Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Megyn Kelly, Donald Trump, and the Decline of Fox News
For the first time in 14 years, CNN is beating Fox News, whose ratings have nosedived in the last eight months, ever since Donald Trump’s rise. Radio host Mark Levin, who has taken to calling Fox, “the Donald Trump superPAC,” blames the decline on its blatant Donald Trump cheerleading.
The most egregious example occurred the day of the Indiana primary. Trump opined about the conspiracy theory that Ted Cruz’s father assisted Lee Harvey Oswald. The talking heads at Fox nodded politely as if they were hearing something serious, instead of the career-ending ravings of a lunatic. They didn’t even challenge Trump on the fact that this story came from The National Inquirer, a scandal rag run by his friend, David Pecker. This episode was embarrassing for Trump, but even more for Fox. But the pro-Trump bias is only part of the explanation; it doesn’t explain that part of the decline that predated their Trump infatuation.
Looking back, I think Fox News’ descent began at that disastrous first Republican debate when the objective of the moderators seemed to be to get the candidates fighting with one another, and when Megyn Kelly attacked Trump using Hillary Clinton’s “War on Women” playbook. The purpose of an all-candidate debate is to educate the voter on what the candidates stand for. Instead, Fox played games. Go after the candidates hard on substantive issues important to conservative voters, but don’t play favorites. At the time, the debate’s sky-high TV ratings made it seem like a triumph but, in retrospect, it was the first sign of trouble.
And let’s be frank: Fox did a deplorable job covering the Republican nomination race. First they went all-in for Jeb Bush. Then, after Bush bombed, they went in the tank for Marco Rubio, and when he dropped out, they picked their pom-poms up for Donald Trump. Who wants to watch propaganda? Hey Fox, did you ever consider covering the Republican race honestly and dispassionately? I don’t have a problem with individual commentators openly taking sides. That’s just natural and anything less would be dishonest. But that sort of partisanship can’t be scaled up to an entire news network. The whole premise of Fox News is to be fair and balanced coverage of the news from a conservative perspective.
To have done that, they would have had to cover every GOP candidate fairly. By all means ask them tough questions – addressing the concerns of conservatives and libertarians that the Main Stream Media systematically ignores. They should have also provided a little bit of airtime to marginal candidates like Rick Santorum and Jim Gilmore. This would have helped provide a complete picture of the race to their viewers. For instance, Gilmore was dismissed out of hand for his low poll numbers, but weren’t these numbers at least partly due to the fact that he never got any air time? What were his actual positions on issues and what solutions did he offer? I can’t say, because the media ignored him.
And then there is Megyn Kelly. I commented at the time of the infamous first Fox debate that I thought that the underlying message of her attack on Trump was, “I may be the star of a successful conservative news network but I am also ‘flexible,’ in that I’d consider a job on broadcast TV, too.'” Her subsequent Vanity Fair cover only confirmed my suspicions. Later, she openly mused in an interview about the possibility of moving on from Fox a year or so from now. I hope her collapsing rating have brought her back down to earth.
If I were Roger Ailes, my response to the bad ratings would be to can the cheerleading and return Fox to the “Fair and Balanced” – from a conservative perspective – formula that made it such a success in the first place. As it is, Fox is going down, not because their formula failed, but because it was abandoned.
If there is some kind of secret arrangement with the Trump campaign, I would end it immediately. Next, I would replace than preening narcissist Geraldo Riviera with Sharyl Attkisson, a top-notch investigative journalist. She may not be a doctrinaire conservative, but she is relentless in the pursuit of the truth and doesn’t let politics — hers or anybody else’s — get in the way. That’s exactly the quality that is needed and one that is all too rare in the media. For the life of me, I can’t understand why Fox didn’t immediately snap her up after CBS canned her for investigating Obama. They picked up Juan Williams after NPR fired him and Williams is a second-rate liberal hack who says nothing original. I’d also frog march Kelly into my office and give her an ultimatum: Get your ego in check — right now — or go get another job.
But if Fox News insists on remaining the propaganda organ of the Trump Empire, expect Fox’s ratings to slide further. They have had their wake-up call.
Published in Politics
I think you’re correct about that, but even if it was Cruz’s dad in the picture (they all look alike to Trump?) it is still an egregious and unforgivable effort to attribute guilt by association. The Donald Trump / David Duke connection is stronger than that, but I never bought into that example of guilt by association. Maybe I should now.
The changes at CNN started with the hiring of Jake Tapper, probably the best host on cable TV who has no bias and doesn’t care about the “teams”. Then they started hiring legit conservative voices like Buck Sexton, Amanda Carpenter, Mary Katherine Ham, Matt Lewis, etc… as full-time guests on their shows.
The only show that was consistently worth watching when I did watch Fox News a couple years ago was Bret Baier’s panel, formerly Brit Hume’s.
The station’s pattern of guests reminds me of Monty Python’s argument skit. Rather than invite only honest folks who reasonably debate the issues from competing perspectives, they settle for anyone representing one view/party or the other. So they get a bunch of guests (and hosts) just towing the party line and not truly debating anything from shared acknowledgment of the facts.
I haven’t had cable/sat for almost four years and outside the odd sporting event there has not been a second of regret about that. It has enabled me to read a lot more. So that’s nice.
I used to watch Special Report on the Fox News website, but the inane “Candidate Casino” bit pushed me over the edge and I have not been back since.
I also find FoxNews nearly unwatchable, except for Bret Baier.
But while others are making cogent comments about Fox, I want to criticize the media’s excuses for both Trump and Hillary. Trump is given free airtime whenever he wants, and this year’s GOP “debates” were little more than asking the other candidates to comment on the latest Trump outrage. Trump was the frontrunner, so (as they argue) that justified making it all about Trump – which only advanced his frontrunner status. Hillary is history’s second-most protected candidate in history, right behind Obama.
The media claims that their focus on Trump is because he’s so “newsworthy.” But “newsworthiness” is the ultimate circular argument: why do you cover something? Because it’s news. Why is it news? Because people are interested in it. Why are people interested in it? Because that’s what we’re showing them.
Even so, that doesn’t explain Hillary. If Hillary could get away with it … and she is, mostly, getting away with it … she wouldn’t face the press at all. The press talks about her, of course, and promotes her – but that’s not the same as “covering” her. On the rare cases where she’s asked a tough question, the interviewer gives her enough time to offer spin and that’s that.
I want to see more of Dana Perino and as smart as he is, I wish Dennis Miller would try to show up sober once in awhile!
She is very sharp. I heard her when she came through Hillsdale not long ago.
As I argued many months ago, I believe Trump benefited from negative attention. The more people talked about him, the less they talked about his competitors. Ironically, Trump’s ascension was aided by those who loathed him most.
That’s something to be remembered if a 3rd-party candidate is now proposed. For the candidate to be widely known, he must compete with Trump for publicity. Don’t cheat your own favored candidate by talking more about Trump than your avenue of hope.
Levin seems to have forgotten how much credibility he gave to Trump early on.
I pretty much stopped watching but I watch quite a few clips on the internet and I watched the debates. Pretty much agree with the OP.
I think Fox exposed itself for what it is, a news-circus making money off of trained elephants and Donald Trump certainly helped.
They also have this strange need to prove to everyone how balanced they are, however they do that by slighting candidates who aren’t their kind of Republican.
Certainly the network isn’t monolithic, and there are plenty of hosts who are primarily self-promoters nurturing their perceived niche audiences. They have never been above pandering (see Palin, Sarah). All of these hosts have their downsides though. I can’t stand O’Rielly and Hannity can be insufferable.
Fox over-reached in the journo-hottie department too. Some shows looked like a picture window in the De Wallen section of Amsterdam.
There is a timeline to all this. Fox was already on shaky ground with a lot of folks. Then the event featuring Megyn Kelly occurred and their ratings started to really slide. Then, once this reality sank in and a plan was implemented, I suspect they decided to chase after better ratings and tweeked their coverage of Trump to be more deferential to a) keep him coming back for their ratings and b) not alienate the Trump supporters. This however had the unintended consequence of losing the many anti-Trumpers in their audience.
Also, this type of newsreporting is outdated.
Oh, I feel myself losing control and heading for trouble here. But I must say it. While the many words here are insightful, here’s the real bottom line in my view. This is a waste of time that could be spent reading Nat’l Review, Commentary and The Federalist.
Why does anyone watch any tee vee for news or reliable information? The entire thing is a scam, you all know that by now. The very, very few people with integrity who appear are accessible via the old fashioned written word, usually 12 hours before they appear on the tube – Jonah G, George Will, et al.
The other thing you won’t believe (no matter how much you think you have things figured out), after six months distance, when you do catch a few minutes of the tee vee talkers in a clip: the baby talk! The inane choices made by millennial producers of 3 or 4 stories per day that we must discuss, no matter how idiotic.
Wake up people. Murdoch & Ailes are cronies of Trump. Murdoch children and Trump children are salivating at the coming opportunities to exploit the masses. Megyn’s act as Trump’s designated foil and damsel in distress is laughably transparent. She’s an actress! (and a good and gorgeous one I will say.)
continued…
continued…
I vent all of this as a recovering tee vee dupe. Oh, I had it all figured out. Except I didn’t until I finally cut the cord. Just by spilling these many words here, we are participating in and perpetuating the scam.
Fox was moderate where the other cable “news” channels were blatantly leftist. Fox had better looking women than the other cable “news” channels. Fox did a better job of promoting their hosts than did the other cable “news” channels, whose unpleasant and temporary hosts sat in chairs above trap doors. Three for three for Fox.
While Moral Swamp NBC hasn’t figured this out, with all credit to their owners at Comcast, CNN finally did. A bit of balance rather than an exuberance of progressivism, and a recognition that about half the populace is not overly enamored of the dismissive wonders of progressivism and the bs it spouts.
Accordingly CNN is no longer the Collapsing News Network. The benefits of capitalism are at work. It must be a Democrats nightmare. Thank heaven for that.
My falling away from Fox started with the “fair and balance” part. I simply got tired of listening to the same old liberal lies and their talking over every guest I wanted to hear. Then the panels became less and less conservative, having few panelists I wanted to hear. Finally, the debates just turned me off. I could only tolerate any of them, on any network, by joining the ricochet chats.
I believe CNN got some of their audience, but they are losing out also to the internet. I have shifted to podcasts and Levin TV. When I do watch TV, I watch Elementary, POI, Big Bang, and Scorpion (A-Team redux). But mostly I watch sports on my Apple TV. I no longer need Fox for conservative opinion.
Fox ought to bring back Major Garrett and give him editorial control. I thought his coverage of the 2012 election for National Journal was spot on in detail and analysis. He strikes me as a true believer in objective journalism.
Fox pretending over the next few months that Donald can either win or it’s close is going to be hilarious and pathetic. On Nov. 6, Hannity will be insisting New York could go for Trump. Megyn Kelly needs to get the heck out of there. I guess they’re all bad but gracious. The audio from Fox & Friends when Trump is talking about Rafael Cruz & Oswald and they’re just nodding right along. Shameful.
Also, long before Hannity started slobbering all over Donald Trump I never thought he was so great. His radio show was always basically like a meathead had listened to Rush the three hours before and then was like, “Okay I got it.”
That would be called “One America News”.
Ahh yes. but as a talisman of Americana, nothing beats being a caller to his show and being granted the moniker of “You are a great American!”. I imagine the feeling is similar to playing the Grande Ole Opry, dotting the “I” in “Ohio” during halftime, or standing at home plate in Yankee Stadium. It would be worth missing the birth of my first-born: “Hang on, Honey, I’m on hold now!”
Another oracle. Thanks.
I used to Tivo six hours of Fox News every day from The Five to Hannity. (Since I live in Arizona, a couple of hours of these shows would all be set up by the time I got home.) I was one of FNC’s strongest proponents, and would harangue for its inclusion in the public sphere.
Then Eric Bolling started shilling for Trump, so no more of “The Five”. Then I watched as the other shows started to enable Trump. I am now down to Special Report. Instead, I find that MSNBC and CNN are much better, and I highly recommend “MTP [Meet the Press] Daily” and “With All Due Respect” on MSNBC.
I feel sad that I have been betrayed by FNC. However, they have made their choice, and I have made mine.
In total agreement. Every day that Bill Whittle is not in front of a large national audience is a large national tragedy. Toss Hannity and replace with Gutfeld. The comment about NYC is a stroke of genius.
We had a mini-thread a few days ago about taking over Pittsburgh and turning it red. Move Fox here to Pittsburgh. Heck, I just want to watch all the hipster losers I ride the bus into town with everyday go full Trigglypuff.
I used to watch hours of Fox News every day; a habit that started on 9/11. Slowly I started to see past the news to the personalities and realized they had quite a few quirks. Some were endearing and some were irritating. Over time the irritating quirks started to overtake the endearing ones. At about that time we decided that we could save a few bucks by not subscribing to cable, but we hesitated because of Fox News. Months passed and, considering all the quirks, I realized I could do without Fox except for Special Report. Soon, I came to understand that it was just the Panel segment of Special Report that I really wanted to watch. Then one day it finally dawned on me that it was just Bret Baier’s face that I needed to see.
It was tough but we eventually cut the cable. Some crushes are hard to get over!
welp. We won’t have Ed Henry to kick around either.
I think they must have. Although MSNBC has one good program “Morning Joe” and fox had Chris Wallace on Sunday and Bret Baier M-F late afternoon. I do not understand the comments here regarding Fox being a Trump supporter because they have covered him with contempt until recently. Charles Krauthammer, George Will and all the crew from National Review are on daily and they hate Trump.
See Fox & Friends, The Five (Bolling and Tantaros), Greta, Hannity
I have never especially “liked” Hannity, but now my contempt for him is beyond the capacity of the English language to convey.
Fox has been more or less dead for me since 2008.
Hannity’s constant myopic “build a wall” rants about illegal immigration was/is seriously damaging to any conversation that would led to a practical solution to the problem. He torpedoed McCain constantly in the run up to ’08. I’ll give you that McCain wasn’t the conservative’s conservative but compared to Obama, I mean really. Yes, yes he hounded Obama about Rev. Wright. But his coverage of the ’08 election was always shallow.
O’Riley ‘s coverage of the mortgage meltdown was patently uninformed and likewise damaging to anyone seeking to understand a complex problem. Compare his coverage to “The Big Short” movie or book. The movie does a fairly decent job of explaining overly intertwined derivatives and the danger they became. O’Reily wanted to paint the whole thing as mismanagement and not fraud.
Remember when John McCain took out a single ad on the night that Obama got nominated congratulating him for a historic event. McCain made a point of letting Obama have his night. Obama returned the favor by giving O’Reily a personal interview on the night that McCain was nominated. The deceitfulness of O’Reily was palpable.
I will periodically tune into Bret Baier especially when Jonah, Rich Lowry or Bill Kristol are on. Otherwise it’s dead to me.