******************** THIS BLOG HAS MOVED TO WWW.LEGALINSURRECTION.COM ********************

This blog is moving to www.legalinsurrection.com. If you have not been automatically redirected please click on the link.

NEW COMMENTS will NOT be put through and will NOT be transferred to the new website.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Beck Boycotters' Waterloo

Ed Morrissey at HotAir has the rundown on the faltering boycott of Glenn Beck's Fox News show. As predicted here, the failure of the boycott has numerous benefits.

What's more, the people pushing this boycott have stepped in it this time. There is no indication that Fox News will give in to the pressure. Fox News understands that this boycott nominally is against Beck, but really is against Fox News.

This is not the first boycott Fox News has broken. Remember when Democratic presidential candidates refused to appear on Fox News or allow Fox News to host a debate? Barack Obama eventually gave an interview to Bill O'Reilly, as McCain-Palin picked up steam.

In fact, Beck is planning a counter-attack against the organizers of the boycott when Beck returns from vacation next week. Beck and Fox News will use the boycott to expose the seamy side of the left-wing campaign against Fox News. The hunters will become the hunted.

Fox News will want to break this boycott to protect O'Reilly, Hannity and the franchise. The boycotters picked the wrong network.

Beyond that, the boycotters picked the wrong issue. Beck is not alleged to have made racist comments. This is not a Don Imus situation.

Rather, Beck allegedly made a false accusation of racism, which is so much a part of politics now that no one gets outraged anymore over it (except maybe me). So beyond the nutroots who have jumped on the bandwagon, the public is not going to be clamoring for Beck to be taken off the air. The boycotters picked the wrong issue.

Wrong network, wrong issue. Will this be the boycotters' Waterloo? Let's hope so, and that it also signals the end of the use of race as a political weapon.

UPDATE: Don Surber reports that the boycott has helped Beck's rating.

Related Posts:
Beck Boycott A Defining Battle In Racial Politics
Ten Top Reasons I'm Happy About The Glenn Beck Boycott
"Race" As Political Weapon

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook


  1. It seems that race will always be a political issue!

  2. The advertisers don't buy time on a particular program. The buy a bloc of prime time from Fox and pay a rate determined by audience size and demographics. Fox has great discretion where they place the ads.

    Boycott Beck? Move a non-targeted company to Beck and move the target to another show. The boycotters have to pressure a new target every day. Fail.

  3. You wrote yesterday: "The boycott stems from a remark Beck made calling Barack Obama a racist..."

    Obama sat through 20 years' worth of the Rev. Wright's blatantly racist sermons. In my mind, that absolutely implies that Obama is a racist. And here's a black Phd who agrees.


  4. When all else fails, pull the race card!

  5. Calling Obama a racist might be labeled 'just another distraction' in the New Hegemony; but that doesn't mean it isn't a valid assessment.

  6. I think you might be missing the point -do the advertisers want to be associated with a man who calls Obama a racist and claims that Obama has a problem with the white race; it has nothing to do with forcing Faux sNooze to do anything - what it has to do with is what do the advertisers want to have identified with their products.

    Of course advertisers will fill as long as they do not having their products associated with Beck's speech; I am sure that will not be a problem.

    This is a project at spockosbrain and I say more power to him. I boycott places myself; I have no expectation that what I do will affect them but I do not buy their products and I tell the people around me what my problem is and let them make their own decisions.

  7. @kitty - wtf? you found a black phd to agree - so effing what! Jeeze, live and die by your own opinions; you do not need someone else to validate you. I can find a black person to support any position you want - heck, I even found a place where you can rent one:

  8. Vive l'Empereur!

    ¡Bienvenido/a lector/a! Esta aventura por recorrer el Mundo de la mano del Emperador Napoleón Bonaparte (1769-1821) nació el 30 de Abril 2009, día en el que además, Napoleón vendió Luisiana a los Estados Unidos por 80 millones de francos.


  9. During my month long stay in the USA and Canada I had the misfortune to be exposed to the CNN news. The tragedy of CNN is that they had 24 hour focus on Michael Jackson. It was a great evening when one of the men sitting in the lounge with myself and some other women in an hotel in Conneticut had more than enough and demanded a change of station. We were all content when it was changed to Fox. We did not have to listen to what was on the TV.

    On a more serious side though, was the CNN coverage of the ousting of Zelaya in the Honduras. It was not a coup, like the one in Iran. What was extremely disturbing about the coverage was the partisan behaviour of the reporter who was in the Honduras. If ever there was a reason to boycott a station then the advertisers should be boycotting CNN over that reportage, and especially the manner in which the reporter played a role in faux photography.

    The majority in the Honduras do not want Zelaya to return. What he did was against their Constitution. No American should be supporting Zelaya and the POTUS should keep his beak out of the situation.

    What was also disappointing is the way that CNN and Reuters and others misrepresented the real coup in Iran, and also their failure to report on what has been happening to the ordinary people who were imprisoned and tortured by the illegitimate regime.

    After seeing some of these idiots viz Maddow and a few others on the TV I am glad that I am not exposed to them here in Australia. I just hope that they get pulled off the air and the sooner the better. They are the most annoying individuals with their bias and their stupid opinions.

  10. @maggie - Wow - so Australia suffers from unabashed wingnuttery too! You are saying that attempting to change the constitution via constitutionally mandated techniques is unconstitutional but circumventing the the constitution with a military coup is constitutional? I do not know where in to start - er, I will just go with Barney "What planet are you from?"

  11. grumpy old man: Oh puh-leeeze. Posting that link has nothing whatsoever to do with validating my opinion.


  12. @kitty - nor does your link to "black phd"