of discriminatory
practices in our country and the faux patriots who seem to sit out every fight
for equality. Instead of addressing that issue O'Reilly chose to punt. Bill O’Reilly’s childish response to her polemic has gotten more
traction than the substance of the comments she was making: this offends me more than any bad
joke the serial misogynist,
racist,
and domestic
abuser could ever tell. Bill O’Reilly, like a lot of people tasked with defending this administration, would rather obfuscate the real issues at hand with ad hominem attacks and faulty logic than address
them. We have to stop taking the bait. O'Reilly succeeded in changing the conversation. He issued a weak apology on his show and then proceeded to slyly attack the congresswoman further proving her point about the way "patriots" address discrimination and equality. Yes, we have to address the ignorance around us, but we don't have to reward it with wall to wall coverage. We have to find a balance. The media should start treating this administration and their defenders like petulant children and stop rewarding their bad behavior with attention. I know this seems hypocritical in a blog about this subject, but we have to do better- All of us!
Dear Angry Trump Supporter: I get it. For the better part of forty years I've felt an anxiety similar to what you're experiencing now. Our anger isn't that different; it's connected to our shared inability to alter our day-to-day realities in any significant way. We share an uncomfortable truth: we're stuck reacting to the ebbs and flows of society because we're powerless to control them. You've seen sections of this country abandoned by the powers that be. Some of you have been suffering economic hardships in silence for decades. Pressing 1 for English is just a symptom of the cultural shift you've been forced to endure. Every other group in society champions their heroes: Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Caesar Chavez, Grace Boggs, Betty Friedan, Harvey Milk, and Louis Farrakhan, yet it's not "politically correct" for you to show pride in your race or heritage. America has changed, and it's not benefiting you. You're called a racist for articulating your fears, you get blamed for historical atrocities you didn't commit, and you're accused of having "white privilege" even though you don't know how it works or seem to be benefiting from it. Up is down, left is right, and things are changing faster than you can adjust to them. I hate that you're in pain. I disagree with the way your anger is being manipulated for political gain, and I wish I could convince you that we (Blacks, Mexicans, Muslims, LGBQT) aren't your enemy, but it's probably too late for that.
I've read dozens of articles chronicling the Trump "phenomenon". Some were garden variety in-group out-group armchair psychology that settled for calling you racists and idiots (some of you are), but those articles didn't interest me as much as the articles that sought to connect your populism to the deeper societal issues and economic realities you've been facing. The underlying cause[s] of Donald Trump's political ascension will be studied and debated for a long time across multiple disciplines. If your guy wins the Republican nomination his campaign will have changed the way future Republican candidates run their campaigns. In essences, your movement will have strong armed the Republican nomination process. This is good and bad. Giving your guy the nomination won't help you in the general election if you continue alienating the rest of us. 2016 could be the year we find out if you need any of us to win in a general election. Your party has only won the popular vote one time (2004) since 1988. My hunch is that a strategy of offending every minority group in the country could backfire, but I've been wrong before.
The America Country music stars sing about is over. This country will never exist as it did in those television shows from the 50's and 60's. We aren't going away.Alexis de Tocqueville understood all of this. He noticed how militant his fellow Frenchmen became as their standards of living improved during the French Revolution. One of the worst things you can do to a person who denies the effects of historical injustices is open the space for historically oppressed people to get access to freedom and economic opportunity. People don't freely go back to a status quo that puts the needs of their particular communities on the back burner for the sake of the majorities feelings. You're not responsible for the world you inherited: neither are we. The coalitions you see forming harbor some of the same mistrust between them as you might harbor towards all of us, but none of us are willing to go back to this place you seem willing to take us. When I hear "take America back" or "make America great again" I hear desperation. Those words are empty signifiers. If taking America back means it will once again be socially acceptable for a bigot to spit on my mother then: I'll fight you, not a metaphorical fight with words and ideas, but a real life out in the streets fight. If taking America back means my gay friends have to go back to their closets: then I know they'll fight you, and I'll help them. If making America great again means my brother's wife and his in-laws could be rounded up because being 4th and 5th generation Mexican-Americans isn't good enough for you: then I'll fight you. If I see a group of people harming my Muslim brothers and sisters: I think you get the point.
Here's a secret: all of us are feeling the pinch of global capitalism. You woke up in a nightmare that transcends race and class. Instead of blaming us for the greed that sent the manufacturing base of our economy to the developing world, and created the unsustainable boom or bust cycles we see in the market, why not ask us how we've endured the trauma you're feeling. I love you and hope you let your anger go. Don't let hate radio, Fox News, and right-wing demagogues strip you of your humanity. The sooner you understand the underlying cause[s] of your anger the sooner you can move on. The market economy is a lot like the in-group out-group distinctions some of the Americans you see as enemies face daily: they exist in invisible spheres that are hard to explain to people who aren't on the underside of them, yet you feel their effects. You could learn a lot from us; we understand what's happening to you better than you do.
Omission is one of the most powerful tools the media has at its disposal. The media can’t control what we think, but they can control what some of us think about. The deafening silence in light of the facts about corrupt Officer Gliniewicz on conservative talk radio and Fox news is telling. I’ve spent more hours than I care to admit watching Fox and listening to talk radio. I forced myself to watch The Five, Bill O’Reilly, and Sean Hannity. Sheppard Smith was the only person who addressed the way the networks on air personalities tacitly linked the “murder” of Officer Gliniewicz to the Black Lives Matter Movement. It doesn’t make me want to nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize, but after watching several hours of their programing over a two day period: I felt somewhat vindicated that a day after the story broke someone made my time worthwhile.
I have to admit I was impressed by the systematic the way they negated this story; the Fox “news” team covered the Russian plane story wall to wall, while the opinion team absolutely hammered Quentin Tarantino. CNN wasn’t any better they covered the Russian plane story with the same vigor that they covered the Malaysian flight from last year with. Chris Hayes gets an A+ for covering the story on Wednesday. This concerted omission is an important lesson for anyone new to media propaganda. The lack of media coverage for the 10\10\15 Justice or Else march combined with the cowardly and dishonest way this story has been covered is something those of us who identify with and support Black Lives Matter have always known and dealt with. I vividly remember the media coverage of the Ferguson and Baltimore riots, and the Fox Lake manhunt. The airwaves were filled with images of destruction and conservative experts chronicling the problems of the black community, yet when nearly a million people of color peacefully assemble in our nation’s capital or a hero cop is proven to be a “thug” we get crickets.
I’m not so naive that I believe news organizations don’t have bottom lines and profit motives to consider, nor do I equate or hold conservative pundits to the same standard I hold hard journalists to, but the lines between the two have been blurry for quite a while. The moment news outlets are more concerned with crafting narratives than uncovering truths they cease to be useful. There’s nothing wrong with infotainment, but too many in our society confuse it with journalism. If a task force had uncovered a link that implicated high ranking leaders at #BlackLivesMatter of Officer #Gliniewicz’s killing trust me: there wouldn’t be a concerted effort to avoid covering this story. In fact I would be watching the news now in an effort to hear the newest round of Ad Hominem attacks against those of us concerned with social injustices.
I’ll accept any criticism that comes from this post, but I won’t apologize for pointing out what’s right in front of me.
