Greta Van Susteren Leaves Fox, But So What?

Before Greta Van Susteren became a talking head at Fox, part of Murdoch’s stable of conservative blonde women, she was a respected and knowledgeable criminal defense lawyer who did some great work at CNN, particularly during the OJ Trial.  Greta was the one thing that doesn’t exist today anywhere on the tube: someone who knew criminal law from the defense side and could explain it in a thoughtful and intelligent fashion.

A criminal defense lawyer, adjunct faculty member at Georgetown Law School, Greta was no dummy.  When she hosted Burden of Proof with Roger Cossack from 1994 to 2002, her intelligence and wit was on full display.

Somebody on air actually knew what they were talking about when it came to crim law. It wasn’t the usual horseshit talking head between commercials, being asked an idiot 4½ minute question that assumed the answer, and giving the 30 second reply that confirmed the host’s inflammatory narrative. Greta had depth. And then, poof, a new nose and she was gone.

When Greta Van Susteren was bought by Rupert Murdoch for Fox News, I defended her right to get a new nose, and felt this was an inappropriate basis for attack.  Many people get new noses for varying personal reasons, and Greta was every bit as entitled to a new nose as anyone else.

But what about a new brain?  Now that’s another story.

Greta was now acting, and she must have been a good enough actor for Fox to keep her on air for the next 14 years. Until now.

Greta Van Susteren left Fox News on Tuesday after 14 years at the network, an abrupt departure that comes with just two months left before the 2016 election.

It’s highly unusual for a network host to leave so suddenly, and the move was announced right after 21st Century Fox settled a lawsuit with former Fox News host Gretchen Carlson.

What Greta has to do with Gretchen is never explained, but then, this is Huff Post, so there is no prohibition on factoids being connected without any basis whatsoever.  CNN claims it was about money.

Van Susteren was already planning to leave, but she thought she would be hosting her 7 p.m. program “On the Record” for a few more weeks.

Yanking her off the air without a chance to say goodbye was “a bit immature,” [Greta’s husband, John] Coale remarked.

It was also a message from Rupert Murdoch.,,,

Murdoch, the patriarch of Fox’s parent company 21st Century Fox, disliked her recent attempt to renegotiate her contract, and the unusual courier visit was a result of that, said one of the sources interviewed for this story.

Money isn’t the root of all evil. That would be lack of money. It bought Greta a new nose and job as a “political” pundit in the Murdoch fashion, even though she wasn’t a political pundit. It bought a dense conservative pundit where a smart liberal once sat. It bought Greta 14 profitable years, even if she had to sell her brain and soul to earn her paycheck.

And now, Greta says it “didn’t feel right.”

So Van Susteren took to Facebook to explain her exit.

Fox “has not felt like home to me for a few years and I took advantage of the clause in my contract which allows me to leave now,” she wrote.

Because it felt all homey when she was spewing the neo-con party line?

So Van Susteren scolded Geller for holding the cartoon contest. “My message is simple — protect our police. Do not recklessly lure them into danger and that is what happened in Garland, Texas at the Muhammad cartoon contest,” she said. “Yes, of course, there’s a First Amendment right and it’s very important, but the exercise of that right includes using good judgment.”

That’s not the old Greta. That’s the Greta with the cute nose who felt right at home saying stupid crap on the tube.

There is no one on the air who can compare with the old, funky-nosed Greta, who was smart and experienced. She understood what was real in the trenches. Today, we’re left with well-intended, if melodramatic, poseurs like Danny Abrams, who couldn’t find the courthouse without google maps, and gives his intense stare as he panders to public sensibilities. Unlike Greta, who made her bones in the trenches before a jury, Danny is 100% TV lawyer, which is obvious to real lawyers.

There is no one, absolutely no one, with the capacity to be real on television and provide viewers with information that won’t make them stupider. There hasn’t been since Greta left CNN for Fox.

Now that Greta’s gone from her acting job, will the criminal defense lawyer return? Will some other network pick her up, give her a show?  They certainly like a proven ratings winner, and Greta has managed to be that, but then, it’s been 14 years since Greta forfeited her credibility to please her Fox overlords.  She’s spoken many words since then, every one of which will come back to bite her in the butt should she try to be real again, to be the Greta she once was.

There’s no going back. She sold her integrity for a pat on the back from Ailes and a contract from Murdoch.  She established herself as a neo-con pundit, a badge-licker, a speech-hater, a celebrity.  There’s no returning to the airwaves as a credible source of criminal law commentary.

Or maybe viewers won’t care. After all, it’s not like they have a clue about criminal law anyway, happy with their simplistic grasp of law based on whatever feeling pops into their head first.  It’s not that Greta was once smart and is now stupid. Smart doesn’t disappear that easily, and it’s certainly still in there. It’s just that she once had integrity and now has a cute nose. That’s not good enough. I miss the old Greta, but I won’t miss a new Greta who admits that she spent the last 14 years making people stupider for a paycheck.

And we still, desperately, need a legitimate voice about criminal law on television.

22 thoughts on “Greta Van Susteren Leaves Fox, But So What?

  1. Billy Bob

    We desperately, need a legitimate voice about criminal law on the Supreme Court as well, in reference to your previous posting. Just as importantly, perhaps more so. We already know TV commentary is largely theater. We luv to be entertained.

    There are lots of things Greta can now do, or nothing. We anticipate a book down the road.

    1. SHG Post author

      Have you ever considered not referring to yourself as “we”? You’re not the king of France, and putting multiple personality disorder on display really isn’t a good idea.

    2. Patrick Maupin

      BIll:

      It was extremely clever of ye to notice that our esteemed host’s finely-tuned mental immune system had learned to associate indiscriminate use of the the first-person singular personal pronoun with indiscriminate spewage of thoughtless, irrelevant, off-topic, and boring anecdotes.

      But now ye have pushed too far. The host’s mental immune system, which has always coped poorly with imperfectly placed pronouns, is now becoming sensitized to any usage of the first person, plural personal pronoun.

      If only EpiPens were not so expensive, ye should send the host a gross to ensure that the side-effects of thine steady toxic pronoun drip do not kill it.

      1. SHG Post author

        What Bill knows, but you may not, is that 99.93% of his comments never see the light of day. These are the best of the best of what Bill has to offer. I, unfortunately, have to read them all.

        1. Billy Bob

          It varies, but you exaggerate. When Billy Bob, aka Wild Bill, is good, he’s real good. He tends to repeat himself though, as does the Host., saying the same thing in as many permutations as the language permits.
          Very astute, Patrick. We commend thee.

  2. Richard G. Kopf

    SHG,

    So far as I can tell, your nose doesn’t need fixing. Thus, I am perfectly serious when I suggest that you would be the perfect person fill the void that you articulate so well. Why don’t you take a run it? Perhaps not Fox, although if you were given editorial freedom the audience there is large. The point is that somewhere in the vast wasteland of television, cable or otherwise, there is a niche for a commentator with an edge who knows, truly knows, the criminal law from the defense perspective.

    All the best.

    RGK

    PS As an added incentive, such an effort might mean more bacon for you!

    1. SHG Post author

      Back in the 90s, I was a pretty regular legal commentator. I would get crap like, “what’s going on in the judge’s head?” or “how does it feel to learn a child was raped, murdered and beheaded?” That’s why I stopped. And they had bacon in the green room. Except Fox, whose green room was incredibly shabby. I did my last stint at Fox News on October 6, 2003 (I kept the pass in my desk to remind myself why I hated doing TV).

      If there was a shot at something remotely intelligent, informative and illuminating, I would suck it up and do whatever I had to do to make it happen. What are the chances?

      1. albeed

        “What are the chances?”

        You’d be a shoo-in for FOX News if you show up in your spiffy Nebraska Admiral’s uniform! Just send in a picture of you on the “gator” with your resume.

        It is a frightening thought though that the other networks might then follow suit.

        1. SHG Post author

          Maybe a nudie on the gator would do it, but if I wore my spiffy admiral’s uniform, I would need to have a wardrobe malfunction for anyone to give a shit.

          1. John Barleycorn

            Here you go…

            http://aggro-gator.com/images/aggro-gatordotcom50698.jpg

            I have never understood it myself but you know what they say, “If the gator suit fits, something, and something, or another.”

            Don’t be distracted by all the cosmetic surgery.Take a good look at how the makeup job meets the brow line. Rumor has it all the talking heads are wearing ’em these days.

            Supposedly you can’t spread vocal vd when wearing one as long as you use follow the directions and use plenty of lobotomy lube.

            P.S. Greta is going to take that gig I offered you a few weeks ago if we can come to an agreement on the theme music.

      2. Dragoness Eclectic

        Be a new, better Erle Stanley Gardner and write highly entertaining fiction about a CDL, that also keeps it accurate about the practice of law/the justice system/etc. People form a lot of their ideas about what the world is like from the fiction they read and watch.

        [Ed. Note: Herp.]

        Personal example: I do not and have not ever thought that criminal defense lawyers are scum barely better than the criminals they defend; rather, I believe that lawyers like yourself are an essential part of the legal system. I also read a lot of Perry Mason novels when I was a child. The two are related.

        [Ed. Note: Derp.]

    2. Brian Tannebaum

      Judge Kopf,

      You are correct that SHG would be the perfect person to fill that void – for viewers like yourself, and maybe me and a few others who are looking for objective commentary on criminal justice. America though is not looking for objectivity – they are looking for someone to yell with them about why someone went to jail for such a short period of time or why criminal cases are *gasp* continued (sorry “delayed, delayed, another delay.”) SHG had some time on TV and I’ve had less, but I’ve stopped wondering why I didn’t get the call about when to show up to the studio after being asked by the producer “would you be able to say that…..?” and my answer was “no.”

  3. j a higginbotham

    King James Bible
    For the love of money is the root of all evil:
    1 Timothy 6:10

    “A foolish pedantry is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.”

  4. B. McLeod

    I think the connection to the settlement was that somebody else got $20 Million for being harassed, while Greta didn’t even get harassed. How is that fair?

Comments are closed.