I concede up front that what follows may well be a classic of the, “No duh” genre of punditry. But here goes, anyway.
Regarding Fox firing Tucker Carlson: Some way, some how this is mainly about money. We are after all talking Rupert Murdoch and NewsCorp, a media empire that for 40-plus years has demonstrated no — as in zero — concern about reputational damage from spewing reckless sleaze, bigotry and flagrant disinformation. Carlson wasn’t fired because he embarrassed Fox.
His deep dives and happy wallows in all of his trademark racist and sexist ugliness could hardly have concerned Fox to the point that it would fire … it’s most profitable prime time host. He was, after all, following the implicit direction of the company’s business strategy.
Now, that said, the other edge of the sword with a “star” who has trafficked in gross transgressions against common social decency is that the bills for such behavior really do start to add up. As you may have followed in the wake of Fox’s $787.5 million payout to Dominion Voting Services, NewsCorp will be able to deduct a fat chunk of those damages on it’s taxes. (I know, I know. Like me, you’re wondering how Rupert Murdoch hasn’t long ago reduced his U.S. tax obligations to nothing.) But then — after the damages — there’s the premiums Fox will have to pay for the production insurance that covers some if not all of the Dominion settlement.
I haven’t been able to find anyone estimating what kind of increases we might be talking about here. But if I were the CFO of whatever company covers Fox, and I were forced to write a check for … hundreds of millions … to cover damages that should have been mitigated if not avoided entirely if the customer had effective management, I know my next move would be to hand them a premium increase worth five or ten times Carlson’s $20 million annual salary. Especially when you consider Smartmatic and all the other lawsuits queued up for pretty much the same corporate behavior.
Based on reporting from last night and this morning, there are suggestions that Carlson’s snarky shots at Fox managers like CEO Suzanne Scott, (who is, excuse me, fully culpable in everything that has gone on), is a factor in Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch souring on Carlson. But please, the guy was a major profit center. Who really cares if he slags his boss-in-name-only once in a while?
Personally, I’m more inclined to suspect that the Carlson redacted in those … hilarious … Fox internal e-mails/texts is more damaging than we can currently imagine. (See link above.) So damaging that Fox knows Smartmatic’s lawyers, who can use the Dominion depositions as a starting point, already have them boxed into a corner for a settlement larger than Dominion’s … with another thud of insurance premium increases to follow. Not to mention shareholder lawsuits.
There seems to be little doubt that Carlson had few fans within Fox corporate or its newsroom. The guy was out free ranging thanks to the cash he was bringing in from the audience of 3 million he guaranteed D-list advertisers night after night. But, as with Roger Ailes and Bill O’Reilly before him, at some point all the impunity big ratings buys you isn’t enough.
I never cease to love reminding people that Bill O’Reilly, once thought as untouchable as Carlson, paid one woman … $32 million out of his own pocket to settle her claims against him, claims that included, “repeated harassment, a nonconsensual sexual relationship and the sending of gay pornography and other sexually explicit material to her.” And she, for the record, was one of six women Fox and O’Reilly paid off.
Point being that a sense of titanic impunity quite often leads to deeply squalid misbehavior, of a kind that creates very large bills for both aggressors and their employers.
With that in mind, I give you this from the suit Carlson’s former producer Abby Grossberg has filed against Fox.
Who replaces Carlson is a topic for another rant. But Fox’ business dilemma is clear and fascinating. Those three million loyal viewers, hungry for anything Fox tells them will not be satisfied with some old school Republican nattering on about capital gains and marginal tax rates. That crowd tunes in for the hysterical hellfire … a shtick that appears to be costing Fox/NewsCorp more and more money with every passing year and superstar host.
Must be some good stuff in one of the discoveries of one of the many pieces of existential litigation Fox is dealing with.
Assuming we survive the current unpleasantness, I hope future historians give full weight to the damage done to democracy by the Murdoch clan. And for no better reason than money. They are a miserable collection of humans IMHO and make the rich people portrayed on all those artsy shows I don’t watch look sympathetic by comparison.
You know, in a certain light you remind me of Logan Roy.
Yeah, I think almost anyone could be successful in that slot–again, provided that they give the audience what it wants. But the audience is certainly there.
I think some aspect of this firing has to be due to the Murdoch’s asserting dominance–Tucker was too big for his britches, time to take him down. Remind all of the on air talent that Fox provides the audience, not the “talent”.
It’s pretty clear Tucker thought himself immune to control from Fox’ hapless e-suite crowd. But he was making Rupert A LOT of money. For that reason I think the financial downsides of keeping him around tilted the decision to fire him. But you are right, I’m sure, that Rupert believes THEY bring the eyeballsa and anyone they drop in their will win the demo. BUT … can they control the next O’Reilly/Carlson monster they create? Also … I’m thinking this Abby Grossberg business has legs … .
Murdoch has a tough balancing act in the post-Tucker era.
On the one hand, he runs the risk of being branded by Tucker lovers and Fox competitors as RINO-TV, which would seem to be a financial disaster for him.
On the other, he needs to get control of that undisciplined beast before it costs him a lot more in the future.
Not easy.