You have used the wrong tense here, I think. It’s not a matter of what Billo the Creep Had on anyone. It is what he still has on some people who are even slimier than he is.
1 Like
My understanding is a portion came from him and a portion came from Fox News Channel. I am going by memory of an article I read recently. If I can remember where (maybe here?), I’ll let you know.
Think about that – who in hell demands such a clause in their contract? – And what sort of organization would agree to it? Sludge on both sides, would be my answers.
Thanks. Yeah; awful stuff. O’Reilly was a serious money-tit; they would’ve done anything to keep it going.
2 Likes
There it is.
It could be the standard text ! Think Ailes !
1 Like
Rupert let Roger the Hutt run Fox News like a feudal fief. As long as the dollars flowed up, Murdoch–being a right winger himself–was content to ignore the shit flowing down. The way Fox News’ business model was designed to keep old white people glued to the station with a combination of confirmation bias and addictive anxiety was fueled by Roger’s need to insure his near total autonomy and financial discretion by keeping those dollars flowing up.
The way that business model led to a downward spiral of increasingly nonsensical, hysterical, bizarre, and racially toxic coverage to keep the anxiety stoked without losing eyeballs began to concern Rupert’s sons, who realized it was tainting all of the company’s other brands. But Ailes’ was burrowed into his fief like Hoover was in the FBI, using corporate money like it was his own to hide his own misconduct without any apparent fear of an audit. Until he took it too far and gave the boys the lever they’d been looking for.
But Roger got the last laugh because there is no breaking out of the downward spiral of nonsense he created without losing ratings. The network is an even bigger stain on the company’s other brands now than it ever was before.
4 Likes