Thread by @GoAngelo

1/ Lots of chatter about Democratic presidential candidates partnering w/Fox News for town halls. There's a lot of confusion, assumptions and conflation swirling about.

I've been knee-deep in this for long while. Lemme unpackage and help clear some things up...

2/ At outset, recognize that we are in the middle of what is called the "upfronts." During this period, Fox News needs to sell approximately 70% of their ads for next year. Due to lots of issues, for the first time ever, they have been in crisis and were not gonna hit their marks

3/ This matters a lot in terms of forcing improvement at Fox. If they miss the marks, not only will the financial cost be massive, BUT it actually creates conditions for shareholders to sue. There's a reason Fox suspended Pirro during this period. To help save face. Moving on...

4/ So there are actually two distinct issues being conflated, which I think is adding confusion. They are:

#1 - Should Democratic presidential candidates partner with Fox News at all?

#2 - Should they do these town halls right now given what is at stake for Fox News?

5/ RE Dem candidates partnering with Fox News at all. I think this is a question that truly is worth having a debate over. I think there are strong reasons not to do them in Fox's current iteration. But more pressing issue is second question, doing right now?

6/ Let's say you think okay for Dems to partner with Fox to do town halls. Okay. But the real question is, is it wise to do it right now in this moment of desperation and need Fox News is having? Or, better to have waited a few weeks?

7/ No matter what, these town halls are Fox's only hope of salvaging their ad sales upfronts, which were on track for disaster. Here's why:

Advertisers already frustrated. Then New Yorker article. Then Pirro. Then Tucker stuff. Fox held emergency meeting w/buyers. Didn't go well

8/ The prevailing consensus emerged that Fox was getting too extreme and reckless. Fox News countered with, 'but that was just our opinion people! our news people are great.' Advertisers were skeptical and stayed on sideline.

9/ So, they started to aggressively pitch these town halls. What this does is signal to the media buyers/advertisers that Fox's supposed "news" side is safe and helps Fox make their case.

And make no mistake, Fox is using these town halls to pull advertisers off sidelines.

10/ For example, upon Bernie accepting town hall, Fox pitched to advertisers something along lines of: 'Even Bernie sanders can't ignore Fox, so you can't afford to ignore us either."

11/ Lastly, it should be a red flag for any campaign that the person from Fox News' "news" side who is negotiating the terms on behalf of Fox is Bill Sammon. A guy who was caught instructing news staff to lie about climate change (and other things). mediamatters.org/blog/2019/04/1…

12/ All the campaigns needed to do was wait a few more weeks. Once the ad sales period ended, the point would have been made and Fox's ad sales would have dinged and the rates would dropped a bit.

13/ All that's to say, you can strongly think candidates should partner with Fox *and also* believe that they should have waited so as not to be used by Fox News to help them get out of trouble.

14/ I hear lots of arguments about why candidates should not partner w/Fox, I have not heard many on why they need to go on right now in this moment when it will help Fox News the most (and also needlessly trample on the work of many activists/organizers to get to this moment)

15/ Now, RE whether candidates should go on at all. Like I said, I think that's a debate worth having. I think there are very strong reasons for candidates not to go on Fox News in its current iteration.

16/ Fox functions as a political propaganda operation. They are a uniquely destructive force. They actively promote white supremacy, dangerous conspiracies and incite violence. They have no identifiable standards, truly.

17/ I think it's fair to treat them more as partisan media than journalistic operation at least until they start having some basic standards and functioning more like any other actual journalistic operation.

18/ And look, that's not all. I could go on about that and would be happy to. But what I dont' want to do is distract from most pressing issue, which is, even if partnering with Fox is fine...why right now in this moment when it's undermines so much work and helps them?