Kelly graphically demonstrated the benefits of not running from your interview subject. If you bend over backwards to keep an interview subject from talking, and stack the deck in your report with negative takes and loads of derisive voice-over, what viewers will perceive – 100 percent of the time – is that you’re afraid of your subject. Trying to “minimize his opportunity to appeal” to audiences also totally misunderstands how people consume media. We’re describers, not politicians, and the best way to convey the essence of Jones is to let him betray it himself.
Judging a report by how tightly it keeps control over whatever you think the desired message is supposed to be is pretty much the opposite of what we’re taught to do as journalists. This is a crazy conception of how media is supposed to work. Instead, through strong voiceover, clips from Jones’ program featuring the host spouting conspiracies, and interviews with a conservative commentator who opposes Jones’ influence and the father of a child who died at Sandy Hook, Kelly explained how Jones operates, the harassment his targets experience, and his close ties to President Donald Trump.” “The segment benefited from devoting very little time to Kelly’s interview with Jones, minimizing his opportunity to appeal to her audience.
In fact, groups like Media Matters went so far as to say that the best part about Kelly’s report was that it showed Jones as little as possible: This new media version of the campus “ no-platforming” movement believes that news organizations automatically help insidious figures by allowing them to speak extemporaneously, or even to be seen onscreen. Incredibly, even other media organizations contributed to this chorus, with Huffington Post going so far as to denounce Kelly for giving Jones a “platform.” Some of the parents of Sandy Hook victims were understandably upset that Jones was being given airtime on “legitimate” TV, and protested the interview.īut other groups objected to the report on the more general – and disturbingly prevalent – view that covering a noxious figure somehow equates to empowering that person. That influence is why it was so beneficial to see NBC’s Megyn Kelly tear Jones to pieces on this past weekend’s Sunday Night With Megyn Kelly. Nor can they deal with the fact that he drew 83 million page views during election month last November, or that Infowars had 5.3 million unique visitors in May of last year. His actual quote was that the Jones show was like a Nazi version of Tommy Boy, which to him was too funny of an idea to have been generated unironically. “Come on, this is a gag or something,” he said. Why, I responded, that’s Alex Jones, one of the most influential people in the United States.
“What do you think tap water is?” he croaks, in the broadcast.
#They re turning the frogs gay tv#
It was one of the ultimate Jones set pieces: his classic “ gay bomb” rant, where the balloon-faced TV host turns baboon-ass red working himself up into a rage about Pentagon-designed hormonal weaponry that supposedly can “turn the frickin’ frogs gay!” Multiple families have joined the lawsuit against Jones for defamation, and it continues to be litigated to this day.Last year around election time, I sent a clip of Infowars lunatic Alex Jones to a friend. A Florida woman was even arrested for failing to appear in court after sending numerous threats to a father of one of the victims. The host defended his theories by saying he had spoken with investigators and state police involved with the event and there was just no way it actually happened.Īlex Jones’ Final Statement on #SandyHook – Media attempting to demonize #Infowars for questioning known liarsĪfter this theory began to gain momentum, the families who were mourning the loss of their children began to receive death threats and nasty letters from his listeners demanding to uncover the truth. He has stated in his talk show that he has watched hours of footage circulating the event, and the shooting appears to be only a drill turned into a catastrophic event to push gun control. Jones believed that the shooting was a hoax created by the government to expose the dangers of gun use. Using his INFOWARS platform, the theorist was able to push his conspiracy to the masses, backing it up with what he believed to be sound evidence.
0 kommentar(er)
