ReportWire

Tag: fox corporation

  • Small Sponsors Gain Bigger Voice at Fox News

    [ad_1]

    Watch an hour of Fox News Channel, and you’ll no doubt see the usual commercials from pharmaceutical giants and auto companies. Increasingly, you may also encounter Anna Brakefield or her father, Mark Yeager, talking about their upstart family business while standing in an honest-to-goodness cotton field.

    “We’re proud to say that 100% of our products are made right here in the U.S.A.” says Yeager, whose family owns and operates Red Land Cotton, in one spot, dressed in a farmer’s hat and a gray button-down shirt. Brakefield tells viewers in a separate commercial that her family’s textiles all start “with a seed in the ground, a hope, and a prayer.”

    Brakefield says the company was accustomed to reaching customers via digital media, and accordingly put its focus on finding customers online. “We built where we are with Google ads, Meta ads — all that you’d typically think an e-commerce business would grow their advertising on,” she says. But her father, a 60-year old farmer in northern Alabama, is “a religious Fox News watcher, and so it was his idea to approach Fox about an advertising opportunity.” The company tested commercials on Fox News in 2023, she says, “and to my surprise, it was successful.” Now, Red Land Cotton tries to maintain a regular presence on “Fox & Friends” and “America’s Newsroom,” along with some commercials on “The Five.”

    “‘I saw you on TV,’” says Brakefield. “That is still a thing for people.” Now, she and her father are quickly becoming as important to Fox News as Madison Avenue stalwarts like Novo Nordisk and Lowe’s.

    Fox has sold ads to a growing number of companies that in a previous era might not have run TV commercials. A regular Fox News viewer might in recent weeks have seen spots from Blue Compass R.V.; the Good Ranchers meat-delivery service; Boll & Branch luxury bedding; or Fire Department Coffee, which was founded by a former Navy veteran with experience working as a firefighter and paramedic in Illinois. In some cases, Fox News sales staff have found these sponsors by listening to podcasts and watching video programs on social-media outlets, searching for advertisers that might find favor with Fox News viewers. Some might make all their goods in America. Others might seek a faith-based audience.

    Commercials for smaller businesses represent “one third of our national business right now,” says Trey Gargano, Fox News Media’s executive vice president of ad sales during a recent interview, and it’s not something owed to happenstance. Fox News has since the start of 2024 made a priority of finding independent companies that often spotlight patriotic themes or other elements that might appeal to its core viewers, then lined them up to sponsor its programs. “Sometimes they are veteran owned. Sometimes, a CEO we know is like-minded and wants to reach the audience on Fox News,” Gargano adds.

    Fox News isn’t the only TV outlet thinking small to get big. Several media giants have been on the hunt for so-called “SMB” advertisers — or “small-and-medium-sized businesses” — for the past several years. NBCUniversal said in July that it had seen a 30% uptick in ad buys from “SMB” clients. Hulu, now part of Disney, in 2020 offered use of a “Hulu Ad Manager” that would allow advertisers willing to spend at least $500 on the streamer’s commercials to launch, manage and track the commercials. Paramount Global last year named a new senior vice president to oversee all its efforts tied to “SMB Advertising.

    “SMB ads have become more important as TV publishers try to maximize, diversify, and increment their advertising’s yield,” says Nikhil Lai, a principal analyst with Forrester who tracks the advertising industry. “SMB advertisers are saturating search and social, which have diminishing returns. They need to scale acquisition without escalating acquisition costs, so they turn to TV.”

    The TV networks have been chasing what are in many cases unlikely national TV advertisers while many traditional Madison Avenue categories are in the midst of significant change. Ad spending from big auto companies has been in flux since the coronavirus pandemic, according to various TV ad-sales executives, as manufacturers struggled with supply chain issues, and then how much of their product lines to convert to electric vehicles. Beverage makers are grappling with consumers’ desires for healthier fare, and sales of beer and soda have ebbed. And now, one of TV’s sturdiest sources of ad spending, pharmaceutical marketers, are fretting over potential restrictions from the Trump administration that could potentially force them to run longer ads to detail potential side effects; the costs of doing so could spur them to be more careful about how they use their ad dollars.

    At the same time, some of the marketers who are thriving are upstarts who cultivate online crowds. Today’s digital entrepreneur might be tomorrow’s Wayfair or Warby Parker, and big media companies want to strike partnerships now.

    And while Fox News is enjoying a noticeable ratings surge in President Trump’s second term in office, it is not immune from the challenges all traditional media outlets continue to face. Fox News Channel is projected to see overall advertising decline over the next two years, according to estimates from Kagan, a market-research firm that is part of S&P Global Intelligence. Ad spending at Fox News is seen falling about 5% from $1.44 billion in 2024 to about $1.36 billion through the end of 2026. Advertisers tend to spend more highly on cable-news networks during a significant election year, like 2024, when a broader set of viewers tend to watch.

    Some of the smaller advertisers require a personal touch. In some cases, says Gargano, Fox News sales executives fan out to make a pitch directly to a company’s founder. “You are going to their house, or their ranch. They invite you in,” he says. “They ask for an awful lot, and it’s an education for them,” because typically they have little experience with buying and running TV ads.

    The entrepreneurs behind Grill Rescue, a grill-cleaning tool that relies on steam cleaning rather than wire bristles, have only been advertising on Fox News Channel for a few weeks. They had largely stuck to digital advertising, but grew intrigued when the McLemore Boys, a father-and-son cooking duo, were barbecuing during a “Fox & Friends” segment and briefly mentioned their product. Anthony Tranchida, one of the founders, noticed.

    “I always had the belief that the new age of advertising is online,” he says. After launching TV commercials on Father’s Day, he says, “we are spending millions with Fox,” and might consider other TV outlets, too.

    He was impressed by the network’s willingness to put him in touch with other small advertisers who bought commercial inventory. “I asked them, ‘You’re asking me to put quite a bit of money into advertising on the network. I’ve never done this before. I want a little bit of reassuring,’” recalls Tranchida, who sometimes appears in his company’s ads. “Everyone else is like, ‘Nope, we don’t do that.’ Fox made it their mission to find someone.”

    He puts a lot of emphasis on monitoring the company’s sales channels after a TV ad runs. “You can see pretty clearly if stuff comes in,” he says, “Whenever an ad runs, what comes in within the next hour or so?”

    Many of the ads spark recognition, says Red Land Cotton’s Brakefield, but what really gets consumers interested are the occasional appearances executives can make on shows like “Fox & Friends” in lifestyle segments. Of course, such cameos likely hinge on having a strong relationship with the network — much as they would for a product placement created for a major blue-chip sponsor. “The more segments you can hit, it’s definitely the way to go,” says Tranchida. But “I don’t think they just hand those things out.”

    (Above, pictured: Anna Brakefield, owner, Red Land Cotton, in a commercial that has aired on Fox News Channel)

    [ad_2]

    Brian Steinberg

    Source link

  • Fox’s Greg Gutfeld goes on sexist rant, suggests crimes would ‘disappear’ if women went away | CNN Business

    Fox’s Greg Gutfeld goes on sexist rant, suggests crimes would ‘disappear’ if women went away | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    One of Fox News’ top hosts said that many of the world’s problems would be solved if women were to vanish from the planet.

    Greg Gutfeld, the right-wing channel’s resident jester who was recently promoted to host his own prime time hour, made a series of brazenly sexist comments on Monday’s edition of “The Five” during a discussion on looting.

    As surveillance video played showing a smash-and-grab that occurred over the weekend at a Los Angeles Nordstrom, Gutfeld went on a rant portraying women as soft on crime and effectively blaming the entire gender for supposed policies that would prevent such crimes from being committed.

    “What would happen if all the women took a ladies week off and they went to Venus … How many of these problems would still exist?” Gutfeld wondered aloud.

    Gutfeld, who allowed for the possibility that new problems would emerge in the absence of women, confidently argued that “smash and grabs” and “rampant recidivism” would “disappear.”

    At one point during the discussion, Gutfeld acknowledged that what he was saying might not sit well with Jeanine Pirro, a tough-on-crime co-host of “The Five” who previously worked as a prosecutor and served as a New York state judge.

    “I know this is offensive to the judge because she thinks like a dude,” Gutfeld joked.

    Gutfeld concluded his rant, shouting, “What I’m saying is that we have gotten so soft and it is because we have decided that discipline and punishment is wrong.”

    A Fox News spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.

    Gutfeld is no stranger to controversy, having made a number of comments during his time at Fox News that have ignited significant backlash.

    Just last month, the White House condemned Fox News over comments Gutfeld made about the Holocaust, describing the remarks as a “horrid, dangerous, and extreme lie” that “insults the memory of the millions of people who suffered from the evils” committed by Adolf Hitler’s Nazi regime.

    Gutfeld never apologized and Fox News did not comment.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fox executives encourage Trump to participate in first GOP presidential primary debate | CNN Politics

    Fox executives encourage Trump to participate in first GOP presidential primary debate | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday dined with top Fox executives at his Bedminster golf club, during which Fox News president Jay Wallace and the network’s chief executive, Suzanne Scott, encouraged him to participate in the first presidential debate the network is hosting later this month, two sources with knowledge told CNN.

    Trump, who earlier in the evening had been indicted for a third time, did not commit to participating in the debate, which will take place in Milwaukee.

    Fox News did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The New York Times first reported on the dinner.

    Trump has privately and publicly floated skipping either one or both of the first two Republican presidential primary debates, and pointed to his commanding lead in the polls as one reason he is hesitant to share the stage with his GOP challengers.

    “Why would we debate? That would be stupid to go out there with that kind of lead,” one Trump adviser previously told CNN. However, not all of Trump’s allies feel this way. Some worry that an absent Trump would give an opportunity for a lower tier candidate to have a breakout moment.

    Trump’s dinner comes after RNC chairwoman Ronna McDaniel and David Bossie, who is in charge of the debate committee, visited Trump at Bedminster in recent weeks to encourage him to participate, according to a Trump adviser. Trump was also noncommittal on his plans during this meeting.

    Over the last year, Trump has trashed Fox News and Rupert Murdoch, the Fox Corporation chairman and controlling shareholder of the company, for not being sufficiently supportive of him.

    Murdoch, who privately holds disdain for Trump, attempted early on in the 2024 campaign to shine a bright light on Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis while casting the former president on the sidelines. The hope appeared to be to seduce the Fox News audience into falling for another Republican candidate.

    But the DeSantis campaign has struggled since it officially got off the ground this year. Last month, Murdoch debuted a new Fox News lineup comprised of pro-Trump propagandists, a move that seemed to acknowledge Trump’s likely selection as the Republican Party’s presidential nominee.

    Trump has also sharply criticized the way in which Murdoch has approached his legal problems, blasting the right-wing media mogul for not doubling down on his lies while in court.

    Trump tried to call into Fox News after his supporters attacked the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, but the network refused to put him on air, according to court filings from Dominion Voting Systems in its defamation case against the company.

    Still, Fox has amplified Trump’s lies about the validity of the 2020 election, even though Murdoch has said he did not believe Trump’s false statements, according to damning private messages revealed in the Dominion case. Murdoch floated the idea of having his influential hosts appear together in prime time to declare Joe Biden as the rightful winner of the election. Such an act, Murdoch said, “Would go a long way to stop the Trump myth that the election stolen.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fox Business to host second GOP primary debate | CNN Politics

    Fox Business to host second GOP primary debate | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The second Republican presidential debate, which will be held at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library on September 27 in California, will air on Fox Business, according to news release from the Republican National Committee. Univision and Rumble will also partner with Fox Business on the debate.

    Fox will air the first two Republican presidential primary debates. The first debate will air on Fox News on August 23 in Milwaukee.

    On Wednesday, CNN obtained a copy of the RNC’s candidate pledge that the party is requiring to participate in its debates. It prohibits participation in unsanctioned debates, requires candidates to support the Republican nominee in the general election and bars them from running as an independent or on another party’s line.

    “I agree to appear in only Primary and General Election debates that have been sanctioned by the Republican National Committee, pursuant to Rule 10(a)(11) of The Rules of the Republican Party,” the pledge reads. “I acknowledge and accept that if I fail to sign this pledge or if I participate in any debate that has not been sanctioned by the Republican National Committee, I will not be eligible to participate in any further Republican National Committee sanctioned debates.”

    Vivek Ramaswamy and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis have signed RNC loyalty pledges, a Republican source told CNN. Others have not yet signed, according to the source, but they are expected to this week.

    Front-runner for the Republican nomination and former President Donald Trump told Newsmax Wednesday that he does not plan to sign the loyalty pledge and said that he will announce next week whether he plans to attend the first primary debate.

    Former Texas Rep. Will Hurd, who has yet to reach the donor and polling thresholds to make the debate stage, told Laura Coates on “CNN Primetime” Wednesday that he would not sign the pledge.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump already taped Tucker Carlson interview that is expected to air on GOP debate night, sources say | CNN Politics

    Trump already taped Tucker Carlson interview that is expected to air on GOP debate night, sources say | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump has already taped an interview with Tucker Carlson that is expected to be used as counterprogramming for the first GOP primary debate Wednesday, two sources familiar with the matter told CNN.

    Trump confirmed Sunday he will not participate in the debate in Milwaukee. Stating that the public already “knows who I am,” Trump wrote on his social media platform: “I will therefore not be doing the debates!”

    It is unclear what platform the interview with Carlson will be published on. The sources said that it would be released around the time of the debate Wednesday night.

    For weeks, the former president had privately and publicly floated skipping Wednesday’s debate, given his lead in the polls. He is expected to spend Wednesday evening at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey.

    CNN previously reported that Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel and David Bossie, who heads the RNC debate committee, visited Trump at his Bedminster home in recent weeks to encourage him to participate, according to a Trump adviser. The former president was noncommittal on his plans during this meeting.

    Fox News President Jay Wallace and the network’s chief executive, Suzanne Scott, had also encouraged Trump to participate in the debate. Trump has feuded with Fox News, as has former prime-time host Carlson, who was ousted from the network in April.

    Fox News informed the Trump campaign on Monday that they will no longer provide credentials to some surrogates of the former president to attend the spin room at the debate given Trump is not planning on participating, three sources with direct knowledge of the matter told CNN.

    Fox News is in charge of credentials for the spin room. However, the RNC manages credentials for the actual debate, and sources said those tickets are still expected be honored.

    Several of Trump’s advisers and top surrogates had been planning to attend both the debate and represent the former president in the spin room despite his absence, CNN previously reported. Some of Trump’s surrogates are credentialed through outside media groups and will not be impacted. Former Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake, Reps. Byron Donalds and Matt Gaetz of Florida and other Republicans are slated to attend the debate.

    Members of Trump’s campaign, including senior advisers Jason Miller, Steven Cheung and Chris LaCivita, were also planning on being in the spin room.

    Members of Trump’s teams and his surrogates, however, are still planning on traveling to Milwaukee and are working on a resolution with the network as well as the RNC, two Trump advisers told CNN. The former president’s aides also believe they will be able to find new credentials, one of the advisers said, and are confident they will be in the spin room on Wednesday.

    Fox News did not immediately respond to CNN’s request for comment.

    Trump’s absence leaves former Vice President Mike Pence, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson and former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie on the debate stage.

    To qualify for the debate, candidates must have at least 40,000 unique donors, with at least 200 unique donors per state, and must reach at least 1% in three national polls meeting the RNC’s requirements or at least 1% in two national polls and two polls from separate early voting states.

    Candidates are also expected to sign a loyalty pledge expressing their commitment to unite and back the eventual Republican nominee, regardless of who that is.

    The GOP field has used Trump’s expected absence to throw shots at the former president, with DeSantis on Monday saying Trump “owes it to people” to debate, arguing voters – even ones who appreciate the former president’s record – won’t “look kindly” at him sitting this one out.

    In a recent interview, Haley said it would be “hard to earn” voters’ support “if you’re absent.”

    And Christie told Newsmax earlier this month that if Trump “didn’t show up, it would be much more trouble for him, adding: “I doubt that I’ll miss an opportunity to bring his name up, especially if he decides to chicken out and not show up.”

    Ramaswamy, a frequent defender of Trump, struck a different tone than his opponents Monday night. “I have no issue with him skipping the first couple of debates,” the entrepreneur told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins on “The Source,” noting that he thought the former president should debate at some point this year.

    “The truth is, many people in this country didn’t know who I was six months ago, so, this is a good opportunity for me to introduce myself to the country,” he said.

    CORRECTION: This story has been updated to reflect that some Trump surrogates can still attend the debate itself but not appear in the spin room, which would require credentials from Fox.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump seeks to steer attention away from first 2024 GOP debate as rivals make final preparations for Milwaukee | CNN Politics

    Trump seeks to steer attention away from first 2024 GOP debate as rivals make final preparations for Milwaukee | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The front-runner for the 2024 Republican nomination is not only skipping the first presidential primary debate of the season – he’s also attempting to wrest the spotlight away from the stage in Milwaukee.

    With the Republican National Committee’s window to meet fundraising and polling requirements having closed Monday night, the debate stage is set, and the GOP contenders vying to become the party’s top alternative to former President Donald Trump are making their final preparations ahead of what will be among the most-watched moments in many of their political careers. As his rivals prepare for the two-hour showdown on Fox News, Trump’s campaign is attempting to counter-program the debate.

    The first debate, a key moment in any presidential primary, is also taking place in the middle of a week in which Trump’s legal troubles will once again take center stage.

    Trump has already taped an interview with Tucker Carlson, the fired former Fox News host, two sources familiar with the matter told CNN Monday. It is unclear what platform the interview with Carlson will be published on. The sources said that it would be released around the time of the debate Wednesday night.

    The former president, who on Sunday said he will skip the first debate and could skip others, is expected to spend Wednesday evening at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey.

    But Trump’s son Donald Trump Jr. and other surrogates planned to travel to Milwaukee, where they would have had opportunities to weigh in on national broadcasts before and after the debate in the spin room.

    However, Fox News informed the Trump campaign on Monday that they will no longer provide credentials to some surrogates of the former president to attend the spin room at the debate since the former president is not participating in the debate, three sources with direct knowledge of the matter told CNN.

    Some of Trump’s surrogates are credentialed through outside media groups and will not be impacted. Former Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake, Reps. Byron Donalds and Matt Gaetz of Florida and other Republicans are slated to attend the debate.

    Members of Trump’s campaign, including his senior advisers Jason Miller, Steven Cheung and Chris LaCivita, were also planning on being in the spin room.

    While Fox News is in charge of credentials for the spin room, the RNC manages credentials for the actual debate, and sources said those tickets are still expected be honored.

    Members of Trump’s teams and his surrogates, however, are still planning on traveling to Milwaukee and are working on a resolution with the network as well as the RNC, two Trump advisers told CNN.

    Fox News did not immediately respond to CNN’s request for comment.

    Ahead of the debate, some candidates are offering previews of their lines of attack – including criticizing Trump for choosing not to participate.

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday said Trump “owes it to people” to debate, arguing voters – even those who appreciate the former president’s record – will be angry over his decision to skip the the first showdown.

    “I don’t think they’re going to look kindly on somebody that thinks they don’t have to earn it,” DeSantis said on Fox News.

    Trump, though, is poised to once again seize headlines this week with new developments in his legal troubles stemming from the former president’s efforts to overturn the outcome of the 2020 election.

    In an election subversion case in Georgia, Trump has agreed to a $200,000 bond and other release conditions after his lawyers met with the Fulton County district attorney’s office on Monday, according to court documents reviewed by CNN.

    Trump will turn himself in Thursday in Fulton County, the former president announced on his social media platform Monday.

    With Trump out, DeSantis – who has consistently polled in second place nationally and in early-voting states – could be positioned to face the sharpest scrutiny Wednesday night, as other contenders seek to replace him as the party’s top alternative to Trump.

    “We’ll be ready,” DeSantis said Monday. “I think that with Donald Trump not being there, I don’t think it’s any secret that I’m going to be probably the guy that people are going to come after.”

    The Florida governor also continued to distance himself from a memo from the super PAC Never Back Down, which last week advised him to “hammer” entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy and defend Trump if he is attacked by former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

    “That’s a separate entity. I had nothing to do with it. It’s not something that I’ve read, and it’s not, not reflective of my strategy,” DeSantis said Monday.

    However, DeSantis has unusually close ties with the super PAC. He has outsourced many typical campaign functions, including early-state organizing, to the super PAC, which can raise and spend unlimited sums. DeSantis frequently appears at events as a “special guest” of the super PAC.

    Other candidates plot their strategies

    Ramaswamy, the 38-year-old entrepreneur who has risen in polling in recent weeks, appears to have become a significant factor in the race in his rivals’ eyes.

    Another contender, Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor and US ambassador to the United Nations under Trump, attacked Ramaswamy on Monday, in a potential preview of a debate-stage showdown.

    Haley said Ramaswamy is “completely wrong” for his call to reduce US military aid to Israel. During an interview with Russell Brand on Rumble last week, Ramaswamy claimed he would cut off additional aid to Israel in 2028, after the current $38 billion US aid package expires.

    “This is part of a pattern with Vivek—his foreign policies have a common theme: they make America less safe,” Haley said on Twitter.

    Ramaswamy, for his part, tweeted a video of himself, shirtless, practicing tennis. “Three hours of solid debate prep this morning,” he said.

    One key wild card Wednesday night is Christie. He is the only contender on stage who has run against Trump before, and has proven lethal on the debate stage previously: In February 2016, he effectively stymied all momentum of Florida Sen. Marco Rubio when he mocked Rubio for delivering memorized, pre-planned lines.

    Since launching his 2024 bid, Christie has focused most of his attacks on Trump. But as he campaigned in Miami last week, he also criticized DeSantis, pointing to the super PAC memo.

    “The only way to beat someone is to beat them. If [DeSantis] thinks he’s gonna get on the stage and defend Donald Trump on Wednesday night, then he should do Donald Trump a favor and do our party a favor, come back to Tallahassee, endorse Donald Trump, and get the hell out of the race,” Christie said.

    South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, a strong fundraiser who many within the GOP see as an increasing factor in the race, has largely stuck to a positive and optimistic message, making Wednesday night a test of whether and how he is willing to mix it up with his rivals.

    Former Vice President Mike Pence has emphasized his conservative positions on ideological issues like abortion. But he had also looked for a debate-stage clash with Trump, his former running mate. On Sunday, he criticized the former president on ABC for skipping the first debate.

    “Every one of us who have qualified for that debate stage ought to be on the stage willing to square off and answer those tough questions,” Pence said.

    As the first debate approaches, polls of likely Republican voters nationally and of those in the early-voting states – Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada – have consistently shown Trump well ahead of his rivals at this stage of the race.

    Trump held a clear lead over his rivals in a Des Moines Register/NBC News/Mediacom poll of likely Iowa GOP caucusgoers released Monday, though just over half say they are not locked in to their choice and could be persuaded to support someone else.

    Overall, 42% say Trump is their first choice, followed by 19% supporting DeSantis. No other candidate reaches double digits. Behind them, 9% back Scott, 6% each back Haley and Pence, 5% support Christie, 4% back Ramaswamy, 2% back North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, and 1% support former Texas Rep. Will Hurd, with the rest of the field tested landing below 1%.

    About two-thirds say they have favorable impressions of DeSantis (66%) and Trump (65%), with majorities also expressing positive views of Scott (59%) and Haley (53%). Views of Christie (60% unfavorable to 28% favorable) and Pence (53% unfavorable to 42% favorable) break negative. Many of the other candidates have low name recognition, with four in 10 or more not sure about them.

    About half, 52%, of likely caucusgoers say they could be persuaded to support someone other than their first choice candidate, while 40% say their minds are made up. Trump’s supporters are more likely to be locked in (66% say so), yet a third say they could be persuaded to back someone else (34%). Among those backing a candidate other than Trump, 69% say they could be persuaded to support someone else, and 31% say that their mind is made up.

    The poll was conducted by Selzer and Co. August 13-17 among a random sample of 406 likely Republican caucusgoers in Iowa. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4.9 percentage points.

    New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, who considered his own presidential run before passing earlier this year, said Monday on CNN’s “Inside Politics” that the GOP primary field needs to narrow before the race reaches the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary.

    He said candidates who are mired in the low-single digits in the polls by early December should drop out.

    “By New Hampshire you need three or four candidates in the race to really make it, you know, a real opportunity and an option for the Republican voter,” he said.

    And Sununu dismissed Trump’s steady national polling leads, saying that his lead would fall “as we get around to Christmas,” while pointing to early state polls, where the former president still leads, though by a smaller margin.

    “Trump is really dominating the national media airwaves. It’s not shocking that he’s there,” he said. “But as the debates start, as people get more and more into that conversation in October, November, as we get around to Christmas, I think nationally his numbers come back down to what you see in Iowa and New Hampshire.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Right-wing media wages war on U.S. justice system after Trump’s historic federal indictment | CNN Business

    Right-wing media wages war on U.S. justice system after Trump’s historic federal indictment | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    Editor’s Note: A version of this article first appeared in the “Reliable Sources” newsletter. Sign up for the daily digest chronicling the evolving media landscape here.


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    The attacks on the rule of law have begun.

    Moments after news broke on Thursday that disgraced former President Donald Trump had been indicted on federal charges, Fox News and the rest of the MAGA Media universe revved up into attack mode, denigrating the U.S. justice system and characterizing it as prejudiced against conservatives.

    The assault on the American justice system was swift and savage.

    On Fox, the historic legal action was portrayed as President Joe Biden weaponizing the Justice Department to target his political opponent.

    “BIDEN ADMIN INDICTS A PRESIDENTIAL RIVAL,” one on-screen banner read.

    “Yes, it is a dark day in America,” Sean Hannity declared. “We have said it often. There is no equal justice, there is no equal application of our laws. There is one set of rules for Democrats and another set of rules for Donald Trump and conservatives and anybody especially in his orbit.”

    Despite the indictment not being made public, Hannity went on to tell his audience that the “system of justice” in the U.S. has “been weaponized beyond belief” and that the country is “in serious trouble.”

    Throughout the night, Fox welcomed guests who echoed the Trump talking points and disparaged the justice system.

    In effect, Fox News is once again platforming those who are leading vicious and irresponsible attacks on the country’s criminal justice system.

    The defense of Trump, of course, was not just limited to Fox News.

    Across the right-wing media ecosystem, the narrative that a sinister deep-state was unfairly targeting Trump to knock him out of the 2024 presidential contest was pervasive.

    “PEAK WITCH HUNT,” the homepage banner on the right-wing Breitbart blared, adding “POLITICAL PERSECUTION INTENSIFIES.”

    Elsewhere, on the far-right Gateway Pundit blog, more than a half-dozen stories were published Thursday night defending Trump.

    The coverage harkened back to the years after the 2016 election, when Trump aimed to discredit and destroy institutions such as the FBI for investigating him.

    News organizations covered the story by delivering fact-based reporting and analysis, while propaganda outfits such as Fox News disseminated hyperbolic commentary to their audiences.

    Thursday night’s coverage did serve as a good reminder that outlets like Fox News can quickly fall under Trump’s hypnosis and snap into MAGA mouthpiece mode.

    While Rupert Murdoch might personally hold great contempt for Trump, documents revealed as part of the Dominion Voting Systems defamation lawsuit showed that he is terrified that airing critical coverage of Trump will result in his supporters abandoning the channel.

    And at the end of the day, that is what motivates such outlets. Their business models are not designed to provide fact-based news to audiences.

    And that means giving voice to dangerous, dishonest commentary — despite knowing, after the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, the real-world violence that it has the potential to incite.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Lachlan Murdoch: No change in strategy at Fox News | CNN Business

    Lachlan Murdoch: No change in strategy at Fox News | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Despite a turbulent and expensive few weeks, Fox News isn’t changing course.

    Fox Corp. CEO Lachlan Murdoch said there will be no change in strategy at the company’s top rated cable news network, despite the firing of its top rated anchor Tucker Carlson and a massive $787.5 million settlement to Dominion Voting Systems that resulted in the company swinging to a loss in the just completed period.

    “There is no change to our programming strategy at Fox News,” Murdoch said in response to an analyst who asked about Carlson’s ouster during the investor call Tuesday to discuss its financial results.

    Murdoch described Fox News as “obviously a successful” and suggested Carlson’s firing was a tweaking of its strategy, not a departure from it.

    “As always, we are adjusting our programming and lineup and that is what we continue to do,” Murdoch said.

    His comments came after the company reported a $50 million net loss for the just completed quarter, compared to $290 million in profit a year earlier.

    The reason was a $719 million charge including the cost of the Dominion settlement, other legal settlements related to its news division and other legal costs, including attorney fees, which was partly offset by equity earnings of it affiliates and a change in the market value of some of its investments.

    The earnings statement didn’t mention Dominion Voting Systems, although it does refer to charges related to legal settlement costs at Fox News Media. On the company’s call with investors Murdoch referred to the settlement with Dominion as in the best interest of the company and its shareholders, given rulings by the Delaware court that he said limited its defense. He said going to trial could have led to two to three years of appeals.

    “We’re proud of our Fox News team, the exceptional quality of their journalism and their stewardship of the Fox News brand,” he said. “So as we look ahead, we are confident in the strength of the Fox brands and the strength of our balance sheet.”

    And he again defended the company’s post-election coverage of the false conspiracy theories made against Dominion, even though internal communications among Fox anchors made public during the discovery process showed many of them didn’t believe the claims being made.

    “We always acted as a news organization reporting on the newsworthy events of the day,” Murdoch told investors Tuesday. “Now we have been and remain confident in the merits of our position that the first amendment protects a news organization’s reporting and allegations being made by a sitting president of the United States. However, the Delaware court severely limited our defenses and trial through pre-trial rulings.”

    Fox did not have to apologize or admit wrongdoing as part of the settlement in Dominion’s defamation suit against it, although its statement did say it acknowledged “the Court’s rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false.”

    Fox still faces a lawsuit from another voting machine manufacturer, Smartmatic, which is seeking $2.7 billion in damages. Murdoch told investors that case is “fundamentally different” from the Dominion case and that Fox will have greater defenses available to it than in the Delaware court hearing the Dominion case. He predicted that case won’t go to trial until 2025.

    The Dominion settlement was reached on April 18, but it was still reported in Fox’s fiscal third quarter, which concluded March 31. Excluding the legal costs and other special items reported Tuesday, it was a pretty good financial quarter for Fox.

    It reported adjusted earnings of $494 million, or 94 cents a share, up from $459 million a year earlier. That was better than the 87 cents a share forecast by analysts surveyed by Refinitiv. The company was helped by the profits and revenue gain it received from airing this year’s Super Bowl.

    Revenue at the company rose 18% to $4.1 billion, slightly higher than analysts’ forecasts. Most of that gain was due to a 43% surge in advertising revenue, helped greatly by $650 million in Super Bowl ads. Fox did not broadcast the Super Bowl in 2022.

    Fox had plenty of money available to pay the settlement. It said it had $4.1 billion in cash and cash equivalent on hand as of March 30, about three weeks before the settlement was reached. It also announced it repurchased $1.8 billion of its shares in the nine months ending March 31, as part of a $7 billion share repurchase plan. So far, Fox has repurchased $4.4 billion worth of shares as part of its plan.

    Murdoch said Fox is better positioned than many other media companies to ride out the delays and lost revenue that could take place from a prolonged strike by the Writers Guild of America. Some programming, such as late night shows, have already gone dark due to the strike that started last week, and production on other shows has been halted.

    But Murdoch said the fact that Fox has more of its revenue and profit coming from sports and news, which are not affected by the strike, puts it in a better position.

    “Our healthy balance of scripted and unscripted content on the network puts us in a tremendous position,” he said.

    The hit from the settlement was well known by investors ahead of the report. But even with the better than expected results, Fox

    (FOX)
    shares were up only about 1% in trading at the market open following the report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How bad is it for Ron DeSantis? He’s polling at RFK Jr.’s level | CNN Politics

    How bad is it for Ron DeSantis? He’s polling at RFK Jr.’s level | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has spent the past few months running to the right ahead of his expected entry into the 2024 Republican presidential primary campaign. From signing into law a six-week abortion ban to fighting with Disney, the governor has focused on satisfying his party’s conservative base.

    So far at least, those efforts have not paid off in Republican primary polling, with DeSantis falling further behind the current front-runner, former President Donald Trump.

    Things have gotten so bad for DeSantis that a recent Fox News poll shows him at 21% – comparable with the 19% that Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has pushed debunked conspiracy theories about vaccine safety, is receiving on the Democratic side.

    DeSantis was at 28% in Fox’s February poll, 15 points behind Trump. The Florida governor’s support has dropped in the two Fox polls published since, and he now trails the former president by 32 points.

    The Fox poll is not alone in showing DeSantis floundering. The latest average of national polls has him dropping from the low 30s into the low 20s.

    This may not seem like a big deal, but early polling has long been an indicator of how well presidential candidates do in the primary the following year. Of all primary elections since 1972 without incumbents running, candidates at around 30% in early primary polls (like DeSantis was in February) have gone on to become their parties’ nominees about 40% of the time. Candidates polling the way DeSantis is now have gone on to win about 20% of the time.

    I will, of course, point out that 20% is not nothing. DeSantis most certainly still has a chance of winning. The comparison with Kennedy is not a remark on Kennedy’s strength but on DeSantis’ weakness.

    There is no historical example of an incumbent in President Joe Biden’s current position (over 60% in the latest Fox poll) losing a primary. At this point in 1995, Bill Clinton was polling roughly where Biden is now, and he had no problem winning the Democratic nomination the following year.

    In that same campaign, Jesse Jackson was polling near 20% in a number of early surveys against Clinton. So what we’re seeing from Kennedy now is not, as of yet, a historical anomaly.

    Jackson didn’t run in that 1996 race. The power of incumbency is strong enough to deter most challengers.

    The last three incumbents to either lose state primary elections (when on the ballot) or drop out of the race – Lyndon Johnson in 1968, Gerald Ford in 1976 and Jimmy Carter in 1980 – were at less than 40% of the vote or up by fewer than 10 points at this point in primary polling.

    The good news for DeSantis is that he doesn’t need to beat an incumbent, though one could make the case that Trump is polling like one.

    In fact, DeSantis’ decline is at least in part because of Trump’s rise. The former president, who has been indicted on felony criminal charges in New York, has gone from the low to mid-40s to above 50% in the average 2024 polling. (Trump has pleaded not guilty to the charges.)

    But one could also argue that DeSantis isn’t helping his cause. He has yet to formally announce his 2024 campaign – most past nominees had already done so or had filed with the Federal Election Commission at this point in the race. And the governor’s play to the right doesn’t line up with where the anti-Trump forces are within the Republican Party.

    Trump has continually been weakest among party moderates. A Quinnipiac University poll released at the end of March found that he was pulling in 61% among very conservative Republicans, while garnering a mere 30% from moderate and liberal Republicans.

    This moderate wing is the part of the party that is least likely to want a ban on abortion after six weeks. A KFF poll taken late last year showed moderate and liberal Republicans split 50/50 on whether they wanted a six-week abortion ban.

    This group isn’t small. Moderates and liberals made up about 30% of potential Republican primary voters in the Quinnipiac poll.

    Indeed, DeSantis’ other big newsmaking action (his fight with Disney) has managed to split the GOP as well, a Reuters/Ipsos poll from last week found. Although a clear majority sided with the governor (64%), 36% of Republicans do not.

    For reference, over 80% of Republicans said in a Fox poll last month that Trump had not done anything illegal, with regard to the criminal charges against him in New York.

    DeSantis, at the moment, is not building a base. He’s dividing Republicans and allowing Trump to claim an electability mantle. The general electorate remains opposed to a six-week abortion ban and his position on Disney.

    We’ll see if that changes should his polling position improve after an official campaign launch. If it doesn’t, this may end up being one of the most boring presidential primary seasons in the modern era, given Biden’s and Trump’s significant advantages.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fox News’ sudden firing of Tucker Carlson may have come down to one simple calculation | CNN Business

    Fox News’ sudden firing of Tucker Carlson may have come down to one simple calculation | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Why?

    That is the question I have been asked — and expect to continue to be asked — more than any other after the seismic news that Fox News had fired its highest-rated host, Tucker Carlson. The news, which rocked both the media and political worlds, begs for an answer to that fundamental question.

    But answering it is anything but easy. In the hours following Carlson’s abrupt dismissal from the right-wing channel, a number of explanations have emerged — all with plausibility. It goes without saying that it was no coincidence that the dismissal came just days after Fox’s historic settlement with Dominion Voting Systems. But what specifically about that case prompted Carlson’s undoing remains murky.

    Perhaps it was related to ex-producer Abby Grossberg’s lawsuit against the network, which alleged rampant sexism and anti-Semitic behavior behind the scenes at Carlson’s show? Or perhaps it was profanity-laced remarks, some of which were redacted in the Dominion discovery documents, that Carlson privately made, disparaging his colleagues, including Fox brass? Or perhaps Rupert Murdoch, and his chief executive son Lachlan, wanted to send a message about who is ultimately in command at the company after having been embarrassed for months with the public airing of Fox’s dirty laundry?

    It’s possible it was all of the above, given that each of the issues are intertwined. For its part, Fox News did not offer an explanation for Carlson’s ouster in the short statement the network put out announcing the bombshell decision. “We thank him for his service to the network as a host and prior to that as a contributor,” Fox News said. Carlson also offered no comment on Monday, ignoring my many texts and phone calls seeking information.

    A version of this article first appeared in the “Reliable Sources” newsletter. Sign up for the daily digest chronicling the evolving media landscape here.

    Which leaves us in a frustrating position. We know the basic contours of how the decision was made (Lachlan Murdoch and Suzanne Scott came to agreement Friday evening about canceling Carlson’s show and informed him on Monday morning, just before publicly announcing the news). But we are unable to say definitively, for now, what led to the firing of one of the most powerful figures in modern American media and politics.

    One veteran television news executive told me that they believed the decision came down to a straightforward calculation by the Murdochs: Risk versus reward. “There’s a lot of drama and intrigue, but this is always about managing risk vs reward,” the person said.

    “I know that’s not very exciting, but it’s how these decisions get made at the highest level,” the executive added. “A weighing of the negatives – and risks to the business – versus the positives or benefits.”

    And if you’re the Murdochs, it is easy to say how holding on to Carlson comes with more much more risk than reward. Carlson is not a team player, and in fact is uncontrollable. He carries legal baggage, and the Murdochs are trying to put an end to the legal disputes they find themselves in. He regularly births negative news cycles about the network that tarnish the brand, and Fox News is desperate to emerge from the cloud of negative press it has been the subject of. Meanwhile, mainstream advertisers have stayed far away from Carlson’s show, which is far too toxic to associate with.

    The Murdochs also have plenty of evidence to support the bet that Fox News is bigger than any single person. Just look at Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, Megyn Kelly, and others who have exited the network. None of them have bigger platforms today than they did when they were on Fox News. They all have a less powerful megaphone than the one they carried when employed by the Murdochs.

    Meanwhile, the network itself has endured. It is pretty much enshrined as a law of physics in the universe of right-wing media that whoever the Murdochs put in prime time will rate. In some cases, certain shows have out-rated their predecessors. Beck was replaced by the higher rated “The Five,” for instance.

    All that said, Carlson will test the hypothesis that Fox News as a brand trumps any single personality. Carlson is a force unlike any other in right-wing media and politics. He commands a loyal audience that is really not akin to anything else in the space. If he were to turn up on another channel, it’s certainly possible that a not-so-insignificant chunk of his audience would follow him over — especially with former President Donald Trump eager to rip the Murdochs and fan chaos in right-wing media.

    Which is all to say that, while the Murdochs may have made a calculated bet that the odds will remain in their favor, it is still a bet. And it’s not clear exactly how things will shake out when the dice land.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tucker Carlson out at Fox News | CNN Business

    Tucker Carlson out at Fox News | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Fox News and Tucker Carlson, the right-wing extremist who hosted the network’s highly rated 8pm hour, have severed ties, the network said in a stunning announcement Monday.

    The announcement came one week after Fox News settled a monster defamation lawsuit with Dominion Voting Systems for $787.5 million over the network’s dissemination of election lies. Fox News said that Carlson’s last show was Friday, April 21.

    Carlson was a top promoter of conspiracy theories and radical rhetoric at the network. Not only did he repeatedly sow doubt about the legitimacy of the 2020 election, but he also promoted conspiracy theories about the Covid-19 vaccines and elevated white nationalist talking points.

    Jonathan Greenblatt, the head of the Anti-Defamation League, praised Fox News’ decision, saying it is “about time” and that “for far too long, Tucker Carlson has used his primetime show to spew antisemitic, racist, xenophobic and anti-LGBTQ hate to millions.”

    Tucker Carlson was a key figure in Dominion Voting Systems’ mammoth defamation lawsuit against Fox News, which the parties settled last week on the brink of trial for a historic $787 million.

    In some ways, Carlson played an outsized role in the litigation: Only one of the 20 allegedly defamatory Fox broadcasts mentioned in the lawsuit came from Carlson’s top-rated show. But, as CNN exclusively reported, he was set to be one of Dominion’s first witnesses to testify at trial. And his private text messages, which became public as part of the suit, reverberated nationwide.

    Dominion got its hands on Carlson’s group chat with fellow Fox primetime stars Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham, and a trove of other messages from around the 2020 presidential election.

    These communications revealed that Carlson told confidants that he “passionately” hated former President Donald Trump and that Trump’s tenure in the White House was a “disaster.” He also used misogynistic terms to criticize pro-Trump lawyer Sidney Powell and reject her conspiracies about the 2020 election – even as those wild theories got airtime on Fox News.

    The lawsuit exposed how Carlson privately held a wholly different view than his on-air persona. A Dominion spokesperson did not comment on Carlson’s departure from Fox.

    Carlson was also one of the biggest promoters of conspiracy theories in right-wing media, sowing doubt about the 2020 presidential election, the January 6 insurrection, and Covid-19 vaccines.

    In the two years since the attack on the US Capitol, the Fox primetime host used his huge platform to amplify paper-thin theories that the attack was a false-flag operation orchestrated by the FBI and government agents because they loathed Trump, and that the criminal rioters were themselves the victims.

    The baseless theory originated from a right-wing website, and Carlson catapulted it into the mainstream by repeatedly featuring it on his show. He routinely suggested that Capitol rioter and Trump supporter Ray Epps was actually an FBI provocateur who sparked the deadly riot.

    In a “60 Minutes” interview that aired Sunday night, Epps had this to say about Carlson’s lies: “He’s obsessed with me. He’s going to any means possible to destroy my life and our lives.”

    Carlson’s disinformation campaign about January 6 reached its apex just a few months ago, with an assist from the newly installed House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, a California Republican.

    The top-rated Fox host obtained and aired never-before-seen footage from Capitol security cameras, but the clips were cherry-picked and selectively edited. He said on his program that he ran the tapes by the US Capitol Police before airing the material, but they disputed his claim.

    Abby Grossberg, the ex-Fox News producer who has since disavowed the network, claimed in recent lawsuits that there was rampant sexism and misogyny among Tucker Carlson’s show team.

    Grossberg, who joined Carlson’s team after the 2020 election, said in her lawsuit that after her first day on the job that “it became apparent how pervasive the misogyny and drive to embarrass and objectify women was among the male staff at TCT,” referring to “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”

    Fox News is aggressively fighting two lawsuits from Grossberg. A Fox spokesperson previously said the lawsuits were “riddled with false allegations against the network and our employees.”

    In a lawsuit filed last month, Grossberg said Carlson “was very capable of using such disgusting language about women in the workplace.” She cited some of Carlson’s private texts, where he used the phrase “c-nt” to refer to Trump lawyer Sidney Powell, a top 2020 election denier.

    Her lawsuits also describe seeing sexually suggestive posters that were visible in the workplace, facing “uncomfortable sexual questions” about her former Fox News boss Maria Bartiromo, and witnessing internal debates on which women politicians were “more f–kable.”

    In a TV interview, she said the sexual harassment was so bad that she considered suicide.

    Carlson’s departure at Fox News comes after the network also severed ties with right-wing bomb thrower Dan Bongino, who had been a regular fixture on the network’s programming, in addition to hosting a weekend show.

    “Folks, regretfully, last week was my last show on Fox News on the Fox News Channel,” Bongino said on Rumble, chalking up the exit to a contract dispute.

    “So the show ending last week was tough. And I want you to know it’s not some big conspiracy. I promise you. There’s not, there’s no acrimony. This wasn’t some, like, WWE brawl that happened. We just couldn’t come to terms on an extension. And that’s really it.”

    Fox News responded in a statement, “We thank Dan for his contributions and wish him success in his future endeavors.”

    Shares of Fox Corp.

    (FOXA)
    fell 5% on the news. The stock had been up slightly before the announcement. Carlson did not immediately respond to a CNN request for comment.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘Difficult to say with a straight face’: Tapper reacts to Fox News’ statement on settlement | CNN Politics

    ‘Difficult to say with a straight face’: Tapper reacts to Fox News’ statement on settlement | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

    ‘Difficult to say with a straight face’: Tapper reacts to Fox News’ statement on settlement

    A settlement has been reached in Dominion Voting Systems’ defamation case against Fox News, the judge for the case announced. The network will pay more than $787 million to Dominion, a lawyer for the company said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fox News-Dominion trial abruptly delayed on eve of opening statements | CNN Business

    Fox News-Dominion trial abruptly delayed on eve of opening statements | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Wilmington, Delaware
    CNN
     — 

    Dominion Voting Systems’ high-stakes defamation trial against Fox News, which was supposed to begin Monday, was abruptly delayed on Sunday evening, in a stunning eleventh-hour twist that threw into question whether a settlement was in the works.

    Opening statements were expected on Monday, but the Delaware Superior Court said in a surprise announcement that “the start of the trial” will now be Tuesday.

    The judge’s statement did not provide an explanation for the delay.

    “The Court has decided to continue the start of the trial, including jury selection, until Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. I will make such an announcement tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 7E,” using the legal term “continue,” which means delay or postpone.

    But the announcement came as The Wall Street Journal, which is owned by Fox Corporation Chairman Rupert Murdoch, reported on Sunday evening that “Fox has made a late push to settle the dispute out of court,” citing people familiar with the matter.

    Neither Dominion nor Fox commented on the delay Sunday.

    “Dominion has seemed quite motivated, throughout this case, to play it out on a public stage and correct the larger record on election denialism,” said RonNell Anderson Jones, a First Amendment expert and professor of law at the University of Utah.

    “But Fox may be far more incentivized to move closer to whatever Dominion might be asking, after a very rough week of pretrial hearings last week and, especially, in light of the recent revelations from the ex-employee who is now in Dominion’s camp.”

    Dominion had sued Fox News for defamation seeking damages of $1.6 billion. It says it was defamed by the right-wing network when Fox hosts and guests claimed in 2020 that its voting systems illegally rigged the election against Donald Trump.

    Fox News has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, maintained it is “proud” of its 2020 election coverage, and argued that Dominion’s lawsuit represents a threat to the First Amendment. The network says the $1.6 billion figure is wildly inflated.

    As the case has progressed through the court system and more damning material has emerged, legal experts have expressed surprise that Fox has not settled the case. A settlement would avert what promises to be an excruciating and embarrassing several weeks for Fox.

    Some of the company’s highest-ranking executives and highest-profile hosts are scheduled to otherwise testify during the trial about the election lies promoted by the network in the wake of the 2020 election.

    If a panel of jurors side with Dominion during trial and award a sum of money near what the voting technology company is asking for, it would represent one of the largest defamation defeats ever for a US media outlet.

    Regardless of whether a case goes to trial, the evidence that has emerged from the case has battered Fox News’ credibility and reputation, exposing the network as a dishonest organization willing to push lies to its audience.

    Private text messages and emails released as part of the case have already revealed top personnel at the right-wing talk network didn’t believe the conspiracy theories that were being put on the air and spread to viewers.

    Prominent hosts such as Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity knew Trump’s lies about the election were detached from reality, the communications revealed, but they leaned into the voter fraud theories anyway on their shows.

    — CNN’s Jon Passantino contributed reporting

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What to know ahead of the Fox News and Dominion trial | CNN Business

    What to know ahead of the Fox News and Dominion trial | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    A trial in a defamation suit brought against Fox News by Dominion Voting Systems is set to begin this week. It could have significant ramifications for the right-wing cable channel.

    Dominion is an election technology company. After former president Donald Trump lost the 2020 presidential election to Joe Biden, Dominion alleged Fox pushed various pro-Trump conspiracy theories, including false and potentially damaging information about the company’s voting technology, because “the lies were good for Fox’s business.” Fox is arguing that it was merely reporting the claims made by the Trump administration and Donald Trump’s associates.

    It filed a defamation lawsuit in 2021. The trial is set to begin Monday in Delaware.

    Here are 5 things to know ahead of the trial.

    Dominion wants the network’s star hosts and top executives to appear on the witness stand during trial, it said in a court filing in March.

    Here’s who could appear as witnesses, if Dominion gets its way:

    • Suzanne Scott, Fox News CEO

    • Jay Wallace, Fox News president

    • Hosts Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Maria Bartiromo, Laura Ingraham and Bret Baier

    Abby Grossberg, a former Fox News producer who alleged that the network’s lawyers coerced her into providing misleading testimony in a lawsuit filed March

    • In April, Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis said Dominion could compel Fox Corporation Chairman Rupert Murdoch and his son, CEO Lachlan Murdoch, to testify, in a big blow to Fox.

    “Both parties have made these witnesses very relevant,” Davis said, regarding the Murdochs. Fox was trying to block Dominion from having the Murdochs on the witness stand.

    Dominion is asking for $1.6 billion in damages and additional punitive damages.

    That could be a major financial hit to Fox. Fox Corporation, the right-wing news outlet’s owner, has an estimated $4 billion in cash on hand, according to its latest earnings statement. It’s also unclear how much insurance the company has, or what any insurance policy would cover.

    Punitive damages are, however, uncapped in Delaware, with no legal maximum limit.

    The network claims that number is a wildly overblown amount designed to grab attention in headlines.

    Fox argued in a statement the case is about protecting “the rights of the free press” and a verdict in favor of Dominion would have “grave consequences” for the fourth estate.

    “Dominion’s lawsuit is a political crusade in search of a financial windfall, but the real cost would be cherished First Amendment rights,” a Fox spokesperson said in a statement.

    Defamation cases are hard to win in the United States, because of the Supreme Court’s ruling in New York Times v. Sullivan in 1964. Defamation has to meet a high standard. An entity can’t have just lied, it must have known (or at least strongly suspected) it was lying at the time, and it has to have been done with “actual malice.” The court has already ruled on the first two, saying that Fox aired lies and knew they were lies, so instead of a question of truth, it’s about whether Fox did so maliciously.

    Though major figures at Fox privately acknowledged reality – that former President Donald Trump had lost to President Joe Biden in 2020 – Fox continued to air conspiracies and lies in order to keep its large audience engaged.

    A cache of private messages, emails and depositions revealed that Fox may not have upheld the journalistic responsibility to report the truth to audiences. The judge has rejected several of Fox’s First Amendment defenses and in pretrial rulings barred the network from arguing its guests’ alleged defamatory statements were “newsworthy” and deserving of coverage.

    Legal filings made public a trove of private text messages, emails and deposition transcripts, revealing how Fox hosts, producers, and executives really felt about Trump.

    The damning behind-the-scenes communications were included in roughly 10,000 pages of court documents that have been made public as part of the lawsuit, many of which are likely to be shown in the trial.

    For example, host Tucker Carlson said in one text message he “passionately” hates Trump. In one November 2020 exchange, Tucker Carlson said Trump’s decision to snub Joe Biden’s inauguration was “so destructive,” adding that Trump’s post-election behavior was “disgusting” and that he was “trying to look away.”

    Murdoch emailed New York Post’s Col Allan, describing Trump’s election lies as “bulls**t and “damaging.”

    Murdoch’s private messages revealed how his own thoughts contradicted what Fox espoused. “Maybe Sean [Hannity] and Laura [Ingraham] went too far,” Murdoch wrote in an email Fox News chief executive Suzanne Scott, apparently referencing election denialism after Trump’s loss to President Joe Biden.

    The trial will begin Monday in Delaware at 9 am ET, with expected opening statements at some point during the day. Jury selection is also expected to wrap up Monday morning, ending with a panel of 12 jurors and 12 alternates. It’s anticipated that opening statements will begin immediately after the jury is seated. The trial is expected to last five to six weeks.

    Dominion will need to convince the jury that Fox acted with “actual malice” — showing the right-wing network’s hosts and executives knew what was being said on-air was false but broadcast it anyway, or acted with such a reckless disregard for the truth that they should be held liable.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Analysis: Fox News is about to enter the true No Spin Zone | CNN Business

    Analysis: Fox News is about to enter the true No Spin Zone | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    This is it.

    The media defamation trial of the century is on the precipice of kicking off in Wilmington, Delaware, in just days.

    Jury selection in Dominion Voting Systems’ monster $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit took place all of Thursday, with 300 potential jurors being summoned to court. Good progress was made and the presiding judge noted that there were “more than enough jurors” to start the trial as scheduled on Monday.

    It is there, in Courtroom 7E, where the biggest figures in Murdoch Media, accompanied by a throng of high-powered lawyers, will attempt to mount their defense after repeatedly failing to convince a judge to toss the now-historic case.

    A version of this article first appeared in the “Reliable Sources” newsletter. Sign up for the daily digest chronicling the evolving media landscape here.

    It’s, frankly, extraordinary to write those words. When I watched Fox News broadcast election lies in the aftermath of the 2020 election, never did I expect the network to be held accountable in a meaningful way.

    I’ve covered Fox News for a while now. I’ve watched thousands and thousands of hours of the right-wing channel’s programming. I’ve seen its hosts over the years undermine public health, make gross anti-immigrant remarks, peddle lies and propaganda and push deranged conspiracy theories that were once reserved for the right-wing’s furthest fringes.

    The network has always seemed to find a way to sail through the controversy, even the most hellish storms it has faced. Sometimes it has emerged even stronger and more emboldened than before.

    But this time is different. This time, the normal tricks the network turns to during times of crisis will not free it from trouble. This time, in a court of law, the network will need to put forward an honest, fact-driven argument.

    Fox News is about to enter the true No Spin Zone, where deception is strictly prohibited. Where it is not in charge. And where its top executives like Rupert Murdoch and Suzanne Scott and hosts like Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity cannot simply ignore a request for comment and resort to, instead, attacking “the media” on-air.

    In this setting, where lies cannot be casually told and truth cannot be distorted beyond reality to fit a dishonest narrative, it will be fascinating to see how the network fares. If the pre-trial hearings are any indicator, it won’t be pretty. The case hasn’t even started and the presiding judge has already lost his patience with Fox’s legal team and put them on notice.

    Perhaps the winds will shift for Fox News when the judge gavels in the trial on Monday. But if they play out like the last few weeks of court have, Fox News is in for a brutal ride.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ex-Fox producer said she gave misleading testimony in Dominion case ‘to keep my job’ | CNN Business

    Ex-Fox producer said she gave misleading testimony in Dominion case ‘to keep my job’ | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Abby Grossberg, the former Fox News producer who accused the right-wing network of pressuring her into giving misleading testimony in the Dominion defamation case, told NBC News Thursday in her first TV interview that she was “bullied, intimidated and coerced” into protecting the right-wing network to keep her job.

    “It felt awful. I mean it felt terrible because I knew that I was bullied, intimidated, and coerced into saying that just to keep my job and stay at the company,” Grossberg told NBC.

    Asked why she did that, Grossberg said “Because I made the decision to keep my job so that I can keep paying my bills. It seemed like the safer decision for me at the time.”

    Her latest comments echo what she said last week in an interview with CNN’s Oliver Darcy, where she said she filed the lawsuit to protect her career and “expose the lies and deceit” that she says is rampant at the right-wing network.

    Fox News contests all of her allegations, and said in a prior statement that, “the assertion that Ms. Grossberg was coached or intimidated into being dishonest during her Dominion deposition is patently false.”

    Fox News also denies wrongdoing in the underlying Dominion case, and says it didn’t defame anyone.

    Last week, Grossberg filed explosive lawsuits in New York and Delaware accusing Fox News lawyers of pressuring her into providing misleading testimony in the Dominion case – testimony that would protect the network and its top talent. Since filing the lawsuit, she submitted new sworn testimony in the Dominion defamation case that undermines some of Fox’s defenses.

    She also claimed in her lawsuit that she had been subjected to a toxic and sexist work environment while at Fox News. The network has vehemently pushed back against these allegations.

    After filing the lawsuit, Grossberg was fired from Fox News. The right-wing network said in a statement that she violated corporate rules improperly exposed legally privileged information in her lawsuit.

    During Thursday’s interview, Grossberg said that she experienced harassment so severe that she thought about killing herself.

    “I reached a breaking point where the harassment was so bad that I called a crisis line,” Grossberg told NBC News. “I thought I could just walk in front of a car and I wouldn’t have to go to work tomorrow.”

    Describing the allegedly toxic workplace at the right-wing network, Grossberg said: “Women were objectified. It was a game. It was a sport. Female politicians who came on the show were mocked. There were debates about who they’d rather sleep with. C-word all the time.”

    A Fox News spokesperson didn’t offer any comment when asked about Grossberg’s mention of suicide. But the spokesperson denied Grossberg’s claims of workplace misogyny, saying her lawsuit was “riddled with false allegations against the network and our employees.” The spokesperson also noted that women are currently serving as the CEO of Fox News Media and the presidents of two of its networks.

    Fox News is no stranger to claims of workplace sexism. Fox News founder Roger Ailes, former primetime star host Bill O’Reilly and other men were forced out amid sexual harassment allegations, and the network has paid tens of millions to settle related lawsuits.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fox News producer files explosive lawsuits against the network, alleging she was coerced into providing misleading Dominion testimony | CNN Business

    Fox News producer files explosive lawsuits against the network, alleging she was coerced into providing misleading Dominion testimony | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    A Fox News producer on Monday filed a pair of explosive lawsuits against the right-wing talk channel, alleging that the network’s lawyers coerced her into providing misleading testimony in Dominion Voting Systems’ $1.6 billion defamation case against the company.

    The lawsuits filed by Abby Grossberg, who worked as a senior booking producer for Maria Bartiromo and most recently head of booking for Tucker Carlson, accused Fox’s legal team of having engaged in wrongful conduct as it prepared her for a pre-trial deposition in the election technology company’s case.

    The lawsuits from Grossberg, who has since been placed on administrative leave by Fox, were filed in Delaware Superior Court and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

    “Fox News Attorneys acted as agents and at the behest of Fox News to misleadingly coach, manipulate, and coerce Ms. Grossberg to deliver shaded and/or incomplete answers during her sworn deposition testimony, which answers were clearly to her reputational detriment but greatly benefitted Fox News,” the lawsuit filed in Delaware stated.

    The Delaware lawsuit alleged that the “concerted efforts and actions” from Fox’s legal team ultimately caused Grossberg to testify in a way that portrayed the facts “in a false light” in order to “shift culpability” away from senior Fox News executives and “away from Fox Corporation.”

    That matter is important because Fox Corporation, the parent company of Fox News, has asked to be dropped as a party in Dominion’s lawsuit by arguing that it does not play a big role in coverage decisions at the network.

    Dominion has alleged in its lawsuit against Fox Corporation and Fox News that during the 2020 election the right-wing network “recklessly disregarded the truth” and pushed various pro-Trump conspiracy theories about the election technology company because “the lies were good for Fox’s business.” Fox News has strongly disputed Dominion’s allegations.

    A Fox News spokesperson responded to Grossberg’s lawsuits in a statement that said, “Fox News Media engaged an independent outside counsel to immediately investigate the concerns raised by Ms. Grossberg, which were made following a critical performance review. We will vigorously defend these claims.”

    Fox News also on Monday filed suit against Grossberg, seeking a restraining order to prevent her from divulging privileged information that it said would cause the network to “suffer immediate irreparable harm.” A judge has not yet ruled on Fox’s request.

    In a phone interview Monday night, Grossberg and her attorney, Gerry Filippatos, disputed Fox News’ assertion the complaints only came after a critical performance review.

    “It’s another example of Fox News not only shying away from the truth, but attempting to bury the truth,” Filippatos told CNN.

    “Fox just does not care,” Grossberg added. “It summarizes everything perfectly. They don’t care about their employees … and they don’t care about their viewers.”

    In her lawsuits, Grossberg also made a number of eye-popping allegations about the workplace environment at Fox News, accusing the network of rampant sexism.

    Grossberg, who indicated she was passed over for a top job on Bartiromo’s show because the network preferred it be filled by a male, said Fox News executives referred to the “Sunday Mornings Futures” host as a “crazy b**ch” and “menopausal.”

    When she began work on Carlson’s show, Grossberg said the environment was horrific. On her first day, she said she learned the show’s workspace was decorated with large photos of then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi “in a plunging bathing suit revealing her cleavage.”

    “Grossberg was mortified by what she was witnessing and began to experience a sinking feeling in her stomach as it became apparent how pervasive the misogyny and drive to embarrass and objectify women was among the male staff at [‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’],” the lawsuit filed in New York said.

    The lawsuit continued to describe a culture at Carlson’s program in which women were subjected to crude terms and in which jokes about Jewish people were made out in the open. Grossberg named Carlson and members of his staff in the lawsuit filed in New York.

    Filippatos said that Grossberg has “ample documentary evidence in all forms to support a broad swath” of the allegations made in the lawsuits.

    Grossberg told CNN that she filed her lawsuit in hopes that it will spur change at the network and because she believed it “was the only step” she had to regain her pride and save her career. Grossberg said she wanted to “expose the lies and deceit” that she “witnessed for years” on two of Fox News’ biggest shows.

    “I’ve covered many stories while I have been there,” Grossberg told CNN. “Dominion is just a small portion. And I’ve witnessed it from the very beginning until my last day of work last week.”

    “It’s constant,” she added. “Ratings are very important to the shows, to the network, and to the hosts. It’s a business and that’s what drives coverage.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fox hunting club that first met in the 1700s holds last meet after new law | CNN

    Fox hunting club that first met in the 1700s holds last meet after new law | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    One of Scotland’s oldest fox hunts has come to an end after 252 years following the introduction of new law on hunting.

    The Hunting with Dogs bill, which went into effect earlier this week after being passed in January, outlaws hunting and killing wild mammals using packs of dogs except in limited circumstances.

    Following its introduction, the Lanarkshire and Renfrewshire Hunt – which first met in the 1700s – announced it had held its final meet.

    “We were humbled to see the huge support by riders and supporters for our modest hunt in the west of Scotland,” the group wrote on Facebook, also thanking “all farmers and landowners who have allowed us to cross your land in some tricky weather over the years.”

    “A big thank you to every single person who has helped out in any way over the years, big or small, it is all very much appreciated,” it said.

    “Finally we wish to thank our lovely hounds, we look after them with great love and affection, often better than we do ourselves.”

    Originating in the sixteenth century, fox hunting remains a controversial topic in the United Kingdom.

    Hunters view it as an important part of local heritage while animal rights activists argue that it is cruel and unnecessary.

    Anti-hunting organizations have previously welcomed the bill’s implementation.

    “This historic news is a huge win for wildlife, locals against the hunt and of course hunt saboteurs who have spent decades bringing this hunt to their knees,” the Glasgow Hunt Sabs said on its website.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fact check: Republicans at CPAC make false claims about Biden, Zelensky, the FBI and children | CNN Politics

    Fact check: Republicans at CPAC make false claims about Biden, Zelensky, the FBI and children | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The Conservative Political Action Conference is underway in Maryland. And the members of Congress, former government officials and conservative personalities who spoke at the conference on Thursday and Friday made false claims about a variety of topics.

    Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio uttered two false claims about President Joe Biden. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia repeated a debunked claim about Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama used two inaccurate statistics as he lamented the state of the country. Former Trump White House official Steve Bannon repeated his regular lie about the 2020 election having been stolen from Trump, this time baselesly blaming Fox for Trump’s defeat.

    Rep. Kat Cammack of Florida incorrectly said a former Obama administration official had encouraged people to harass Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina inaccurately claimed Biden had laughed at a grieving mother and inaccurately insinuated that the FBI tipped off the media to its search of former President Donald Trump’s Florida residence. Two other speakers, Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and former Trump administration official Sebastian Gorka, inflated the number of deaths from fentanyl.

    And that’s not all. Here is a fact check of 13 false claims from the conference, which continues on Saturday.

    Marjorie Taylor Greene said the Republican Party has a duty to protect children. Listing supposed threats to children, she said, “Now whether it’s like Zelensky saying he wants our sons and daughters to go die in Ukraine…” Later in her speech, she said, “I will look at a camera and directly tell Zelensky: you’d better leave your hands off of our sons and daughters, because they’re not dying over there.”

    Facts First: Greene’s claim is false. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky didn’t say he wants American sons and daughters to fight or die for Ukraine. The false claim, which was debunked by CNN and others earlier in the week, is based on a viral video that clipped Zelensky’s comments out of context.

    19-second video of Zelensky goes viral. See what was edited out

    In reality, Zelensky predicted at a press conference in late February that if Ukraine loses the war against Russia because it does not receive sufficient support from elsewhere, Russia will proceed to enter North Atlantic Treaty Organization member countries in the Baltics (a region made up of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia) that the US will be obligated to send troops to defend. Under the treaty that governs NATO, an attack on one member is considered an attack on all. Ukraine is not a NATO member, and Zelensky didn’t say Americans should fight there.

    Greene is one of the people who shared the out-of-context video on Twitter this week. You can read a full fact-check, with Zelensky’s complete quote, here.

    Right-wing commentator and former Trump White House chief strategist Steve Bannon criticized right-wing cable channel Fox at length for, he argued, being insufficiently supportive of Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign. Among other things, Bannon claimed that, on the night of the election in November 2020, “Fox News illegitimately called it for the opposition and not Donald J. Trump, of which our nation has never recovered.” Later, he said Trump is running again after “having it stolen, in broad daylight, of which they [Fox] participate in.”

    Facts First: This is nonsense. On election night in 2020, Fox accurately projected that Biden had won the state of Arizona. This projection did not change the outcome of the election; all of the votes are counted regardless of what media outlets have projected, and the counting showed that Biden won Arizona, and the election, fair and square. The 2020 election was not “stolen” from Trump.

    NATIONAL HARBOR, MARYLAND - MARCH 03: Former White House chief strategist for the Trump Administration Steve Bannon speaks during the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) at the Gaylord National Resort Hotel And Convention Center on March 03, 2023 in National Harbor, Maryland. The annual conservative conference entered its second day of speakers including congressional members, media personalities and members of former President Donald Trump's administration. President Donald Trump will address the event on Saturday.  (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

    Bannon has a harsh message for Fox News at CPAC

    Fox, like other major media outlets, did not project that Biden had won the presidency until four days later. Fox personalities went on to repeatedly promote lies that the election was stolen from Trump – even as they privately dismissed and mocked these false claims, according to court filings from a voting technology company that is suing Fox for defamation.

    Rep. Jim Jordan claimed that Biden, “on day one,” made “three key changes” to immigration policy. Jordan said one of those changes was this: “We’re not going to deport anyone who come.” He proceeded to argue that people knowing “we’re not going to get deported” was a reason they decided to migrate to the US under Biden.

    Facts First: Jordan inaccurately described the 100-day deportation pause that Biden attempted to impose immediately after he took office on January 20, 2021. The policy did not say the US wouldn’t deport “anyone who comes.” It explicitly did not apply to anyone who arrived in the country after the end of October 2020, meaning people who arrived under the Biden administration or in the last months of the Trump administration could still be deported.

    Biden did say during the 2020 Democratic primary that “no one, no one will be deported at all” in his first 100 days as president. But Jordan claimed that this was the policy Biden actually implemented on his first day in office; Biden’s actual first-day policy was considerably narrower.

    Biden’s attempted 100-day pause also did not apply to people who engaged in or were suspected of terrorism or espionage, were seen to pose a national security risk, had waived their right to remain in the US, or whom the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement determined the law required to be removed.

    The pause was supposed to be in effect while the Department of Homeland Security conducted a review of immigration enforcement practices, but it was blocked by a federal judge shortly after it was announced.

    Rep. Ralph Norman strongly suggested the FBI had tipped off the media to its August search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home and resort in Florida for government documents in the former president’s possession – while concealing its subsequent document searches of properties connected to Biden.

    Norman said: “When I saw the raid at Mar-a-Lago – you know, the cameras, the FBI – and compare that to when they found Biden’s, all of the documents he had, where was the media, where was the FBI? They kept it quiet early on, didn’t let it out. The job of the next president is going to be getting rid of the insiders that are undermining this government, and you’ve gotta clean house.”

    Facts First: Norman’s narrative is false. The FBI did not tip off the media to its search of Mar-a-Lago; CNN reported the next day that the search “happened so quietly, so secretly, that it wasn’t caught on camera at all.” Rather, media outlets belatedly sent cameras to Mar-a-Lago because Peter Schorsch, publisher of the website Florida Politics, learned of the search from non-FBI sources and tweeted about it either after it was over or as it was just concluding, and because Trump himself made a public statement less than 20 minutes later confirming that a search had occurred. Schorsch told CNN on Thursday: “I can, unequivocally, state that the FBI was not one of my two sources which alerted me to the raid.”

    Brian Stelter, then CNN’s chief media correspondent, wrote in his article the day after the search: “By the time local TV news cameras showed up outside the club, there was almost nothing to see. Websites used file photos of the Florida resort since there were no dramatic shots of the search.”

    It’s true that the public didn’t find out until late January about the FBI’s November search of Biden’s former think tank office in Washington, which was conducted with the consent of Biden’s legal team. But the belated presence of journalists at Mar-a-Lago on the day of the Trump search in August is not evidence of a double standard.

    And it’s worth noting that media cameras were on the scene when Biden’s beach home in Delaware was searched by the FBI in February. News outlets had set up a media “pool” to make sure any search there was recorded.

    Sen. Tommy Tuberville, a former college and high school football coach, said, “Going into thousands of kids’ homes and talking to parents every year recruiting, half the kids in this country – I’m not talking about race, I’m just talking about – half the kids in this country have one or no parent. And it’s because of the attack on faith. People are losing faith because, for some reason, because the attack [on] God.”

    Facts First: Tuberville’s claim that half of American children don’t have two parents is incorrect. Official figures from the Census Bureau show that, in 2021, about 70% of US children under the age of 18 lived with two parents and about 65% lived with two married parents.

    About 22% of children lived with only a mother, about 5% with only a father, and about 3% with no parent. But the Census Bureau has explained that even children who are listed as living with only one parent may have a second parent; children are listed as living with only one parent if, for example, one parent is deployed overseas with the military or if their divorced parents share custody of them.

    It is true that the percentage of US children living in households with two parents has been declining for decades. Still, Tuberville’s statistic significantly exaggerated the current situation. His spokesperson told CNN on Thursday that the senator was speaking “anecdotally” from his personal experience meeting with families as a football coach.

    Tuberville claimed that today’s children are being “indoctrinated” in schools by “woke” ideology and critical race theory. He then said, “We don’t teach reading, writing and arithmetic anymore. You know, half the kids in this country, when they graduate – think about this: half the kids in this country, when they graduate, can’t read their diploma.”

    Facts First: This is false. While many Americans do struggle with reading, there is no basis for the claim that “half” of high school graduates can’t read a basic document like a diploma. “Mr. Tuberville does not know what he’s talking about at all,” said Patricia Edwards, a Michigan State University professor of language and literacy who is a past president of the International Literacy Association and the Literacy Research Association. Edwards said there is “no evidence” to support Tuberville’s claim. She also said that people who can’t read at all are highly unlikely to finish high school and that “sometimes politicians embellish information.”

    Tuberville could have accurately said that a significant number of American teenagers and adults have reading trouble, though there is no apparent basis for connecting these struggles with supposed “woke” indoctrination. The organization ProLiteracy pointed CNN to 2017 data that found 23% of Americans age 16 to 65 have “low” literacy skills in English. That’s not “half,” as ProLiteracy pointed out, and it includes people who didn’t graduate from high school and people who are able to read basic text but struggle with more complex literacy tasks.

    The Tuberville spokesperson said the senator was speaking informally after having been briefed on other statistics about Americans’ struggles with reading, like a report that half of adults can’t read a book written at an eighth-grade level.

    Rep. Jim Jordan claimed of Biden: “The president of the United States stood in front of Independence Hall, called half the country fascists.”

    Facts First: This is not true. Biden did not denounce even close to “half the country” in this 2022 speech at Independence Hall in Philadelphia. He made clear that he was speaking about a minority of Republicans.

    In the speech, in which he never used the word “fascists,” Biden warned that “MAGA Republicans” like Trump are “extreme,” “do not respect the Constitution” and “do not believe in the rule of law.” But he also emphasized that “not every Republican, not even the majority of Republicans, are MAGA Republicans.” In other words, he made clear that he was talking about far less than half of Americans.

    Trump earned fewer than 75 million votes in 2020 in a country of more than 258 million adults, so even a hypothetical criticism of every single Trump voter would not amount to criticism of “half the country.”

    Rep. Scott Perry claimed that “average citizens need to just at some point be willing to acknowledge and accept that every single facet of the federal government is weaponized against every single one of us.” Perry said moments later, “The government doesn’t have the right to tell you that you can’t buy a gas stove but that you must buy an electric vehicle.”

    Facts First: This is nonsense. The federal government has not told people that they can’t buy a gas stove or must buy an electric vehicle.

    The Biden administration has tried to encourage and incentivize the adoption of electric vehicles, but it has not tried to forbid the manufacture or purchase of traditional vehicles with internal combustion engines. Biden has set a goal of electric vehicles making up half of all new vehicles sold in the US by 2030.

    There was a January controversy about a Biden appointee to the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission, Richard Trumka Jr., saying that gas stoves pose a “hidden hazard,” as they emit air pollutants, and that “any option is on the table. Products that can’t be made safe can be banned.” But the commission as a whole has not shown support for a ban, and White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said at a January press briefing: “The president does not support banning gas stoves. And the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which is independent, is not banning gas stoves.”

    Rep. Ralph Norman claimed that Biden had just laughed at a mother who lost two sons to fentanyl.

    “I don’t know whether y’all saw, I just saw it this morning: Biden laughing at the mother who had two sons – to die, and he’s basically laughing and saying the fentanyl came from the previous administration. Who cares where it came from? The fact is it’s here,” Norman said.

    Facts First: Norman’s claim is false. Biden did not laugh at the mother who lost her sons to fentanyl, the anti-abortion activist Rebecca Kiessling; in a somber tone, he called her “a poor mother who lost two kids to fentanyl.” Rather, he proceeded to laugh about how Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene had baselessly blamed the Biden administration for the young men’s deaths even though the tragedy happened in mid-2020, during the Trump administration. You can watch the video of Biden’s remarks here.

    Kiessling has demanded an apology from Biden. She is entitled to her criticism of Biden’s remarks and his chuckle – but the video clearly shows Norman was wrong when he claimed Biden was “laughing at the mother.”

    Rep. Kat Cammack told a story about the first hearing of the new Republican-led House select subcommittee on the supposed “weaponization” of the federal government. Cammack claimed she had asked a Democratic witness at this February hearing about his “incredibly vitriolic” Twitter feed in which, she claimed, he not only repeatedly criticized Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh but even went “so far as to encourage people to harass this Supreme Court justice.”

    Facts First: This story is false. The witness Cammack questioned in this February exchange at the subcommittee, former Obama administration deputy assistant attorney general Elliot Williams, did not encourage people to harass Kavanaugh. In fact, it’s not even true that Cammack accused him at the February hearing of having encouraged people to harass Kavanaugh. Rather, at the hearing, she merely claimed that Williams had tweeted numerous critical tweets about Kavanaugh but had been “unusually quiet” on Twitter after an alleged assassination attempt against the justice. Clearly, not tweeting about the incident is not the same thing as encouraging harassment.

    Williams, now a CNN legal analyst (he appeared at the subcommittee hearing in his personal capacity), said in a Thursday email that he had “no idea” what Cammack was looking at on his innocuous Twitter feed. He said: “I used to prosecute violent crimes, and clerked for two federal judges. Any suggestion that I’ve ever encouraged harassment of anyone – and particularly any official of the United States – is insulting and not based in reality.”

    Cammack’s spokesperson responded helpfully on Thursday to CNN’s initial queries about the story Cammack told at CPAC, explaining that she was referring to her February exchange with Williams. But the spokesperson stopped responding after CNN asked if Cammack was accurately describing this exchange with Williams and if they had any evidence of Williams actually having encouraged the harassment of Kavanaugh.

    Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana boasted about the state of the country “when Republicans were in charge.” Among other claims about Trump’s tenure, he said that “in four years,” Republicans “delivered 3.5% unemployment” and “created 8 million new jobs.”

    Facts First: This is inaccurate in two ways. First, the economic numbers for the full “four years” of Trump’s tenure are much worse than these numbers Kennedy cited; Kennedy was actually referring to Trump’s first three years while ignoring the fourth, which was marred by the Covid-19 pandemic. Second, there weren’t “8 million new jobs” created even in Trump’s first three years.

    Kennedy could have correctly said there was a 3.5% unemployment rate after three years of the Trump administration, but not after four. The unemployment rate skyrocketed early in Trump’s fourth year, on account of the pandemic, before coming down again, and it was 6.3% when Trump left office in early 2021. (It fell to 3.4% this January under Biden, better than in any month under Trump.)

    And while the economy added about 6.7 million jobs under Trump before the pandemic-related crash of March and April 2020, that’s not the “8 million jobs” Kennedy claimed – and the economy ended up shedding millions of jobs in Trump’s fourth year. Over the full four years of Trump’s tenure, the economy netted a loss of about 2.7 million jobs.

    Lara Trump, Donald Trump’s daughter-in-law and an adviser to his 2020 campaign, claimed that the last time a CPAC crowd was gathered at this venue in Maryland, in February 2020, “We had the lowest unemployment in American history.” After making other boasts about Donald Trump’s presidency, she said, “But how quickly it all changed.” She added, “Under Joe Biden, America is crumbling.”

    Facts First: Lara Trump’s claim about February 2020 having “the lowest unemployment in American history” is false. The unemployment rate was 3.5% at the time – tied for the lowest since 1969, but not the all-time lowest on record, which was 2.5% in 1953. And while Lara Trump didn’t make an explicit claim about unemployment under Biden, it’s not true that things are worse today on this measure; again, the most recent unemployment rate, 3.4% for January 2023, is better than the rate at the time of CPAC’s 2020 conference or at any other time during Donald Trump’s presidency.

    Multiple speakers at CPAC decried the high number of fentanyl overdose deaths. But some of the speakers inflated that number while attacking Biden’s immigration policy.

    Sebastian Gorka, a former Trump administration official, claimed that “in the last 12 months in America, deaths by fentanyl poisoning totaled 110,000 Americans.” He blamed “Biden’s open border” for these deaths.

    Rep. Scott Perry claimed: “Meanwhile over on this side of the border, where there isn’t anybody, they’re running this fentanyl in; it’s killing 100,000 Americans – over 100,000 Americans – a year.”

    Facts First: It’s not true that there are more than 100,000 fentanyl deaths per year. That is the total number of deaths from all drug overdoses in the US; there were 106,699 such deaths in 2021. But the number of overdose deaths involving synthetic opioids other than methadone, primarily fentanyl, is smaller – 70,601 in 2021.

    Fentanyl-related overdoses are clearly a major problem for the country and by far the biggest single contributor to the broader overdose problem. Nonetheless, claims of “110,000” and “over 100,000” fentanyl deaths per year are significant exaggerations. And while the number of overdose deaths and fentanyl-related deaths increased under Biden in 2021, it was also troubling under Trump in 2020 – 91,799 total overdose deaths and 56,516 for synthetic opioids other than methadone.

    It’s also worth noting that fentanyl is largely smuggled in by US citizens through legal ports of entry rather than by migrants sneaking past other parts of the border. Contrary to frequent Republican claims, the border is not “open”; border officers have seized thousands of pounds of fentanyl under Biden.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fox News election fraud revelations could take down the network’s embattled chief | CNN Business

    Fox News election fraud revelations could take down the network’s embattled chief | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Who will Rupert Murdoch exile from the Fox kingdom?

    The Fox Corporation chairman is facing an ever-deepening scandal that threatens to cause considerable financial and reputational damage to the crown jewel of his media empire, Fox News, as well as the parent company he leads. The scandal, exposed by Dominion Voting Systems’ blockbuster $1.6 billion lawsuit, has unearthed damning information, revealing the right-wing talk channel, driven by financial interests, was willing to lie to its viewers.

    The stunning levels of misconduct exposed in recent weeks raise questions about the future of Suzanne Scott, the embattled chief executive of Fox News. Will she be Murdoch’s sacrificial lamb? No moves are currently on the immediate horizon, CNN is told. But it’s certainly possible — perhaps even likely — that Murdoch might cancel her in an attempt to save himself and his legacy.

    The Murdochs “are certainly setting Suzanne Scott up to take the fall for this,” Ben Smith, the Semafor editor-in-chief who writes a Sunday night media column, said Wednesday.

    “They’re leaving a trail of crumbs that lead back to her office,” added David Folkenflik, the NPR media correspondent and Murdoch biographer.

    A version of this article first appeared in the “Reliable Sources” newsletter. Sign up for the daily digest chronicling the evolving media landscape here.

    There is no shortage of evidence to support the notion Scott is on the chopping block. Most notably, during his deposition, Murdoch sought to distance himself from decision making at Fox News. Instead, he pointed to Scott: “I appointed Ms. Scott to the job … and I delegate everything to her,” he said. In doing so, Murdoch made the case that Scott is in charge of the network — and if there was wrongdoing, it rests on her shoulders. Of course, astute media observers know that Murdoch is the person actually calling the shots. But it’s not hard to see how the company could advance this narrative.

    This is not the first time that Murdoch has been faced with a serious and embarrassing matter in his media empire. In 2011, his now-defunct News of the World newspaper was ensnared in a phone hacking scandal. In 2016, Fox News founder Roger Ailes was accused in an explosive lawsuit of sexual harassment. And in 2017, star host Bill O’Reilly was caught in his own sexual misconduct scandal.

    In each case, Murdoch made the decision to sever ties with top personnel. As one source who once worked in Murdoch-world said Wednesday, “His pattern has been to throw some money overboard and offer a head or two in the process to make it go away.” And cutting ties with Scott would appear to be one of the easier ousters for Murdoch to execute over the course of his decades at the helm of one of the world’s biggest media empires.

    “Looking back to previous scandals, Murdoch and the companies have tended to try to pay early and quietly to make things go away, or they ignore them thinking they’re so big they can ride things out,” Folkenflik said. “And then when things really come to a head, they try to cauterize the wound at the lowest level possible.”

    “If he threw [Scott] over, he would only do it because he thought he needed to cauterize the wound before it goes higher,” Folkenflik added. “That’s his record. That’s what he does. It can be editors. It can be executives. It can be stars. He’s not throwing himself over the side.”

    Jim Rutenberg, the former media columnist at The New York Times who has an extensive history covering Murdoch, echoed that sentiment.

    “Murdoch has a history of sacrificing loyal lieutenants, but he does it only in the most extreme circumstances,” Rutenberg said. “We know that he hates doing it. We know that he tends to try to fight for his loyalists, even for Ailes, certainly for O’Reilly. But when it’s a necessity to overcome a real threat to his business, he’ll do it.”

    Whether the circumstances have reached a boiling point yet are unclear. The Dominion lawsuit, which has already caused massive reputational damage to the Fox News brand, is still in the pre-trial phase of the case. There’s no telling what could emerge from a weeks-long trial in which prominent executives and hosts such as Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity are called to the stand. And it remains to be seen whether outside forces, such as potential shareholder lawsuits, come into play and exert added pressure on Murdoch to take action.

    Regardless, it’s worth noting that Murdoch himself has signaled that firings could be coming. When asked in his deposition whether Fox News executives who knowingly allowed “lies to be broadcast” should face consequences, Murdoch responded in the affirmative: “They should be reprimanded,” he said. “They should be reprimanded, maybe got rid of.”

    As Folkenflik noted, “If you’re Rupert, you can’t fire Rupert. And you’re not going to fire [Fox CEO] Lachlan [Murdoch] either. So who are you going to chop?”

    “Everyone who takes a senior executive position under Rupert Murdoch knows that is the case, that is the ultimate fall position,” Folkenflik explained. “They understand that’s part of the job. You’re very well paid. It can be a somewhat glamorous life. If you fall out of favor with the sun king, or it is to his benefit, that’s part of the equation.”

    We’ll see what Scott’s fate ultimately looks like. For now, Fox is not offering any public statement of support for her. When I reached out to Fox spokespeople on Wednesday asking for comment, the company declined.

    [ad_2]

    Source link