Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Stop Supporting Fox News or You'll Have Blood on Your Hands
In a letter released today, Tides CEO and founder Drummond Pike called on advertisers to stop supporting Fox News.
Dear Fox Advertiser,
I am writing to ask your company to take a simple step that may well save lives in the future. And it is not unimportant that taking this action will remove your company and its products from any connection to what could very likely be an unpleasant tragedy, should things remain as they are today. On behalf of my organization, and many others like it, I ask that you cease advertising on the Fox News Channel.
This is neither a hollow request, nor one rhetorically made. There is an urgency to it born of our own direct experience as the target of a would-be assassin inspired by Fox's Glenn Beck Show.
On July 19th of this year, I arrived at our San Francisco office to learn that a misguided person carrying numerous guns and body armor had been on his way to start a "revolution" by murdering my colleagues and me. The Oakland Police Department called to tell us that, following a 12 minute shootout with the California Highway Patrol, law enforcement officials arrested an assailant who had targeted the Tides Foundation, an organization which I founded and currently serve as CEO, and the ACLU for violence. To say we were "shocked" does not adequately describe our reaction. Imagine, for a moment, that you were us and, had it not been for a sharp eyed highway patrolman, a heavily armed man in full body armor would have made it to your office with the intent to kill you and your colleagues. His motive? Apparently, it was because the charitable, nonpartisan programs we run are deemed part of a conspiracy to undermine America and the capitalist system, which is hogwash.
Although not a political organization, the Tides Foundation has been a frequent target of misinformation, propaganda, and outright lies by Fox News' Glenn Beck. Since his arrival at Fox in early 2009, Beck has repeatedly vilified Tides, suggesting we are intent on "creat[ing] a mass organization to seize power." He accuses the foundation of indoctrination and says we are "involved in some of the nastiest of the nasty." Beck tells viewers that Tides has "funneled" money to "some of the most extreme groups on the left" and that our mission is to "warp your children's brains and make sure they know how evil capitalism is." In total, prior to the attempted rampage, Beck had attacked the Tides Foundation 29 times. On September 28th, more than a month after the shooting, Beck reiterated his focus on the Tides Foundation, warning, "I'm coming for you." In jailhouse interviews, the gunman confessed he views Beck as a "schoolteacher" who "blew my mind." My would-be killer admitted that Beck "give[s] you every ounce of evidence you could possibly need" to commit violence.
Beck is a self-described "Progressive Hunter" who relies on violent rhetoric. Do you really think that the millions of Americans who describe themselves as "progressive" need to be "hunted down"? If so, to what end?
For hours every day on radio and television, Beck pits American against American, telling his audience that our country is under attack by a demonic Nazi-like regime seeking to destroy all that is great about America while insisting it's up to his viewers to resist and revolt. He warned his audience that "these are the most dangerous two years of our republic. Because in the end, in revolutions, the real dangerous killers show up." Beck even compared our government to vampires while instructing his viewers to "drive a stake through the heart of the bloodsuckers" and pretended to poison Speaker Pelosi on television. A few months later, Gregory Giusti was was arrested for repeatedly threatening House Speaker Nancy Pelosi -- including threatening to destroy her home -- because he was upset over health care reform. The man's mother told a local news station he listens to those with "really radical ideas," adding, "I'd say Fox News or all of those that are really radical."
When I started the Tides organizations 35 years ago, I did so in the very American belief that ordinary citizens had a role to play in our democratic process. It was, I thought, the responsibility of everyone to become engaged in our civic life, and for years we've worked with thousands of Americans to do just that. And, while we support progressive values and goals, we respect the rights and voices of those with whom we disagree on issues. Never in our history have we tolerated employees or grantees that support those who would do harm to others. By supporting Fox News Channel, you and your company are risking your reputation and good standing because they are doing just this.
As you may know, a coordinated advertiser boycott by Media Matters and Color of Change, an online civil rights group, has caused Glenn Beck's Fox News show to lose over 100 sponsors. Despite the campaign's success, Fox insists it has had no impact on the channel's profitability because the overall demand for advertisements on Fox has remained stable. Companies are still paying to advertise on Fox News, but their ads are simply moved to a different time of day. Thus, businesses that pay to broadcast commercials on Fox News are subsidizing Glenn Beck's television show by continuing to pump money into the network. It has become clear that the only way to stop supporting Beck is to stop supporting Fox News.
I respectfully request that you bring this matter of your company's sponsorship of hate speech leading to violence to the attention of your fellow directors as soon as possible. I believe no responsible company should advertise on Fox News due to its recent and on-going deplorable conduct.
While we may agree to disagree about the role our citizens and our government should play in promoting social justice and the common good, there should be no disagreement about what constitutes integrity and professionalism and responsibility in discourse - even when allowing for and encouraging contending diverse opinions intelligently argued. This is not a partisan issue. It's an American issue. No one, left, right or center, wants to see another Oklahoma City.
The next "assassin" may succeed, and if so, there will be blood on many hands. The choice is yours. Please join my call to do the right thing in this regard and put Fox News at arm's length from your company by halting your advertising with them.
Sincerely,
Drummond Pike
CEO and Founder, Tides
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
118 Comments so far
Show AllI have very little time to watch TV so I don't spend any of it watching Fox News. Can anybody tell me some major advertisers on that channel so I can write to them? Or, if no response is forthcoming, boycott them?
Every man woman and child in this country has blood on their hands... This empire must end..
I don't watch fox news either, I do watch fox business and their advertisers are almost exculsivly Stock Brokerage firms.
>^^<
I love the cheerleader babes, and I love to watch the fatcats sweat when the DOW drops 50pts
It may be just me (I don't have a TV, so watch it only occassionally), but Faux News has far less commercials than the other (more liberal) news stations. MSNBC may well spend twice as much time making you listen to their sponsors than Faux does.
This is not a plug for Faux, just a warning that what funds Faux is probably not anxious to reveal itself. and I hope you are reading everything into that, that I intend you should.
Maybe the American NAZI Party can't afford a spot, Rupert Murdoch didn't get rich giving anything away :)
>^^<
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who will guard the guardians, watch the watchers, etc?)
Hello RichardsCatz,
As a matter of fact Rupert Murdoch did get rich by giving things away especially media both print and TV. He subsidized them to the tune of millions of dollars before making one penny more than he spent in the first year of net profit and he will continue to use the rest of his empire to allow current money losing media to broadcast (spew) his point of view (venomous propaganda).
that might be a reason they're eager to expand into Canada. But that might not work out so well for them. The harpy gov't is doing their best to do an end run around the CRTC to approve a fox channel in Canada. But if fox pulled the stuff in Canada that they do in the States, they'd get their butts sued by nearly every special interest group there is up here.
Hmmm, maybe it would be a good idea for them to bite off a bit more than they can chew....
The Canadian viewer would think
a) That it is a satirical comedy network; and
b) that it is not very funny.
Actually there are some laws that I'm quite sure fox would break up here. Not quite sure of them, but I have no doubt at all that they'd get their butts handed to them in a number of court cases, human rights violations, and god only knows what else.
No, we do know the difference between satire and delusion; or at least I fucking hope we do...
Typical CD. Everybody bitches, nobody provides a useful answer to 3645's question. I'd like to know, too: Who can we be writing angry letters to? Whom should we boycott? Who are the actual supporters behind Fox News [sic]. This is a practical, useful question.
Rupert Murdoch......... Thats it, he makes the decisions. Staffers are just drones.
>^^<
about what you'd expect
or watch the network to see who advertises and then write the advertisers and tell them that you'll not buy their products as they support fox.
Don't use cable television is one solution. As indicated below a fraction of the revenues you pay for cable goes to Fox. therefore if you have cable you are supporting them to a small degree. My answer is to not use cable television, tell my friends not to use television and turn the mind warpin' propaganda machine off.
Three of my Obamabot friends watch American Idol and other programs on FOX TV. For 40 years I have embraced the concept that the only worthwhile vote working class people cast are the votes they cast in the marketplace. For that reason alone, I could never watch the FOX network.
If I recommened that they stop supporting FOX they wouldn't understand. If I told them I voted for Nader in the past 4 elections they would tell me that I was undermining Democrats even though their supporting FOX undermines Democrats more than my votes.
Glenn Beck just shows what a $200,000 a year coke habit can do to you.
Turn off the TV entirely and save you money for something worthwhile; it dysinforms you, wastes time, hurts your brain and funds the fascists. In Orwell's 1984, turning off the telescreen was a privilage reserved to the inner party -- but you can do that now.
Do internet, read books, rent videos, pursue a hobby, talk to friends and family, cook good food, get in touch with nature -- or enjoy the silence and meditate. Don't be part of the awful propaganda machine.
That's what I do.
And all that money from not having to pay the Comcast cable leaches was kind of nice too.
BLUE: You seem to be advocating a rather Libertarian view here. Do you think it matters if the few hundred of us on CD turn off our televisions (I did 4 years ago), when it is the right wing crowd that feeds on Beck's words like caged animals thrown raw meat?
In other words, you can be at home NOT watching TV, but that won't stop the angry crowd from smashing your door down IF enough of them get mad enough and convinced that YOU are their enemy.
The wisdom of a few is not a firm guarantee against the folly of the many.
It is possible to find out what is going on in the world without the TV. You can hear the murderous crowd coming much better if your TV is not spewing garbage. You obviously have internet.
Sioux Rose - so true... the CD true lefties/progressives could likely all fit in double-decker bus. Though it may be fun supporting one another on this forum, we are outnumbered by the Beck T Buggers 100,000/1. I meet them daily when I take my dogs to the park. I try to be civil, yet they suspect something is not quite right when I ask them: "By the way, we've been at war in Afghanistan going on ten years now... can you tell me exactly what we are doing there?" I have mentally catalogued the many responses and the two most frequent are... (I shit you not). (1) "We're fighting them there so we don't have to fight then here"; (2) "They're still searching for Osama bin Laden". Now you know for a fact that you are dealing with brain-dead zombies when you get responses like these... but, this seems to be the Umerka of the 21st Century. Glad my passport is current and I have friends oversea's.
Bye the bye... I seem to have noted that our mutual friend (CNR) aka demented screech-monkey, turned up on another thread today... reinvented simply as 'B'. So, 'B' careful where you step since the 'feces thrower' seems to still want to play.
Regards...kz
I don't see it as libertarian -- just common sense. I have said [this] to people other than on CD, but what it comes down is that I can decide what I do, but not [what] everyone else [does]. That's all I can ever do, and there are never any guarantees.
That is the essence of libertarianism - seeing yourself as an island rather than as a social being.
I can remember being at a festival around 1970 and a performer screamed from the stage "throw away your TV!!" That seemed so odd. I have never owned one, myself. But that was a time of an enormous shift in the way people looked at social and political issues. It was dramatic, and seemed to happen overnight. The general theme was "I can decide what I do, but not everyone else does." A lot of the rhetoric at the time sounded silly and self-indulgent. Little did we know that we would still be hearing the same cliches and platitudes being endlessly repeated 40 years later, and presented as an alternative to political organizing and resistance.
Between 1967 and 1970 there was a massive influx of upper middle class white kids into the Left. They commandeered, and then destroyed the Left. A combination of fear - "4 dead in Ohio" - boredom, and beckoning middle class lifestyles and professional careers led the newcomers to abandon the movement, and they gutted it on their way out. At the time people said "I am not quitting. I still have the same beliefs. It is just that now I am going to work within the system, so I can really make a difference and change things from inside!" That led to the complete collapse of the political Left, and a steady rise of the extreme right wing.
An island? Like I CAN decide what other people are going to do? Or SHOULD?
What? Have TV police (recruit them form the spelling police...) and go around forcing people to turn their TVs off -- or raid the well-funded corporate studios and force them to show better programs? You think that kind of authoritarian force could work, even if the left DID have anywhere near that much power? What next? Neo-Bolsheviks, cultural cleaning and re-education camp? How is that better than the authoritarianism and despotism from the right?
This is not rejecting political organizing, but that has to be through people becoming aware, and through consensus, or it just makes things worse.
I don't have the power to force other people to stop watching TV, and I don't WANT the power to do that. I don't have the One Ring, nor want it. I have trouble enough deciding what I should do -- but I'm sure as hell going to resist anyone else trying to decide for me, or having anyone decide what other people should do and force it on them -- which is the root of many of the problems we have now. Being a social being does not mean trying to dictate to other people.
Great Post!
>^^<
No idea what you are talking about here. Maybe you replied to the wrong post accidentally.
I didn't say anything about forcing anyone to do anything. No idea where that came from.
It came from 'island' after I said I can decide what to do myself but I can't decide what others do. What's that alternative? To decide what others do -- but that requires forcing them to do it, or I would be persuading or reaching consensus, but not deciding for them.
There are two problems with taking any action to stop FOX broadcasting or people from viewing it, aside from the practicallity: one is using force and being authoritarian, but the other is we want to make people aware and decide for themselves they shouldn't watch it, or they will still keep thinking badly and collect garbage dysinformation from elsewhere. The symptoms of a disease can kill kill you, but just curing the symptoms is not curing the disease.
The defining core of libertarianism is not only personal freedom so much as personal independence including social interaction and influence -- in the sense that democratic socialism supports personal freedom but also interdependence and consensus, and even compromise. The right thinks socialism means a loss of personal freedom, but that's not correct.
You are so right. I turned off my TV over a year ago. With the money saved I can get books and give to charities that mean something to the world, and keep my blood pressure down.
excellent post. i"m with you. No consumerist beam into my son's brain either. .14 years of no TV. More time to rattle the cage.
"Politics? FXCK Politics!. Politics is Living."-Abbie Hoffman
On Point bluepilgrim ! wise words
Bluepilgrim, truer words were never spoken. I think I stopped watching TV in 1986. I still have the TV though -it's one of those with rabbit ear aerials. I am told it won't work now as coverage is no longer analog and it would need a converter box from digital to analog.
Occasionally I am in a location where there is little choice, other than earplugs, to avoid listening to the Mass Media schlock emitter. In this case I do things like analysing the coverage to see how many units of fluff are beamed out for each unit of information (disinformation?)
It is distressingly high and in one case I determined 20 minutes of sensationalist real time coverage could be distilled into two short sentences of tangible information.
I wonder if a person could start a theme like WeightWatchers or perhaps more appropriately one of the addiction help groups - "I gained 10 hours in just 2 days with TV Busters"?
Right on, Pilgrim. Blow up your TV. If that is where you find repose, entertainment, information, the hook is set and you are being reeled in.
Speaking of "dysinforms," your post doesn't show much in the way of being profoundly INFORMED. Spelling privilege as privilage, added to dysinforms hardly suggests a poster who is given to serious reading or study.
Pardon me for living -- but I have acquired dyslexia due to my fibromyalgia, and includes forgetting how to spell.
'Dysinformed' however is quite deliberate, echoing 'dysfunctional'.
If that's the biggest criticism you can make to what I wrote I'm not too concenred.
That's the spelling police. for ya :)
>^^<
RICHARD: If there WERE spelling police, I'd knock your door down in a heart beat. If anyone deserves to be called to the mat for ridiculously poor spelling--ALWAYS; it is YOU.
BLUE PILGRIM: Maybe you don't realize it, but your comment reinforces a status quo wherein people are being completely programmed by false media AND advertisers; and then inverts the paradigm to suggest that those of us who are aware of this, who recognize what it's doing to society (in the form of a net melt-down/dumb-down effect) are the ones evidencing authoritarian character traits.
That's like the Nazis stating that those who stand against their trespasses--into control of the mass psyche--are the ones guilty of totalitarian tactics.
Maybe you really don't get it. And if that's the case, I highly recommend that you take the time to view "Century of the Self" on You-tube; so that you can understand the meaning of my posts.
You compare me to a Nazi? How refreshing... although I don't know that Godwin would approve.
I saw Century of Self long ago, along with the other Adam Curtis films; I'm aware of Edward Bernays (his books are available on line); I am aware of and have read Lakoff and other cognitive scientists and various other materials on propaganda and linguistic cognition; I know about Korzybski and general semantics, etc. etc. There is also some decent material on the web about 'political persuasion (which I have read), and also on neurolinguistic programming. I was also reading and posting at the Rockridge Institute site, and some others, including semiotics sites. I've been studying this stuff for years and years -- for decades.
When I first went to a meeting at the local peace group some ten years ago I told them then that the key to all of this was the media.
I am also familiar with authoritarianism -- I read Altmeyer's book, and am a member of the discussion group about it.
I am not quite the idiot you apparently think I am. I understand the meaning of your posts just fine. But I'm saying that with the funding and corporate and government connections involved this can't be handled with a head on approach. You don't try to oppose power with lesser power, just so you can be steamrolled or ignored, and you don't try to FORCE people what to watch or think -- that just sets up defensive mechanisms and reinforces their own beliefs (but I'm not going to try to write a monograph on the subject here).
I will say this much: the 'left' and 'progressives' and anyone else are not immune to propaganda -- it works on perceptual and neural levels, largely through subliminal and subtle, abstractive, ideational and linguistic proximity binding -- the classic 'big lie' told over and over, and simply perceiving a meme often enough reinforces it as legitimate. That's the way the brain works.
The first step in combatting this is too get as many people as possible to turn the damned off and stop getting brainwashed themselves so they are able notice the covert as well as overt messages being put out. Take the log out of one's own eye, so to speak. Only then can one understand the insidious content and framing of a message (or meme) and devise an effective counter to it. Yet, it's largely a losing battle simply because of the lack of 'air time' -- the volume of the propaganda machine. More effective is to anticipate what is coming down the road and start dropping memes which people can pick up on when they are faced with the unpleasant circumstances they will face -- but this is more difficult. One can also invoke old memes and beliefs they hold, such as 'one should work for one's money' and weave into that the fact that the banksters do NOT work for the money they get -- and THAT can resonate with them. Another meme is that the corporations, and media, are not trustworthy, and most people have experienced that.
There is no royal road in this. It has to be done one person at a time simply because there is no significant progressive mass media. It's like spreading seeds all over which may sprout when the season is right for them.
I could go on for pages and pages -- and have in writings I've done in the past -- but don't think I am not aware or conversant with the problems, or the approaches which are or are not effective. What is needed is clever guerilla warfare, not open combat with a superior force.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_spelling_reform
I'm not looking for spelling reform -- I don't care if anyone else wants to do that, but I used to be very good at spelling, and now I'm not, and my grammar goes haywire too -- it's acquired dyslexia, and some other cognitive problems at times -- it's part of my brain and nervous system not working right from fibrofog, and sleep disruption. I have trouble walking too, and with basic arithmetic, and other things don't work like they used to or should -- but I don't have to shrivel up and die just yet; I can struggle some -- 'rage against the dying of the light'.
If anyone is that upset over some spelling and grammar errors they don't have to read my posts.
Blue I do most all of these since I was a hippy in 67 ........ but do still have to shoot up on my NFL football every so often. Maybe if the Vikings keep failing this year I will get a mentor and take the 12 step program and heal myself from this barbaric shit sport.
As to fox it's one big infomercial for the corporate death hold on the planet and it's inhabitants!
Corporations are really the Doctor Strange Love's 'doomsday machines in action. They are godless, soulless, juggernauts that once set in motion cannot seem to be stopped, even by themselves, as they have no off switch.
Several years ago I canceled my cable service because a friend told me that a part of my subscription fee went to Fox News. The thought of contributing even a billionth of a cent per month to Fox was beyond the pale for me.
In my view, and I realize it's a bit extreme, anyone who subscribes to a cable or satellite service that carries Fox News is a financial supporter of that network and has no right to criticize their right-wing propagandizing. If you contribute in any way to Fox, you are part of the problem.
Let's see 14 years of no cable tv bill for me is, at a clip of 50 clams per month =8400 clams in after tax dollars. That ain't chickenfeed. What's my point? Nothing. Well then there's the wear and tear factor. Wear and tear on the mind. Wanna know what TV is? It's a somnambulist machine baby. It puts one into a hypnotic stare. Then there's the wear and tear on your body. Sitting like an ass hat on my couch fattening up on food and drink watching the crappy food commercials and the non news Orwell wrote about in 1984. What was it ? The seven minute hate? Same as watching those retards on Fox. When I watch their inanities I feel like throwing my boot through the screen. I go to a gym and can watch that crap for free on the exercise machines. I use those ones that measures your heart rate. Well just yesterday I started to watch the somnambulist machine. They were beaming in some reality show that was like surreal how retarded some people are in this country,and I noticed my heart rate go up! So I turned it off. Is this a true story? No the heart rate was going at 142 and the bs on tv had no effect whatsoever. But the crap still is a depressing thing to observe. I'd rather be enriched by a good book by someone like Sinclair Lewis or Dostoyevski. My point is I agree with you 100 percent Still Standing. I want to contribute as little as possible to the corporate military complex and boy is TV a part of that. It's the propaganda ministry baby. Thanks for bringing this point up. Oh one more point. Those barrages of commercials flashing out at you and your brain, you think that's healthy? Creating needs for you. Drumming into your pea brains that you ain't worth shit unless you own a Chevy. F their shit.
"Overturn the tables, disconnect the cables"-Bob Dylan
Dear One:
I have had my TV and cable turned off for fifteen years and I so much wiser for it. My god...what did I do with all that money.....I ate, lived, and loved. I didn't learn to hate, mate, and kill.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who will guard the guardians, watch the watchers, etc?)
Hello Rico,
I find your comments interesting and without some additional technology the commercials that are shown are a royal mindf*ck. The commercials are bypassed due to prerecording the show and then skipping over the commercials. There are other sources of pollution that are less avoidable such as air pollution (try not to breathe), water pollution (no potable water for us) as well as food pollution (guess what foods are safe to consume).
Rico,
While I tend to agree with much of what you say in your posts, I have a really hard time taking you seriously when you so cavalierly throw around words like "retard" or "retarded." Back in the 50's when I was growing up, my Mom instructed us NEVER to use such language in a disparaging way because there ARE people who are indeed retarded, and using that language is hurtful to those who are and those who have family members or friends who are. Today, they are more often referred to as mentally challenged. Your posts would have more impact on a thoughtful audience if you could refrain from using the hurtful language. Many thanks for any thought you can give to this.
Quite true, as moron was once a medical term for those that were placed in custodial care usually by the state. The word having been so degraded was changed to retarded or developmentally delayed. All words have a memory or history so it is important to use the right one. How about bad speller...
truejustice- as you have requested me not to use the word in a civil and understanding way. a way in which I can understand. yes of course I will refrain from calling them that. thanks for that. I will continue to use comedy and light heartedness however in my posts as well as absurdities and contradictions. But I will on the strength of your arguement never use the word 'retard' in a disparaging way again.I will call the above said Glen Beck and RushLimbaugh as dinosaurs and squares and fascists.
I will never understand why anyone takes this pudgy assclown seriously.
yeah, and he's from my neck of the woods, too...
part of the problem is this damn network gets business to contract with them to show their channel in public spaces...I've been on vacation in remote places, only to go into the hotel lobby and find FOX on...when I ask, they say it's contractual, and they have to have it on...
dubet -
Absolutely true. Wherever I travel it seems that the hotel lobby/commons has a bigscreen with FUAX NEWS blaring 24/7. I've asked the same question as you, since I couldn't accept it as mere coincidence. The reply: "We're being paid by FOX to keep it on".
Shit... if Hitler had these kind of tools, we'd all be sprechen Deutsch by now.
Sadly, I don't see any of this having an impact and it will likely continue in its death spiral with a similar outcome as that of the 3rd Reich.
When the hotel employee tells you they are being paid by Fox to play their news, you can respond by saying "and I'll pay my hotel fare at another hotel that does not play Fox news". These corporations need to know that they are losing business because they chose to accept money from Fox. How else to get them to respond?