I suspect at least some of the powers that be at Fox News know to the degree they themselves are in, if anything, more jeopardy than Kamala Harris from Bret Baier’s interview with the candidate Wednesday.
Roseanne Barr “won the internet,” as the saying goes, with her posting on X after Baier had written “I want to hear from you—what would you ask @vp Harris? Send them to me here or on Instagram @bretbaier”.
Every wag from here to Alpha Centauri responded, very little of it friendly but a fair amount of it funny.
But no one was as accurate and telling as Ms Barr who, in her inimitable way, silenced the argument with:
“Ask her why she only goes on programs of people too weak to actually challenge her. Ask yourself this too while you’re at it.”
In so doing, she encapsulated the view of millions not only about Baier but about Fox News.
Many of us worry that the most popular cable news network has evolved into, possibly always was, a mass media “false flag” operation.
I write this admiring many of its contributors, some of whom I know personally.
But as long as you believe the time-tested theorem A. J. Liebling stated in 1960 – “Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one”—those contributors, talented and often valuable as they may be, have made a pact with the devil.
The problem comes down to who actually owns Fox News. If you ask Google, that great obfuscating search engine is not able to do so in this case. It tells us what most people know. The Murdoch family controls about 40% of the shares. It continues: “Some of the largest institutional owners include Vanguard Group Inc., BlackRock Inc., Dodge & Cox, State Street Corp, and Yacktman Asset Management Lp.”
Many of the above, including the younger generation of the Murdoch family, are far from conservative or libertarian, nothing like the “reputation” of Fox. Vanguard and BlackRock, especially, have been known for their fealty to the extremes of wokeness.
Talk about controlling your enemies.
Bret Baier’s nightly Special Report is supposed to be the real, old fashioned news. Is that something to be aspired to? Some like to believe news was once even-handed. That’s
largely a fantasy. There was just less of it and that actually made it easier to manipulate.
Meanwhile, the nature of media is in flux. Some people now prefer Substacks. Others, sometimes overlapping, find the growing Newsmax more to their liking than Fox.
A whole new generation was born out of the blogging revolution in the early 2000s that has led many to be suspicious of spoon-fed news, even if comes from a supposedly “conservative” network.
Since then, media has been in constant revolution, its own version of creative destruction. The conventional right-left political terms, themselves an outgrowth of the French Revolution, may have become outmoded. They are certainly ripe for inspection.
Where does Fox stand in this? Roseanne Barr’s comment did not come out of nowhere. She won the internet because she used her great wit to reflect the views of millions.
Bret Baier undoubtedly noticed. He and his network will literally be up against the wall on Wednesday evening. If he doesn’t ask legitimate questions and follow them up, he’s toast, and Fox itself will take a serious, perhaps fatal, blow.
We can assume that his interview will not be recut in the buffoon-like manner exercised by executives at CBS’s 60 Minutes in their zeal to hide the incoherence of Ms. Harris.
CBS all but destroyed their reputation as a news outlet in the process. Oracle’s Larry Ellison is in the process of purchasing the network. Heads are likely to roll, and deservedly so.
Fox should take that as a warning. Will they?
They pretend not to regard Newsmax as a competitor, but it already is. That network is making a play to have its viewers as investors, a far cry from Vanguard and BlackRock et al.
There will be others. No matter who wins the election in November, if I were predicting the future of media, I’d be placing my bets with Elon Musk, not NBC, CBS, the New York Times or any of the fusty names we grew up with. They are dinosaurs about to be carted off in not too long a time to Washington’s Newseum, whether that museum’s management knows it or not. They should plan ahead and make room.
UPDATE: I have been informed that the Newseum has folded. Actually, I knew but forgot. My excuse is the since I left The Epoch Times I don’t get to Washington as much. Generally, I take that as a plus, but in this case it has made me inaccurate. My apologies.
If he asks her questions about flip flopping and her husband's abuse of women, great. If he lets her interject millions of times that she accepted a debate on Fox and Trump didn't, bad.
Bret Baier, a weak anchor, receives $7 million per year in salary from Fox and is estimated to have a net worth of $30 million. A working type of reporter? Not really. A very poor interviewer. He didn’t lay a glove on DHS Secretary Mayorkas interview. I have very low expectations he will be a solid interviewer of Harris.