,
11 tweets,
4 min read
Read on Twitter
A short thread on how the billionaire class supports Fox News. Lachlan Murdoch, the chief executive of Fox's parent company, is a co-chair of the annual benefit for Robin Hood, an anti-poverty organization. The May 13 gala is the peak of one percent philanthropy in New York. 
Attendees at last year's gala included Bill Gates, Michael Bloomberg, Oprah Winfrey, etc. It's a who's who of the banking, hedge fund and entertainment worlds. Probably a lot of them dislike Fox News but wining and dining with the Murdochs who control Fox -- no problem.
Ostracism is a powerful tool that punishes harmful behavior. Its opposite -- social embrace -- rewards the behavior. Steve Bannon has been ostracized for spreading white nationalism, but the Murdochs remain in good standing. theintercept.com/2018/11/04/fox…
After getting a free pass for too long, the Murdochs are finally getting attention for the damage they've inflicted. Here is Jane Mayer's excellent story from earlier this year about Fox as "something that hasn’t existed before in the United States." newyorker.com/magazine/2019/…
The New York Times recently published an epic investigation that concluded the Murdochs have helped "elevate marginal demagogues, mainstream ethno-nationalism and politicize the very notion of truth." nytimes.com/interactive/20…
Journalists are doing their jobs of identifying where white nationalism comes from (I've written a bit about it, too). There's no sign the Murdochs care about that -- Fox News hasn't changed an iota. But pressure from their peers -- the billionaires -- could have an impact.
So that brings us to @RobinHoodNYC. The organization is dedicated to fighting poverty yet the co-chair of its gala oversees a cable network that opposes crucial anti-poverty initiatives, such as Medicare for All, livable wages, higher taxes for the rich.
Of course lots of billionaires who donate to @RobinHoodNYC oppose those anti-poverty initiatives; it's a contradiction at the heart of the organization's mission. For more on the problem of billionaire philanthropy, check out anything from @AnandWrites.
But let's ask @iamwesmoore, the chief executive of Robin Hood: Is there no point at which you say to a billionaire funder -- your positions and your impact on the world are so odious that we will not accept your money, you are the problem and we are fighting against you?
By taking money from Lachlan, Rupert or James Murdoch, you make them stronger. You give them the philanthropic establishment's seal of approval. You are saying: we are not troubled by Fox News, please join our benefit committee, would you like the filet mignon or salmon entree?
I realize the billionaire class is unlikely to repudiate one of their own. But really, Bill Gates and Oprah and others who have shown a bit of liberal guilt about Fox News and the state of things -- can you not draw this one little line, and put the Murdochs on the other side?
