OPINION |
FOURTH ESTATE
Fox Doesn’t Need to Fear Trump’s Wrath
The cable behemoth’s audience yowled after the network
seemed insufficiently supportive of the president’s electoral hopes. But Fox’s
hold on crackpot news—and viewers—is secure.
By JACK
SHAFER
11/24/2020
05:45 PM EST
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/11/24/fox-doesnt-need-to-fear-trumps-wrath-440446
Jack Shafer
is Politico’s senior media writer.
It was a
media story that sustained a thousand pundits, politicians, media critics and
reporters for a generation, and it went like this: Fox News Channel, the
devilish invention of Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes, rules the commanding
heights of conservative broadcast news! It cannot be displaced! It is the tail that
wags the dog of the Republican Party! The network that bolsters the Trump
presidency and the essential source of news that issues hourly—and often
untruthful—marching instructions for America’s populist-right millions!
But then
came Election Night 2020. Fox’s coverage earned it Judas status among Trump’s
most ardent supporters. The network's crimes of betrayal and heresy? It was
first to call Arizona for Joe Biden. In the following days, Fox joined the
consensus projection that Biden was the winner of the election and show-host
Laura Ingraham and co-host Brian Kilmeade drew criticism from the right for
meekly allowing that a Biden presidency might be in the offing. Tucker Carlson,
as Trumpie as a Trumpie can get without being a member of the family, earned
damnation for doubting the berserk election-fraud theories of then-Trump
attorney Sidney Powell.
Fox also
slow-walked the voting-fraud allegations, and these combined tilts from the
usual hard-Trump line fueled a new storyline: Fox was losing its mojo among
conservative viewers and bleeding audience and influence to upstart,
hard-to-find-on-your-dial channels like Newsmax and One America News Network
(OANN). These two channels, unlike Fox, had lent high credence to the
election-fraud stories and remained loyal to Trump. The president encouraged
the Fox hatred, disparaging the network in a Nov. 15 tweet that ended, “Many
great alternatives are forming & exist. Try @OANN & @newsmax, among
others!”
Our
president-for-the-time-being’s move to buffalo his legions of supporters away
from his historically loyal mouthpiece poses a central question about the
media-politician axis. Who possesses the real power here? The politician? The
audience? The network? And if the network, which one? The answers arrived on the
heels of the collapse of Trump’s legal ploy to overturn the election.
Today, with
the presidential election all but officially conceded, the Newsmax and OANN
insurgency has faltered. But both networks had struck a chord in Trump country
by reliably producing news that matches the priors of Trump supporters and
leaving their political preconceptions unruffled. Reject the authority of the
newsies, Trump commanded, and accept mine. And Newsmax and OANN bowed with
enthusiasm that not even Fox in its toadiest moments ever mustered. Even after
Michigan and Pennsylvania certified the Biden victory and Trump had allowed the
GSA to fund the Biden transition, Newsmax and OANN were still hyping the
election-fraud angle, stoking its audiences passions with Foxier than Fox,
pro-Trump kindling. “Bypass the big media,” as one Newsmax on-air promo
instructs viewers, taking a shot at not just CNN but Fox, too.
Both
channels have historically drawn low viewership numbers, but that’s changed at
Newsmax. One top Newsmax show, which usually hovers around the 58,000-viewer
mark, recently attracted a record 1.1 million viewers, only a couple of million
shy of a top-ranked Fox show running in the same time slot. The idea that Fox
could be outflanked on the harder right was supported by a recent Wall Street
Journal report that a Trump-friendly private equity company had approached
Newsmax to buy or invest in it. Suddenly, the prospect of extra-Trumpie news
networks competing with Fox and supplanting it for conservative primacy seemed
possible.
Predictions
of Fox’s diminution—however stirring they might be to liberals—must clear
several obstacles before they can be taken seriously. Again and again, Fox has
proved itself resourceful in replacing “star” show hosts like Megyn Kelly and
Bill O’Reilly with new versions of the same thing, such as Ingraham and
Carlson, and carrying on after the departure of network auteur Roger Ailes. For
another example, when Fox’s favorite presidential candidates have
underperformed—such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio in 2016—it’s been quick to
dismount for a winning candidate like Trump and pretend that it always
supported him. For another thing, viewership habits are extraordinarily hard to
break. In many households, Fox burns like a winter hearth all day long, as
background, diversion and even rapt viewing. Audiences have to search their
cable dials for the alt-Fox networks or download the OTT apps. Even if they do
in times of peak interest like the “election fraud” episode, how many will
remain after the hubbub subsides? As Biden moves into the White House and the
election fraud story turns to vapor, we can expect Fox to reclaim most of its
defecting audience by going full-bore against Biden with its superior
production values and much more talented news and opinion anchors.
The
mismatch between the Newsmax and OANN pair and Fox cannot be exaggerated. As
data published in the Financial Times shows, the contest isn’t really two
Davids and one Goliath as much as it is between two dust motes and the burning
sun. Fox is expected to reap $2.9 billion in revenue this year compared with
Newsmax’s teensy $26 million and OANN’s only slightly less pitiful $48 million.
More than half of those Fox revenues come from the affiliate fees that the
cable operator pays to carry the channel, which means that if you’re a Democrat
and your cable package includes Fox, you’re putting about $1.65 in Rupert’s
piggy bank every month (96 cents for CNN and 29 cents for MSNBC). At Fox,
they’ll probably say a prayer of thanks on Thursday as they carve the turkey,
expressing joy that it is two underfunded, amateurish operations attacking them
from the right instead of a repositioned-to-the-right CNN or MSNBC.
What of the
argument that one of the alt-Fox networks could become competitive by adding
Trump to the programming schedule? Good luck. The backers of Current TV and
then Al Jazeera America poured millions into cable trying to launch viable,
quasiliberal networks to compete directly with incumbents CNN and MSNBC. They
failed. I suppose you could pay Trump $100 million a year to host a weekday
show to swell ratings, but you can’t construct a network around a single tent
pole. Besides, the Trump audience is already backed into the viewership of
Newsmax and OANN. Without a doubt, given the right producers, Trump could put
on a terrific tractor-pull of a show, but will his words convey the same
valency as those spoken at his rallies or from the White House? But even a hit
Trump show would leave competitors miles behind Fox. Also, the man is 74 years
old, making him an old horse for any network to bet on let alone ride. On the
plus side, the fact that nearly 74 million voted for him indicates the upside
potential of the Trump audience. He was, after all, a better TV show host than
he was a president. (Newsmax CEO Christopher Ruddy says he won’t turn his
network into Trump TV but is willing to consider a weekly Trump show.)
Newsmax and
OANN may have temporarily outflanked Fox by more perfectly echoing Trump’s
contention that the election was stolen from him for days after Fox largely
abandoned that line, but what special ingredient do they have now? The downside
of news organization embracing disinformation, such as the stolen election
story, is that reality has a way of interceding and eventually nullifying it.
The easiest path is to devise or adopt another disinformation scramble, a
technique Fox has already perfected. You may recall the heavy breathing Fox
gave the Benghazi scandal, the Seth Rich murder conspiracy, Obama birtherism, and
the hydroxychloroquine hype, just to name a few of its grand scoops that when
pfft. If Newsmax and OANN think they can maneuver around the Murdoch empire by
promoting grander crackpot stories than Fox, they can expect a surprise. Fox is
the master of this type of coverage, and unlike Newsmax and OANN, it knows when
to discard a news angle and find a new one.
Newsmax and
OANN do have one thing going for them. Misinformation masquerading as news
clots the Internet and the cable dial not so much because producers create it
but because consumers demand it: It’s a demand-side problem, not a supply-side
one. As long as viewers seek confirmation of every utterance by a prolific liar
like Donald Trump, there will be a guaranteed place for outfits like Newsmax and
OANN. But just as surely, if Fox doesn’t turn its back completely on that game,
it will bestride the right-wing mediaverse for years to come.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário