Impeachment, Foxified

My next column in The Everett Herald:

Nothing better explains America’s unbridgeable political divide and why Trump’s supporters are convinced they’re right and disinterested in learning otherwise, than Fox “news” coverage of the impeachment “trial,” compared to that of MSNBC, CNN, and C-Span. The ones showing the proceedings stem to stern. The ones who recognize the seriousness of what’s happening and the importance of viewers seeing it for themselves. 

Only Trump State Television cut away from the initial presentations, frequently showed video with no audio while dissembling dismissively. Knowing what their viewers want, they spooned it out: misleadingly edited and censored information, slanderous commentary, validation of their toxic beliefs. Any appetite among the enFoxed for disenthralling themselves has been systematically and effectively extinguished. By Fox.  

Certain detoxification won’t happen, Fox “news” mainlines its half-truths and no-truths like heroin. Has their audience seen that video of Trump, sounding like the mob boss he is, telling his goons to “get rid” of Ambassador Yovanovich? Do they care that he’d previously claimed he hadn’t? Or wonder why he wanted a smear-job when he could have just removed her? 

How about the news of Bolton’s book? Republican Congress-creatures, who once complained there were no “first-hand” witnesses, said, “This changes nothing.” Fox’s talking heads immediately dismissed him, their former hero, as a “tool for the left.” See how it works? 

Even during impeachment, when all citizens should demand the full story, Fox omits and distracts. Clearly, Foxolytes prefer the ignorance Foxing heads provide. If they didn’t welcome it, their sainted source wouldn’t have done this. 

It doesn’t get more blatant. Yet the beFoxed believe theirs is the truthful network, giving Congressional Republicans cover in spinning away Trump’s unfitness, mocking those who call upon their patriotism and remind them of their oath. Fox “news” is camo pants. 

Knowing the Foxagandized won’t understand its irrelevance to Trump’s shakedown or ask if it was about corruption, why he eschewed a US-based investigation, Flimsy Lindsey (thanks, PM) promises to call the Bidens if Bolton is subpoenaed. Aimed at the same audience, Trump’s “trial” team argued that Trump can do anything – ANYTHING! -- as long as he “believes” it’s in the national interest. That’s as insane as it is un-American.  

Whether or not Republican senators believe their own twaddle, it’s obvious they care more about their careers than their country, confident of inFoxicated absolution. Assuming Foxotees didn’t see Adam Schiff’s late-night speech last week, here it is. 

That sound is Trumpists laughing him off as “pencil-neck,” because that’s what their Jesus-approved role model calls him. It’s the sound of shovels, as Republican Senators bury their consciences; the sound of burning parchment, of millions of “patriots” dismissing words that deserve conscientious consideration, no matter one’s political views. Words that echo what once made America great.  

It’s unlikely the prevariFoxed watched Mr. Schiff’s next-day elucidation of the importance of US support for Ukraine and the damage done by Trump’s withholding military assistance for his, and only his, benefit. Except, as always, Putin’s, too. Fake news, penciled out.  

“We have the material and they don’t,” crowed Trump at Davos, exulting in Republicans’ refusal to issue subpoenas. How demeaning of his excusers; what confidence in their and their voters’ disinterest in facts. But if any took offense, they swallowed it, as they have all of Trump’s attacks on truth and democracy. 

As Mr. Schiff noted, many patriotic State Department officials risked careers in defense of America. Republican senators? None. Ah, but if the preceding didn’t bother them, they took grandiose offense when Mr. Schiff mentioned a news report about threatened piked heads. At last! A Foxerrific excuse for ignoring a “president’s” malfeasance. Trump, meanwhile, kept it classy (it’s why they love him).  

Schiff also laid out what a propaganda coup it was when Putin pegged Trump (no pun) as a tool who, he concluded, by dint of flattery and who-knows-what-else, would defend and repeat their lies about Ukraine, not Russia, interfering in our election. And about non-existent servers. It’s there for the hearing, but words can’t penetrate reinforced concrete. 

Fox didn’t invent rightwing preference for fake news and lazy thinking. Like Trump, it liberated, magnified and cashed in on it. 

After Trump is acquitted, he’ll act as if given carte blanche to do whatever he wants, to whomever he wants, whenever he wants. The Constitution will have become a useless relic. As short-sighted Republican congress-dwellers look away, uncaring, Trumpists will kneel before their newborn king, bearing gifts.

[Image source]

Propaganda And Stuff

My upcoming newspaper column:

In fifth grade, my teacher talked about how propaganda works. Reporting results of an automobile competition, he told us, Pravda, the Russian state newspaper, said a Russian car came in second while the American was next to last. There were two cars in the contest.  

I thought of it as I read about Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia, where, like presidents before him, he was given their highest civilian honor. (Saudi Arabia, let’s recall, was the home of nearly all the 9/11 attackers, and is not exactly a world leader in human rights.) Will he bow, I wondered: and if he does, what will we hear from those who excoriated President Obama for it? Well, the results are in. Not only did he bow, he dipped his knee. Curtsied, but for lack of a tutu. However, if you get your news from Fox this is the headline you saw: “Trump shakes hands with Saudi leader, doesn’t bow as Obama appeared to do.” 

And that’s how it’s done. Posting a picture of a different gathering, they lie by telling a different truth. It’s what they’ve done since inception. That, and straight-up lying. Letters to the editor confirm how effective it’s been in cultivating disinterest in accurate news. “Pravda” means “truth.” Fox pretends it’s fair and balanced. The space between them is too tight for Trump’s medallion. Next day, during an interview, as video of the genuflection began, Jeanine Pirro motioned to cut, and cut they did. If Fox viewers want to see it (do they?), they may need another source. 

But you won’t need to look elsewhere than here to find something positive about Donald Trump. His speech in Saudi Arabia, before he got “exhausted” after two days, wasn’t as bad as most, once he got past his usual self-referential braggadocio. For one thing, he’s gotten better at reading a teleprompter. More importantly, his writers toned down his usual malevolent rhetoric about Islam and about the country in which he was standing, even referring to Islam as a “great faith” and to Saudi Arabia as “sacred land.” Rather than repeating “Islam hates us,” he extolled “shared values.”  

How will this fly with his base? Even some rational conservatives found it troubling. Trump also said he wouldn’t tell people of other nations how to live their lives or worship. That doesn’t apply back here, of course: for one example among many, it ignores his reinsertion of biblical testing into money spent on women’s health around the world. 

If he’s not detained for having visited a Muslim country, we’ll see if his tone devolves after returning home, and whether it will have influenced Saudi tolerance for home-grown terrorists. Coming at the perfect time to redirect the conversation from treasonous activities, for Trumpists the trip is bringing a tidal wave of relief.  

And yes, Dr. Freud, he also danced an all-male sword dance with Saudi princes.  

Signing a $110 billion arms agreement is within the tradition of reminding Saudi kings nothing they do can sour relations with us. By some measures, they’re what passes for a moderating force among Arab nations, and oil is oil; although Israel might have other perspectives. Surely, it’s unrelated that the Kingdom and the UAE simultaneously announced committing $100 million to the nascent fund for women’s entrepreneurship initiated by Ivanka. And let’s not dwell on what Trump once said about donations to the Clinton Foundation, because it couldn’t have been “Saudi Arabia and many of the countries that gave vast amounts of money to the Clinton Foundation want women as slaves and to kill gays. Hillary must return all money from such countries!” 

 When President Obama spoke in Egypt, he was criticized for “lecturing” when speaking for improving human rights in the region, and for weakness in not using the words “Radical Islamic terrorism.” Trump didn’t use those exact words, either. He did, however, make it clear he doesn’t care how Saudis and others behave within or outside their borders as long as we can do deals and if they get tougher on Iran. Since, under Trump, we’re backtracking on caring for our own people, one might even argue it’s a reasonable approach. If amoral, at least it’s not hypocritical. 

[Image source]

How To Lie By Telling The Truth

This is exactly what Fox "news" does, all the time. The numbers are accurate (in this case), the implication pure b.s. But it takes a paragraph or two to explain why, and Fox knows its listeners aren't into that kind of attention. Fox assumes its audience is stupid. (If they're right, is it chicken or egg?)

I bet there are lots of Foxophiles using that very list to make what they think is a persuasive point.

Wonder when Fox will get around to crediting Trump for the worst first-quarter growth rate of the economy in years. He has, after all, taken credit for the job creation in that quarter.

Fox vs. Reality

I wonder if there's any point beyond which its viewers won't follow Fox "news". Given my previous post about teabaggers and their demands, I guess the answer is no; not, at least, regarding a desire for factual information and reputable reporting.

If all humans tend to want their beliefs reinforced, and to hang around with those of like mind, it's pretty striking that at least liberals -- as currently constituted and by contrast to today's Republicans, anyhow -- gravitate toward the factual. If MSNBC (which, because liberals also don't need that reinforcement as much as conservatives, has nothing close to Fox's viewership) doesn't just make shit up.

[Update: I just discovered that the original posting didn't include the above video, which was the whole point, ferchrissakes.]

"News" Flash

Stipulating that it's based on an unnamed source, I nevertheless find this article credible and unsurprising. Credible because the site is always factual, if partisan; unsurprising because it states what's obvious to everyone except the Foxobeckified:

Asked what most viewers and observers of Fox News would be surprised to learn about the controversial cable channel, a former insider from the world of Rupert Murdoch was quick with a response: “I don’t think people would believe it’s as concocted as it is; that stuff is just made up.”

Indeed, a former Fox News employee who recently agreed to talk with Media Mattersconfirmed what critics have been saying for years about Murdoch’s cable channel. Namely, that Fox News is run as a purely partisan operation, virtually every news story is actively spun by the staff, its primary goal is to prop up Republicans and knock down Democrats, and that staffers at Fox News routinely operate without the slightest regard for fairness or fact checking.

“It is their M.O. to undermine the administration and to undermine Democrats,” says the source. “They’re a propaganda outfit but they call themselves news.”

And that’s the word from inside Fox News. ...

... The real story, and the real danger posed by the cable outlet, is that over time Fox News stopped simply leaning to the right and instead became an open and active political player, sort of one-part character assassin and one-part propagandist, depending on which party was in power. And that the operation thrives on fabrications and falsehoods. ...

... "anything—anything--that was a news story you had to understand what the spin should be on it. If it was a big enough story it was explained to you in the morning [editorial] meeting. If it wasn’t explained, it was up to you to know the conservative take on it. There’s a conservative take on every story no matter what it is. So you either get told what it is or you better intuitively know what it is.”...

... “And then two, three, five years into that it was, we’re taking the Bush line on things, which was different than the GOP. We were a Stalin-esque mouthpiece. It was just what Bush says goes on our channel. And by that point it was just totally dangerous. Hopefully most people understand how dangerous it is for a media outfit to be a straight, unfiltered mouthpiece for an unchecked president.”...

... The source continues: “I don’t think people understand that it’s an organization that’s built and functions by intimidation and bullying, and its goal is to prop up and support Republicans and the GOP and to knock down Democrats. People tend think that stuff that’s on TV is real, especially under the guise of news. You’d think that people would wise up, but they don’t.”...

... The former insider admits to being perplexed in late 2009 when the Obama White House called out Murdoch’s operation as not being a legitimate new source, only to have major Beltway media players rush to the aid of Fox News and admonish the White House for daring to criticize the cable channel.

“That blew me away,” says the source, who stresses the White House’s critique of Fox News “happens to be true.”

This is the point in the conversation when the aggrieved predictably begins to shout, "They want to take away my first amendment rights. Patriot that I am, I'm standing up for free speech." In other words, I have a right to say whatever I want, but you have no right to point out my bullshit. Sarah and gunsights. Sharon and second amendment remedies. Glenn Beck and pretty much everything. Fox "Whateveritis."

Fox "news" has a right to say whatever they want. The rest of us have not only the right but the duty to point out how dishonest and destructive it is. If comments from within the teacups on this blog are any indicator, however, the information will be rejected like a mismatched kidney.

Which is hardly a news flash.