Last post of a good thread below. If I may pick it up to continue a bit...
The question of why AT&T is willingly paying money to a Christian supremacist channel that routinely slanders people is one that's been asked a lot today. I'll try to answer that a bit in this thread.
The question of why AT&T is willingly paying money to a Christian supremacist channel that routinely slanders people is one that's been asked a lot today. I'll try to answer that a bit in this thread.
https://twitter.com/GoAngelo/status/1445858346561458176
According to court testimony of OANN's founder, Robert Herring Sr., the idea of starting his channel came from AT&T. There are a few interesting facts about ATT that are relevant to the motive question here.
The first is that ATT is a Republican company based on its giving.
The first is that ATT is a Republican company based on its giving.
Historically speaking, telecom companies in the U.S. have favored Republicans in their giving. ATT has been no exception.
This is plain to see in @OpenSecretsDC data opensecrets.org/party-totals-s…
This is plain to see in @OpenSecretsDC data opensecrets.org/party-totals-s…
That last link got messed up, try this one for ATT's PAC giving: opensecrets.org/political-acti…
For the company itself, it has also favored Republicans historically, except in 2020 when the corporate honchos seemed to think Trump was going to lose. They gave enormously in 2016 to him however opensecrets.org/orgs/at-t-inc/…
ATT is also headquartered in Dallas, TX which is a huge area for Republican fatcats, one of the highest concentrations of them in the country, in fact.
If you're a corporate executive living in Dallas, giving big bucks to Republicans is a way to get invited to cocktail parties.
If you're a corporate executive living in Dallas, giving big bucks to Republicans is a way to get invited to cocktail parties.
But beyond ATT's executives' allegiances to Republicans, there is also the fact that ATT actually owns CNN, which is also in the news business.
So ATT literally helped to create a far-right competitor to its own channel. Why?
So ATT literally helped to create a far-right competitor to its own channel. Why?
Executive partisanship is likely a factor. ATT suits love Republicans, as we've seen here. So creating OANN helps them spread their ideology.
But a strong OANN also gives ATT another advantage: It is leverage against Fox News which charges about $2 per subscriber.
But a strong OANN also gives ATT another advantage: It is leverage against Fox News which charges about $2 per subscriber.
By building up OANN & subsidizing it, ATT executives appear to have been thinking of using it as leverage to seek lower subscriber fees from Fox News.
Currently, FNC charges far more than CNN and MSNBC.
ATT could threaten to cancel Fox and substitute OANN and not risk rw ire.
Currently, FNC charges far more than CNN and MSNBC.
ATT could threaten to cancel Fox and substitute OANN and not risk rw ire.
The hardball strategy would've been even more effective had OANN allowed ATT to acquire the 5% stake in it that ATT had sought.
ATT execs don't care about how awful the content is. They see OAN as a way to make money & help GOP. Win-win by their standpoint. /end
ATT execs don't care about how awful the content is. They see OAN as a way to make money & help GOP. Win-win by their standpoint. /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
