Should Progressives Appear on Fox News?

Should Progressives Appear on Fox News?


Let’s go to our caller from the two zero five
area code. Who’s calling today from two zero five. Hey David, this is John in Franklin, Tennessee. Hey John, what’s up? So I got a question for you regarding uh,
Fox news and just I guess progressive and progressive voices going on Fox news segments.
I mean, I understand that you’ve done that a handful of times. I’ve done it twice. You got it twice. Okay. Yeah, this is more
related to I guess you recently crystal ball and you know other folks like E N sorry, you’re breaking up. John. I heard you
say crystal ball and I don’t know who else you mentioned. I said Michael Tracy and Glenn Greenwald.
Um, you know, they really go on and Tucker Carlson or Sean Hannity and just need to get
your take on if you believe that’s helpful for the progressive or if you think it’s harmful
or if they’re really just kind of playing into maybe Tucker or Shawn’s emo as it stands
for that show. I have not seen any of those appearances.
So the devil is in the details and what matters is what is the appearance. Like Tucker Carlson
is an expert at framing up conversations in a way that is ultimately beneficial to his
worldview, which is a sort of non interventionist right wing, um, with a of at least claimed
anti elitism that whether it’s real or not, I don’t know. I mean certainly Tucker is,
is one of the elites in in a sense, I’ve not seen any of those appearances. I think generally
Progressive’s going on. Fox news is perfectly fine. I’ve done it if you’re well prepared
and if you can sort of take control of the framing and um, uh, do a good job in espousing
your view. Not in a way where you get kind of pushed into a corner and used as a useful
idiot. I think it’s great to go on Fox news. It doesn’t always work that way. But again,
th the three appearances you mentioned, I don’t even know all the people you mentioned.
I don’t know who, who Michael, the Michael person you mentioned is a, and I haven’t seen
them so I wouldn’t be able to say for sure. But ideologically I have no problem with Progressive’s
going on Fox news if they’re well prepared to do it. Gotcha. All right. Thank you. All right, thank you for the call. Great to
hear from you

Author:

100 thoughts on “Should Progressives Appear on Fox News?”

  • Whatever your ideology, if you have the courage of your convictions you should have no issue going on Fox and the like. Make your case if your case is strong enough.

  • If anything they should go on there to say Fox "News" should burn in hell for the damage they've caused to all the uninformed people that Want to be informed about the world we live in and fell into their trap of pushing a false narrative of this perpetual propaganda machine.

  • they should go on fox in exchange for a legally binding agreement that all fox revenues for those segments get donated to an ungodly liberal charity like planned parenthood, or similar

  • If you get the chance to educate the uneducated viewers of Fox News (which you have to be to watch Fox News thinking it's a serious news channel) then it's worth doing as it may open eyes

  • They should, but they can't expect to succeed in the appearance. That's almost impossible.
    It would be very valuable symbolically. It suggests that progressives are conscious and evolved about their convictions, rigorous as individuals and as participants in political discourse, and possessing of moral certitude.

    Most importantly, it shows that they're not afraid– that they're above being primitively pigeonholed and bullied, and that they can prove objectively that they have a higher and more honorable basis for what they do and say and believe.

  • If Faux News was an honest broker, I would absolutely say, yes. But they are no better than state propaganda at this point, a glorified Alex Jones & Breitbart. Chris Wallace is the only one left on the station I would make an exception for, as he still retains some journalistic integrity

  • Well the best reason not to is that you cannot defeat their ideas in debate.
    So run away, progressives you know you're ideas don't stand up to scrutiny.

  • Molly From Michigan says:

    Absolutely helpful. Trump supporters think he is a populist. Bernie actually is a populist candidate. I’m suuuper progressive and actually considered voting for Trump iver Hillary because screw the DNC and corporate Democrats. I just don’t think moderate Democrats get how fed up Progressive’s are. And I don’t feel like DNC or moderate Democrats care, they just think we should get in line 🙄

  • Mithridates of Parthia says:

    Definitely helpful. I found Pakman’s channel because he was mentioned by other youtubers. He hasn’t changed my mind on everything, but definitely tempered my more libertarian economic ideas.

  • I'm really torn… yes because exposure both for the individual and the ideas, but no because that's not how you change minds and most of them intentionally refuse to change their minds.

  • That this question is even asked indicates how fragile and insular socialists are. Leftists prefer "me too" journalism of establishment media. Pampered poodles!

  • The Huxley Agnostic says:

    If they actually challenge FOX's own biases and bullshit, while they're on, then yes. If they're only going to let FOX use them to push their own anti-Democrat and anti-other MSM agenda, and give FOX a pass, then no.

  • If it will change just one mind, that is a step in the right direction. We need to keep talking about the issues of our time, intelligently & armed with facts, maybe one MAGA hat wearer might loosen their cap!

  • Hey David,
    U should check out my childrens book on Amazon and TELL me how much Trump is exactly like the little girl 😂 Available for download for 3.98 on Amazon .. I now call Trump an (Alley May) 😂😂😂😂😂
    Title: My name is Alley May

  • Petitio Principii says:

    Ideally only those well-prepared to do so, not the ones who'd then easily be used as real-world straw-men for progressive ideas that are not limited to the idea that one given person is spousing. I haven't watched, but I believe there were a bunch of debates of interviews between feminists and the likes of Jordan Peterson that were used like that. And unfortunately maybe in a way that's not even that much of a dishonest cherry-picking of much of "the left," but relatively common flawed notions that nevertheless help the right and far-right defend something that's not necessarily any saner, but potentially even more ridiculous and dangerous.

  • Well Bernie Sanders, Mayor Pete, and Amy Klobuchar did; Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris didn't. I don't think they should but that's my opinion.

  • Petitio Principii says:

    I'm afraid outlets like Fox would even try to select the most "authentic straw-men" types of the left in order to generalize and straw-man the left and progressives in general. The ones saying things like "gender, sex, and sexual orientations are nothing but oppressive constructs of racist capitalism! We must fight for absolute equality of outcome for all, all workers in a production line are equally owners of the entire output of the factory, but the bourgeoisie steals them the product of their labor, making capitalism nothing but a synonym for slavery! Society will only be free when everything is free for all!"

  • the comment section on fox news youtube page is mindbogglingly shocking.esp on pete who is the most "republican" candidate on the DNC….and also when amy spoke. If you let democrats talk to fox news, they are going to use everything they say and use it against them to an audience who is drinking the kool aid propaganda. There are 2 types of supporters…..republicans who hate democrats no matter what….and support trump no matter what….= fox news station viewers.

    if they already hate you the truth doesn't matter

  • TheBreaker OfWalls says:

    This caller needs to watch the Bernie Sanders FOX town hall, Kyle Kulinski panel appearances, and most recently Nomiki Konst appearance on Fox's Kennedy show panel. If they aren't afraid of pushing back. DON'T PULL A TULSI ON HANNITY, AND I'M A FAN OF TULSI, JUST A HORRIBLE INTERVIEW SHE ALLOWED HIM TO CONTROL THE NARRATIVE!

  • exiledfrommyself says:

    No. There's no point. FOX viewers live in an alternate reality and they've been trained by their master Trump to dismiss anything that doesn't fit that reality as fake news.

  • Bernhard Riemann says:

    Was this call staged?
    These two guys Greenwald and Tracey recently called you out on Twitter (they're Russian shills).
    Perhaps the caller wanted you to elaborate on these two.

  • Nah. Clearly it's better to leave any and all groups to fester and foment with themselves…… Nothing bad ever comes from echo chambers, right?

  • It should be noted that Tucker Carlson actually appeared on an episode of Ancient Aliens a few weeks ago. Just fyi. But, no; to answer the question, progressives shouldn't give Fox the time of day. MSNBC and CNN, yes, seeing as though there are at least a few younger and more thoughtful demographics who watch those channels rather than just Southerners and folks in their 70s.

  • "do nothing demonstrates" Close to 300 bills setting on Moscow Mitch's graveyard desk that he refuses to put up in the senate. It's not the demonstrates that are doing nothing. Don't here that from FAUXnews/entertainment because, well, facts.

    But if any liberals, progressive, or well any democrat with any sense goes on FAUXnews/entertaiment they better be sharp or they will get eaten alive.

  • Yes, to talk about progressive policy, like Bernie did. Not to complain about establishment Democrats and give the right ammunition. Never forget, no matter how "nice" Fox pretends to be to progressives, they are diabolical, and not on our side!

  • yes, many people only get their news from fox and this the only way to reach these people who would otherwise never get to hear progressive viewpoints

  • Michael Tracey and Glenn Greenwald went on to just agree with Tucker Carlson.
    David, Kyle and Nomiki went on to penetrate the Fox News bubble and did a great job.

  • yes!! when progressives appear on fox news, it is possible that the intellectual curiosity of a diehard fox viewer could be awakened…and if that happens just once, it’s still worth it…

  • I think it's a question that should be answered with a question. Should progressives refuse to interview certain elements of the right wing? Follow-up question, why?

    The same logic for refusing to platform an ideology also makes an argument for why it's beneficial to get one's own ideology on others' platforms. I would say there are limits. For one thing, I don't think progressive media should get on fox news to talk about other corporate media outlets. Yes, cnn and msnbc suck, but if a progressive voice undermines them on fox news without ensuring fox news doesn't walk away with a pat on the back, they're being a useful idiot.

    As well, I think there are certain hosts that a progressive should avoid. Chris Wallace will talk to a progressive with some good faith. I wouldn't say the same for Tucker Carlson. Bret Baier seems to want to maintain some semblance of honest reporting, Sean Hannity is perfectly happy working for the president.

    So, yes, progressives should appear on fox news, but they also should put some thought into what they're being asked to talk about, and who they will be talking to.

  • No. The only reason Tucker Carlson ever has leftists on his show is to either laugh at them or ingenuously link his far-right populist ideals to leftist rhetoric.

  • Glen Greenwald is far from progressive. At best, he's a moderate Libertarian who would push the narrative in favor of Neo Conservatives in hopes that individuals become so oppressed and disenfranchised that they would uprise on account of being unable to stand it anymore. He has proven this readily because he has already tried to do it.

  • I used to be against it but after seeing Bernie's town hall and seeing people like David and Kyle Kulinski on there I have changed my mind.

  • Obviously. Communication is always good. The chance of convincing conservatives is small, but real enough to count as a bonus. The main reason, however, is to humanize each other, and create enough trust for communication and cooperation on common sense grounds, to make the voters expect and demand this from their elected officials. Limiting the fights to things where the sides actually disagree would improve the situation quite a lot. Being able to make true compromises on issues of more pragmatic than ideological importance would also be quite helpful. None of this can be accomplished if the sides refuse to talk to each other.

    It's very interesting, and encouraging, to see that the ones most willing to communicate across party lines (openly in front of voters), and show respect for voters on both sides, are the true progressives — the ones who actually, truly disagree with conservatives on the ideological fundamentals. That demonstrates that communication and polite respect doesn't entail compromising your principles.

    We find goals and motivation in the world of ideas, but we have to accomplish them in this, more troublesome, physical world, and that requires communication, cooperation, occasional compromise, choosing our time and place, taking likely and unlikely allies, showing consideration and respect, and all sorts of other things that some find distasteful, or even frightening.

    Then there's the fact that Fox News is actually willing to let people speak about things MSNBC, CNN, etcetera won't. While that's not for the same reasons that progressives want to say those things, but rather their own reasons, it's still an opportunity to get the message out. It's an unlikely and uneasy alliance, based on a compromise and a gamble from both sides, but with significant potential.

  • That's a really good question. I think it IS worth it, and a good avenue to present our ideas to the mainstream by invitation…but the progressive who goes on needs to be very well prepared and familiar with each Faux's host's particular brand of chicanery in interviewing. David did an amazing job both times, and I would love to see him take on Faux news again. Ana Kasparian and Cenk Uygur too.

    I'm afraid Faux news realizes that and isn't likely going to invite them on again.

    David, I really hope you will consider speaking with Joe Rogan again. That last interview between you was fascinating and a really good one. I think he's going to be the best avenue for allowing progressives to speak.

  • I think progressives should appear on as many legitimate news outlets as exist. Unfortunately, I do not believe Fox is a legitimate news outlet, and appearing there only serves to make them appear legitimate. In my opinion, in times such as these Fox is analogous to a man yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater, and I don't think it would be a violation of the First Amendment to take away their broadcast license for spreading lies.

  • David ,, I liked how you went on FOX and started talking about how tRump F****up the N Korea situation.
    They quickly change the subject. I bet you will NOT be asked back.

  • In the timeless words of General Ackbar: "It's a trap!" 🦑  Everything about progressive appearances on their network is set up with the express intent of advancing their conservative narrative by making any progressive opinions seem dismissable, irrational, unpopular, etc., for example these appearances are almost always set up with at least 2 or more conservatives outnumbering the progressive so that the moment the progressive starts saying anything the "group" starts clutching pearls, talking over the progressive, expressing disgust or strong disagreement to drown them out, it's not even an honest debate where principles are thoughtfully discussed with the intent of reaching the truth it's just an opportunity for Fox to psychologically manipulate their viewers into believing that progressives are outnumbered, unpopular outliers who aren't part of their home group, the discussion is just a pretense to socially engineer their viewers. Fox is also usually prepared with all kinds of misleading "lie by omission" gotcha type questions, and unless you're extremely well prepared or well read for the specious arguments they've prepared for you then you'll wind up feeding into their well prepared narrative that liberals don't know what they're talking about. This is why they almost NEVER have prominent liberals appear on their network and usually target small time commentators who they suspect will easily be blindsided pushovers during the questioning, or egged into saying something controversial out of brash emotion, etc. Every once in awhile a prepared liberal slips through the cracks and it's HILARIOUS when the Fox anchors are caught off guard when they thought the person would just be a pushover, they thought David might be just such an easy mark during his appearance, which he wasn't, which is of course why they haven't invited him back on since, because a well-prepared, articulate, rational liberal who can actually clearly deconstruct their arguments only serves to break the finely crafted echo chamber they've created for their audience.

  • Bill Maher has been saying that for a long time. I’ve seen Tulsi on Fox few times. I like to hear both sides a lot of people don’t.

  • David, watch your back my friend. It is not far fetched to imagine those who oppose Mr Trump getting canned, being ostracized, removed from long held positions and dare I imagine them "disappeared". Just be on alert.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *