Watching cable after the end of the day’s impeachment proceedings, I flipped through the cable channels to see what was being said. Between CNN and MSNBC, it was a competition for who could gush more about horror, the former with Jake Tapper pacifying old man Wolf and the latter with Joy Reid silently bobbing her head in the most insightful way she could.
So I turned to Fox News and was shocked to learn that nobody told them there was an impeachment going on. At least, no one mentioned it, as they were doing a critical piece on how liberals were engaged in a conspiracy to spread foot fungus. That wasn’t really what they were doing, but it was something of similar ilk, and there was no mention, none, of the impeachment trial, as if it wasn’t happening. It was classic Fox, existing in a separate reality.
Nick Kristof asks why Fox shouldn’t be held accountable for the insurrection too. Why can’t Fox be impeached?
As America debates whether to hold former President Donald Trump accountable for inciting insurrection, what about his co-conspirator Fox News?
Fox helped sell Trump’s lie about a stolen election, propelling true believers like Ashli Babbitt — a fan of Fox personalities like Tucker Carlson — to storm the Capitol. Babbitt died in the attack, while this week Fox Corporation merrily reported a 17 percent jump in quarterly earnings.
Of course he knows that a media outlet can’t be impeached, but his point is that the “fair and balanced” news was just as responsible for what happened as Trump, so why should it be allowed to bask in riches for spewing lies.
We can’t impeach Fox or put Carlson or Sean Hannity on trial in the Senate, but there are steps we can take — imperfect, inadequate ones, resting on slippery slopes — to create accountability not only for Trump but also for fellow travelers at Fox, OANN, Newsmax and so on.
Before you get to the bottom line of whose news is more truthy, understand that a columnist in the New York Times, the paper of record, the Grey Lady, just called for steps “we” can take to silence other media outlets. And the New York Times published it.
That can mean pressure on advertisers to avoid underwriting extremists (of any political bent), but the Fox News business model depends not so much on advertising as on cable subscription fees. So a second step is to call on cable companies to drop Fox News from basic cable TV packages.
Here’s what Kristof can’t do. He can’t prevent people who choose to watch Fox from doing so. The alternative is to go down the “cancel culture” path of secondary pressure against the advertisers, but more importantly, cable companies, to choke off Fox news revenues. What makes this “cancel culture” is that Kristof isn’t saying he will not watch Fox, which is entirely his right although it’s unlikely he spent a great deal of time watching Hannity before.
He’s not even calling upon others to stop watching this blight on truth and contributor to conspiracy, mostly because his followers aren’t likely big Fox fans either. No, he’s calling on his followers to pressure third parties, advertisers and cable companies, to do their dirty work of depriving a competing news outlet of revenue so it will starve.
Angelo Carusone, president of Media Matters for America, says that Fox News relies on unusually generous cable fees — more than twice what CNN receives and five times what MSNBC commands. So Media Matters started a campaign, at unfoxmycablebox.com, for people to ask cable carriers to drop Fox News from their packages.
“Given all the damage that Fox News has caused and the threat that it remains, they absolutely should unbundle Fox News,” Carusone told me. “It’s not a news channel. It’s a propaganda operation mixed with political smut. If people want that, they should be forced to pay for it the way that they pay for Cinemax.”
Fox, like CNN and MSNBC and a host of other cable channels, comes as part of a bundle. It’s not paid five times what MSNBC is paid because cable companies are particularly generous toward it, or MSNBC prefers to make less rather than more money for the sake of the downtrodden. It demands the fees it can command, as do they all. If it’s paid more, there’s a reason.
But the point is that when cable news channels are bundled together, we pay for all or none, and if you hate lie-mongering, conspiracy-spewing, violence-spreading Fox, then why must you pay for it in your bundle of news you agree with?
Frankly, my argument leaves even me a bit queasy. I deeply believe in the “marketplace of ideas,” and I do think that there is a danger of a liberal monoculture in some universities, nonprofits and news organizations. I’ve railed against “liberal intolerance,” and I don’t think the “cancel culture” that conservatives decry is entirely a mirage.
Good as it may be that he’s not proud of himself for being a censor, he just can’t help it because Fox, et al., is just too false, too lying, too awful and too dangerous to be allowed to walk away. And Kristof deflects the anticipatory “whataboutism.”
Conservatives are likewise right that The New York Times, CNN and other mainstream news organizations make mistakes all the time, and surely right-wingers are unhappy that their cable fees subsidize Rachel Maddow.
But there’s no symmetry. Fox News and Fox Business didn’t make an honest mistake about election outcomes but deliberately spun nonsense into ratings gold.
He’s right, there’s no symmetry, but he’s being disingenuous by saying the NYT, et al., “make mistakes.” They’ve chosen a side and pound on it as hard as they can. Granted, they try harder to be factual, but not hard enough to answer the question Kristof neglects to ask: Why do so many turn to Fox, OANN and Newsmax for news rather than trust the New York Times? The way to deprive media of viewers isn’t to call on their tribe to engage in secondary pressure, but to do better and be the source of news that everyone can trust. Instead, the left press wants to silence the right press because as bad as the left may be, the right is worse.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Let ’em talk…
Everyone is full of shit, each in our own special way.
–Abraham Lincoln
You mean A. Blinken? (Some confusion of late).
“I believe deeply in the marketplace of ideas”.
No. No you don’t.
It’s astounding how frequently these days that people with careers that are dependent on the first amendment, working at places whose existence depend on the first amendment, are willing to call for the amendment to be substantially diminished.
Not for themselves of course. Only for those bad guys over there. If it wasn’t for hypocrisy we wouldn’t have a political system.
Everything old is new again. Once there was this offense called “criminal syndicalism,” which was used to punish the expression and teaching of wrongful thoughts. Some hide-bound court got rid of it, and it is only now that the woke are rediscovering the concept.
If the solution to bad speech is more speech, the he should be arguing for yet another cable news program. One possibly called ‘Anti?ox-ident’ who’s purpose is along the lines of a fact checking organisation. Their modus operandi would be to check the facts of ALL other news outlets, left, right, middle, broadcast, print, cable, etc., and they would need to be very very careful, name their multiple sources and err on the side of keeping their mouths shut until they know something for sure.
And, it would behoove such an organization to say someone was correct, when they were, and not only speak when someone is incorrect. The hardest thing will be to be balanced and not show a bias. At least not on purpose.
The problem is that this solution is also very unlikely, looking for another.
…and this ‘organization’ will never be corrupted, right?
…. and then, after a time, we may need another ‘organization’ to check these folks,
…. and then, after a time, we may need another ‘organization’ to check these folks,
…. and then, after a time, we may need another ‘organization’ to check these folks,
…. and then, after a time, we may need another ‘organization’ to check these folks,
…. and then, after a time, we may need another ‘organization’ to check these folks,
…. and then, after a time, we may need another ‘organization’ to check these folks,
…
In a better world, they all watch each other and all do so in good faith. Trust, but verify, as an old movie cowboy once said.
If only the six corporations that own the MSM would act against their own interests by fact-checking their own propaganda and by working to unite people instead of dividing them.
I’m a scientist and fact check myself, from original sources. A month of monitoring climate related news found that Fox was 38% accurate, CNN was 80% accurate, when reporting climate news. There is no reason not to be 100% accurate if you report carefully and check facts with multiple sources.
Anybody can print opinions, it doesn’t even take much thought. Fact checking is work. Some reporters do it.
And here I thought there was some degree of controversy about climate news reporting. Good to know that you are the universal authority on the subject and that there is correct and incorrect information, settling all issues of controversy.
I hope CNN calls you to clear up their 20% of misinformation. It would be a shame if their reporting fails to meet with your approval.
Hey pal, got a address for that ‘better world’ place?
I’ve been to 50 countries, and the most sophisticated propaganda I’ve seen is Fox News in the US. Some countries are smarter than us, Germany being one example. They have as free a media as us BUT some types of speech are prohibited, such as hate speech against categories of people (“Jews are….””Muslims are…”). They do this from their horrible experiences of WWII. Do we have to go through something that bad to learn to put limits on speech that spreads hate throughout America and turns neighbor against neighbor? You can’t yell “Fire” in a crowded theater. Fraud does not enjoy freedom of the press. The kind of fraud perpetuated by Fox, OANN, and their like should be illegal.
Except maybe you can yell fire in a crowded theater, and if you ask the people who live in Germany, they can explain why you’re mindnumbingly wrong.
No matter how many countries you’ve been to, it doesn’t fix stupid.
What a thoughtful person you are.
Sorry. You’re special.
A “doctor” wanders into a Hotel where the denizens are largely judges and lawyers, some of whom actually litigate the 1st Amendment and other stuff in the Constitution. He first mentions his work on climate, then provides nonsense about the law. When told by one that actually does this stuff that he doesn’t know what he’s spewing around the lobby, he pouts.
This is not a place to say dumb shit to people who are experts on the subject matter. The Hotel is not that place because we believe there should be no such place. There should be no such place because dumb shit said by the unknowledgeable only makes people dopier.
In this here Hotel, people that make others stupider find their luggage at the curb. Yours is in the grease pond behind the kitchen.
I’ll be honest, as a CNC machinist I love watching people who would no doubt think of themselves as my “betters” get smacked around the hotel bar. I’ve said it before but I learn more here than I ever did in college.
There are few things funnier than a pompous ignoramus spewing nonsense after he put “Dr.” up front as if he’s going to impress a bunch of lawyers and judges with his righteous self-importance. You can’t pay fools to do this for you.
And it hurt his feelz that he didn’t get a warm welcome and tummy rub for it.
“You can’t pay fools to do this for you.”
And yet, for some strange reason people keep paying their cable TV bills for that very service.
The other day, Dr. SJ flipped to MSNBC to see who was on, and I groaned and said, “nobody worthwhile is on MSNBC,” to which my daughter replied, “didn’t you used to do MSNBC?” Ouch.
” Teach your parents well, their children’s hell will slowly go by…”
Touché.
This may not make the cut but Sgt. Schultz your response to Dr. Duncan making a point of showing his Dr cred to us reminded me there was only one.. “ Worlds foremost authority… “ he lived to the age of 102
Professor Irwin Corey.
They have as free a media as us BUT some types of speech are prohibited
Please, stop.
You can’t yell “Fire” in a crowded theater.
Stop!
Fraud does not enjoy freedom of the press.
No! I’m already dead!
There was a time when we could know who the actors were by allowing them to voice their really bad ideas. Seems far too many can’t bear to allow us to use our own minds to decide right from wrong, fact from fiction. Perhaps they believe us not bright enough to figure it out. On second thought.
“categories of people (‘Jews are….’ ‘Muslims are…’)”
Why do you hate critical race theory?
“Do we have to go through something that bad to learn…”
Nope. We’re not gonna go through anything that bad.
The internet this week is just ate up with ridiculous Nazi Germany references this week.
He wants to cancel them because of what they believe about the election being stolen? Didnt I just sit through years of “Russia stole the election” nonsense that hasnt been retracted even now?
Full disclosure I think all the large media companies have a bias problem. But this is an exercise in raw power and cancel culture pressure these assholes think they can wield.
I have never subscribed and rarely watched fox, but if these idiots pressure cable companies to ignore their paying customers and cancel their opponents. For something these same companies do all the time Im going to pay for fox just to spite them.
Side-show. I’m lobbying my elected reps to direct the FCC to get back into the business of regulating the ‘news’, pass laws regarding election-related fraud, and expand access to voting.
We can’t fix stupid, but we can beat the con-artists with a stick.
I have bad news for you, Jake. They can’t regulate cable news under our Constitution. Sorry.
The supreme court disagreed with your point in Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC 8-0. I’m not suggesting a return to the fairness doctrine is the right solution today but fraud is already a thing and I see no reason why Fox News, or any other news outlet, gets a free pass to defraud the public regarding an election because of 1a.
Stay away from law, Jake. You really suck at it and not even you can violate the “don’t make people stupider” rule. FCC rules for broadcast television have nothing to do with cable. No, this is not an invitation to discuss it further.
Might be time to fix that. It’s a broadcast media. No different than the news programs on good old-fashioned over the air channels. Except for the fraud they call facts. Time they all operate under the same rules.
That’s where a little understanding of law makes a big difference. Broadcast can be regulated. Cable cannot.
Ah, the good old “defraud the public” argument. A statement starts its journey as something you personally disagree with. How far does it have to go before it becomes false and how many more miles before it passes the “defraud the public” road sign? Let me guess, you “know it when you see it,” and some things just “clearly” constitute a fraud on the public and must be regulated by a committee. I propose the PMRC as the committee to do the regulating, I don’t think they’ve been as busy as they were in the 1980s.
[Ed. Note: We have rules here. One is that comments be on the topic of the post. Two is that links aren’t allowed. Three, this isn’t your blog and you don’t get to hijack it for whatever shit floats into your head.]
It’s fundamentally unfair that I only get to vote once. My cis- and my trans- side both want to vote.
Instead of “I’m not a robot,” wouldn’t a better CAPTCHA be “Are you allowed to shout ‘fire’ in a crowded theater?” Responses could be filtered accordingly.
That’s a great idea. Now if only someone here had the coding chops to make that happen…
As a layman I’ve wondered what would be a more accurate phrase. Of course shouting fire in a crowded theater is not the same as advocating for pacifism.
Could the counter-argument to a talking head saying such a phrase be, ” you are wrong on what you said but if you had said instead that if someone had taken action to incite panic not just by words but also by expressed action then you may be right as the situation is no longer limited to the sphere of speech alone.”?
Yes, yes. I know you take PayPal. I’m too young to sign up for PayPal and I’m too old to know how to use Venmo.
I wouldn’t mind not paying cable fees to FoxNews and would love the option to remove them from my subscription package. I just wouldn’t force my choice on others.
If cable goes full a la carte, think it will be less expensive?