Elizabeth Warren was right, though it took another
candidate- Kirsten Gillibrand- to prove it. On May 14, Senator Warren defended herdecision not to bolster Fox News' bottom line and give the network cover against
advertisers queasy about a far-right network in Donald Trump's pocket. She
She continued (inserting criticism of Fox News), passionately defending her position on abortion while avoiding answering the actual question asked. That was satisfactory to the Fox News host because these events aren't really about information, anyway.
Share |
used a series of Twitter messages to accuse the network of
giving “a megaphone to racists and conspiracists” and providing cover for
corruption. She also returned to one of her campaign’s central themes, framing
the channel as the sort of corporate “profit machine” she has railed against.
“Hate-for-profit works only if there’s profit, so Fox News
balances a mix of bigotry, racism, and outright lies with enough legit
journalism to make the claim to advertisers that it’s a reputable news outlet,”
Ms. Warren wrote. “It’s all about dragging in ad money — big ad money.”
“A Democratic town hall gives the Fox News sales team a way
to tell potential sponsors it’s safe to buy ads on Fox,” she continued. “I won’t
ask millions of Democratic primary voters to tune into an outlet that profits
from racism and hate.”
Refusing to perform (and it is a performance) at a town hall
must have been a difficult decision because nobody has failed to come out smelling
like a rose in this venue since President George Herbert Walker Bush repeatedly
looked at his watch while debating Bill Clinton in 1992. It's set up that way,
and no politician fails to charm the audience.
So Warren's position was an outlier, for which the
Massachusetts senator has faced some criticism. Yet if not earlier, it became
clear what the objective of these affairs is when
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) challenged Fox News’
coverage of abortion during a town hall event on Sunday, accusing the network
of peddling disinformation to the chagrin of host Chris Wallace.
Gillibrand, the latest Democratic candidate among a crowded
field to appear on the network for an hourlong Q&A session, used a question
about late-term abortions to pivot toward Fox News’ coverage of the issue. Just
over 1% of abortions across the country are performed at 21 weeks or later,
according the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, but such procedures
get outspoken criticism by groups against reproductive rights.
“What we’ve created, unfortunately, is a false choice and a
false narrative. Chris, I want to talk about the role Fox News plays in this,
because it’s a problem,” Gillibrand said in response to the question. “I can
tell you before President Trump gave his State of the Union, Fox News talked
about infanticide. Infanticide doesn’t exist.”
Wallace quickly cut the senator off, saying that the network
had invited her there as a guest and had thus far been treating her “fairly.”
“I understand, maybe to make your credentials with the
Democrats who are not appearing on Fox News, you are going to attack us,”
Wallace said. “I’m not sure, frankly, it’s not very polite when we’ve invited
you to be here.”
Gillibrand said she would address her concerns politely, and
continued on.
She continued (inserting criticism of Fox News), passionately defending her position on abortion while avoiding answering the actual question asked. That was satisfactory to the Fox News host because these events aren't really about information, anyway.
We don't know Senator Gillibrand's view of late-term abortion specifically, but we do know that these
"town halls" are a charade, with the intent to normalize an extreme
cable "news" network among advertisers. We know that as long as Fox
News can host good little boys and girls who participate in the charade by
avoiding criticizing Fox News, everyone wins.
Thus far, Gillibrand, Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar, and Bernie Sanders have appeared, with Julian Castro due later this week and Bill
deBlasio negotiating. Those who have or will show up know what the deal is. It's not
necessarily with the devil, but it is in return for the inevitable applause,
good optics, and favorable news coverage. However, with Warren's emphatic
refusal and the decision of Kamala Harris not to participate, we're learning which candidates aren't going
to play ball with Trump TV and the expectation that candidates show deference to it.
Share |
No comments:
Post a Comment