Media

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Lara Logan, who compared Fauci to Mengele, says Fox News pushed her out

      by

      Lara Logan, who compared Fauci to Mengele, says Fox News pushed her outLogan says network ‘does not want independent thinkers’ as Fox stays quiet on reports it dropped her after November remark The former CBS reporter Lara Logan, who compared Dr Anthony Fauci to the Nazi doctor Josef Mengele, has claimed she was “pushed out” at Fox News because the conservative network does not want “independent thinkers”.“I was definitely pushed out,” Logan told Eric Metaxas, a conservative radio host, this week. “I mean, there is no doubt about that. They don’t want independent thinkers. They don’t want people who follow the facts regardless of the politics.”Fox News has not commented on reports that it “quietly benched” Logan over her remark about Joe Biden’s chief medical adviser. On Friday, a spokesperson for Fox News said the network would not comment.Logan has not appeared as a guest on Fox News since making the comment about Fauci. There have been no new episodes of her show on the Fox Nation streaming service, Lara Logan Has No Agenda, which is still available.Logan made the comment about Mengele, the “Angel of Death” who conducted medical experiments at the Auschwitz concentration camp, in November, during a discussion of the Covid pandemic on Fox News Primetime.Logan said: “Dr Fauci, this is what people say to me, that he doesn’t represent science to them.“He represents Josef Mengele, Dr Josef Mengele, the Nazi doctor who did experiments on Jews during the second world war and in the concentration camps, and I am talking about people all across the world are saying this.”The show’s host, Pete Hegseth, and another guest, the Fox News host Will Cain, did not respond.The Auschwitz Memorial said: “Exploiting the tragedy of people who became victims of criminal pseudo-medical experiments in Auschwitz in a debate about vaccines, pandemic and people who fight for saving human lives is shameful. It is disrespectful to victims and a sad symptom of moral and intellectual decline.”Kremlin memos urged Russian media to use Tucker Carlson clips – reportRead moreJonathan Greenblatt, chief executive of the Anti-Defamation League, said: “There’s absolutely no comparison between mask mandates, vaccine requirements and other Covid-19 mitigation efforts to what happened to Jews during the Holocaust.”Fauci, whose work has generated threats to his safety and that of his family, told MSNBC Logan’s remark was “unconscionable” and “absolutely preposterous and disgusting … an insult to all of the people who suffered and died under the Nazi regime in the concentration camps”.Fauci also said he found it “striking … how she gets no discipline whatsoever from the Fox network – how they can let her say that with no comment and no disciplinary action?”Logan rose to fame with CBS during the Iraq war and the Arab spring. After leaving CBS in 2013 over errors in a report about the Benghazi attack, she moved into conservative media.In March, Logan told a rightwing online show she was “dumped by Fox” and added: “I was taken off the air at Fox just before they went into a whole marathon of war porn in Ukraine.”She also repeated Russian talking points about “Nazis” in Ukraine and said Fox News had “a few people like Jesse Watters and Tucker Carlson who are doing their best to add some context and to show what this war is really about”.Speaking to Metaxas, Logan also said she did not like being called a “darling of the right wing”.TopicsFox NewsUS politicsUS television industryTelevision industrynewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in UK Politics

      Ministers accused of ‘cultural vandalism’ as government announces plans to privatise Channel 4

      by

      Ministers have been accused of “cultural vandalism” after the government announced it is to press ahead with plans to privatise Channel 4.The contentious decision to sell off the broadcaster, which was founded in 1982, follows a consultation on its future, a government source told The Independent.It is expected to form part of a draft Media Bill to be unveiled at the Queen’s speech – setting out the forthcoming agenda for Boris Johnson’s government – next month.The source said the sale would form part of reforms “to modernise and sustain the UK’s public service broadcasting sector”, but the move was met with dismay by Channel 4 and television production companies.“Ministers have decided that, although C4 as a business is currently performing well, government ownership is holding it back in the face of a rapidly changing and competitive media landscape,” the source added.“A change of ownership will remove its straitjacket, giving C4 the freedom to innovate and grow so it can flourish and thrive long into the future and support the whole of the UK creative industries.”A spokesperson for the broadcaster said it was “disappointed” with the decision but would “continue to engage” with the government on the process to “ensure that Channel 4 continues to play its unique part in Britain’s creative ecology and national life”.It said “significant public interest concerns” had been raised during the consultation, launched by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport last year.The move – unveiled during a Commons recess – was condemned by Westminster’s opposition parties, including Labour, who described it as “cultural vandalism” and warned it would cost jobs in the north.“Nothing screams a rudderless government like announcements on Channel 4 while people’s energy bills are through the roof,” the party’s shadow culture secretary Lucy Powell said.Damian Green, the former Conservative cabinet minister, added: “The sale of Channel 4 is politicians and civil servants thinking they know more about how to run a business than the people who run it. Very unconservative. Mrs Thatcher, who created it, never made that mistake.”Channel 4 has previously said there was a lack of evidence to justify its sale and warned privatisation may result in “reduced diversity and quality of content for UK viewers”.In an internal email on Monday informing staff of ministers’ decision, the broadcaster’s chief executive, Alex Mahon, said her priority was to “look after all of you and the wonderful Channel 4 spirit”.She said: “In our engagement with government during its extended period of reflection, we have proposed a vision for the next 40 years which we are confident would allow us to build on the successes of the first 40.“That vision was rooted in continued public ownership, and was built upon the huge amount of public value this model has delivered to date and the opportunity to deliver so much more in the future.“But ultimately the ownership of C4 is for government to propose and parliament to decide.“Our job is to deliver what parliament tasks us to do, and if or when that changes, then I am confident that this incredible organisation will respond with the relentless energy it has always displayed in pursuit of its goals and the remit.”The government source said ministers planned to use money generated by the sale to fund “independent production and levelling up wider creative skills in priority parts of the country”.They said Channel 4 would remain a public service broadcaster with a commitment to primetime news.But Pact, the trade body representing UK independent production companies, urged the government to rethink the sale.John McVay, Pact’s chief executive, said: “Privatising Channel 4 is unnecessary and risks damaging the UK’s world-beating independent TV and film production industry. Channel 4 is crucial to our sector, both as a commissioner of programmes and because of its role in helping new businesses get their first break, especially businesses outside the M25.“Unlike other broadcasters, it makes none of its programmes in-house – but a private owner could shift production away from independent producers to cut costs, with a knock-on impact on the wider industry.” More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Chris Wallace: working at Fox News became ‘unsustainable’ after election

      by

      Chris Wallace: working at Fox News became ‘unsustainable’ after electionJournalist’s new show begins on archrival CNN’s streaming service after nearly 20 years with the right-leaning cable channel Chris Wallace has said working at Fox News became “increasingly unsustainable” before he jumped ship to CNN last December after almost 20 years with the right-leaning cable channel.His departure dealt a blow to Fox’s news operation at a time when its opinion side had become preeminent. The veteran journalist’s new show begins on archrival CNN’s streaming service this week and the 74-year-old spoke to the New York Times.‘Tucker the Untouchable’ goes soft on Putin but remains Fox News’s biggest powerRead more“I’m fine with opinion: conservative opinion, liberal opinion. But when people start to question the truth – ‘Who won the 2020 election? Was January 6 an insurrection?’ – I found that unsustainable,” he told the newspaper.He added: “Before, I found it was an environment in which I could do my job and feel good about my involvement at Fox. And since November of 2020, that just became unsustainable, increasingly unsustainable as time went on.”When asked why he didn’t leave Fox News earlier, he said: “I spent a lot of 2021 looking to see if there was a different place for me to do my job.”And he acknowledged: “Some people might have drawn the line earlier, or at a different point…I think Fox has changed over the course of the last year and a half. But I can certainly understand where somebody would say, ‘Gee, you were a slow learner, Chris’.”After Donald Trump lost the November 2020 election to Joe Biden, Fox skewed further from news to comment, ending its 7pm nightly broadcast, firing the political editor who had been part of Fox accurately projecting on election night that Trump had lost the crucial state of Arizona and promoting Tucker Carlson, the populist commentator and host who has consistently downplayed the insurrection at the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, by extremist Trump supporters, the New York Times noted.Carlson and other voices aired by Fox have spent the past four weeks playing down Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, going soft on Putin, and undermining the messages of the invaded country’s sovereignty and the Biden administration and Nato in supporting Ukraine.“One of the reasons that I left Fox was because I wanted to put all of that behind me,” Wallace said, adding that: “There has not been a moment when I have second-guessed myself about that decision.”Fox has won praise from the Kremlin earlier this month.TopicsFox NewsTV newsTelevision industryCNNDonald TrumpUS elections 2020US politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Marina Ovsyannikova, Russian TV protester, decries Putin propaganda

      by

      Marina Ovsyannikova, Russian TV protester, decries Putin propaganda‘I could see security dragging people away,’ says editor fined for walking into shot with sign saying ‘No War’

      Ukraine: live coverage
      00:17The Russian TV editor who interrupted a news broadcast to protest the Ukraine war said on Sunday she acted out of dissatisfaction at propaganda disseminated by Vladimir Putin’s government, and said she had turned down an offer of asylum in France despite fearing further retaliation.‘Tucker the Untouchable’ goes soft on Putin but remains Fox News’s biggest powerRead moreMarina Ovsyannikova, who describes herself as “a patriot”, was fined 30,000 roubles ($280) by a court in Moscow last week for the “spontaneous” act of rebellion in which she appeared during the live newscast with a sign saying “No War”.On Sunday, she told ABC’s This Week she needed to speak out after watching her employer, Channel One, spread “lies” about the Ukraine war.“After a week of coverage of this situation, the atmosphere on the channel was so unpleasant that I realised that I could not go back there,” she said. “I could see what in reality was happening in Ukraine. And what we showed on our programmes was very different from what was going on in reality.”She said the knowledge the channel was imparting false information ate away at her.“I could not believe that such a thing could happen, that this gruesome war could take place. And as soon as the war began, I could not eat. I could not sleep,” she said, adding that she had considered joining public protests in Moscow.“I could see security dragging people away … and I decided that this was going to be a rather useless action on my part. Maybe I could do something more meaningful, with more impact, where I could show to the rest of the world that Russians are against the war.“And I could show to the Russian people that this is just propaganda, expose this propaganda for what it is and maybe stimulate some people to speak up against the war.”Marina Ovsyannikova broke the state propaganda machine – others will follow | Denis KataevRead moreOvsyannikova, who could face further action after the Kremlin suggested she breached rules on “hooliganism”, said the French president Emmanuel Macron offered her asylum but she turned it down.“I am very worried for the safety of my children, first and foremost. And I’m very grateful to Mr Macron for his offer, but I have publicly refused to take political asylum in France because I am a patriot,” she said.“I want to live in Russia. My children want to live in Russia. We had a very comfortable life in Russia. And I don’t want to immigrate and lose another 10 years of my life to assimilate in some other country.“And now I believe in the history of my country. The times are very dark and very difficult, and every person who has a civil position who wants to make that civil position known must speak up.”TopicsUkraineRussiaEuropeUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Kremlin memos urged Russian media to use Tucker Carlson clips – report

      by

      Kremlin memos urged Russian media to use Tucker Carlson clips – reportRussian government document instructed outlets to show Fox News host ‘as much as possible’, Mother Jones says The Fox News primetime host Tucker Carlson has been widely accused of echoing Russian propaganda about the invasion of Ukraine. According to a report on Sunday, earlier this month the Putin regime in Moscow sent out an instruction to friendly media outlets: use more clips of Carlson.‘Cynical, craven’ Republicans out to bash Biden, not Putin, over gas pricesRead moreMother Jones, a progressive magazine, said it had obtained memos produced by the Russian Department of Information and Telecommunications Support.One document, it said, was entitled “For Media and Commentators (recommendations for coverage of events as of 03.03)”, or 3 March. The magazine published pictures of the memo, which it said it was given by “a contributor to a national Russian media outlet who asked not to be identified”.It said the memo included an instruction: “It is essential to use as much as possible fragments of broadcasts of the popular Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who sharply criticises the actions of the United States [and] Nato, their negative role in unleashing the conflict in Ukraine, [and] the defiantly provocative behavior from the leadership of the eastern countries and Nato towards the Russian Federation and towards President Putin, personally.”The document, Mother Jones said, summed up Carlson’s position on the Ukraine war as “Russia is only protecting its interests and security” and included a quote: “And how would the US behave if such a situation developed in neighbouring Mexico or Canada?”Carlson and Fox News did not comment to Mother Jones. Fox News did not respond to a Guardian request for comment.On air last Wednesday, 9 March, Carlson said testimony by Victoria Nuland, a US undersecretary of state, about Ukrainian “biological research facilities” had shown Russian claims of US involvement were “totally and completely true”.Fact checkers said they were not.“Russian state TV featured Carlson’s take the next day,” the Washington Post said, adding that the Russian claim about US participation in biological laboratories in Ukraine was “straight out of the old Soviet playbook. But that doesn’t mean prominent commentators like Carlson should be so quick to fall for it”.Citing another Russian “recommendations for coverage” memo, dated 10 March, Mother Jones said the text advised Russian hosts to relay the message that “activities of military biological laboratories with American participation on the territory of Ukraine carried global threats to Russia and Europe”.On Sunday Joe Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, told NBC Russian claims about biological warfare facilities in Ukraine could indicate Russian willingness to use such weapons.“When Russia starts accusing other countries of potentially doing something, it’s a good tell that they may be on the cusp of doing it themselves,” he said.The Fox News journalist fact-checking channel’s pundits on air over UkraineRead moreMother Jones said no other western journalist was named in the memos it obtained, which it said also included advice on how to cite Carlson about how “Biden’s sanctions policy” was actually an economic “punishment for the American middle class”. That memo, the magazine said, also cited the New York Post, like Fox News owned by Rupert Murdoch.On Sunday afternoon, Julia Davis, an analyst of Russian media, tweeted a still from “Russia’s state TV” showing “none other than Tucker Carlson” on a screen above a discussion panel.“They always follow the Kremlin’s directives,” Davis wrote, “namely to use Tuckyo Rose clips as often as possible.”“Tokyo Rose” was a nickname given by Americans to several women who broadcast Japanese propaganda during the second world war.TopicsFox NewsUS television industryVladimir PutinRussiaUkraineUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      How Billionaires Are Shaping France’s Presidential Campaign

      by

      In a nation with strict political finance laws, control over the news media has provided an avenue for the very rich to influence elections, this one more than ever.PARIS — The face of President Emmanuel Macron’s possibly fiercest rival in France’s coming election is not on any campaign poster. He has not given a single speech. His name will not be on the ballot.He is not a candidate at all, but the man often described as France’s Rupert Murdoch: Vincent Bolloré, the billionaire whose conservative media empire has complicated Mr. Macron’s carefully plotted path to re-election by propelling the far-right candidacy of Éric Zemmour, the biggest star of Mr. Bolloré’s Fox-style news network, CNews.With the first round of France’s presidential election just a month away, polls show Mr. Macron as the favorite. But it is Mr. Zemmour who has set the themes of the race with the openly anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim views he had put forth each evening on television for the past couple of years.“Bolloré’s channels have largely created Zemmour,” François Hollande, France’s former president, said in an interview. But Mr. Zemmour’s emergence is just the latest example of the power of France’s media tycoons, Mr. Bolloré most prominent among them, to shape political fortunes. In a nation with very strict campaign finance laws, control over the news media has long provided an avenue for the very rich to influence elections.“If you’re a billionaire, you can’t entirely finance a campaign,” said Julia Cagé, an economist specializing in the media at Sciences Po, “but you can buy a newspaper and put it at the disposal of a campaign.”The political reach of media tycoons like Vincent Bolloré, center, has become enough of a concern that the French Senate opened an inquiry.Isa Harsin/Sipa, via Associated PressIn the long run-up to the current campaign, the competition for influence has been especially frenzied, with some of France’s richest men locked in a fight over some of the nation’s top television networks, radio stations and publications.The emergence of Mr. Bolloré, in particular, has intensified the jockeying in this election season as he buys up media properties and turns them into news outlets pushing a hard right-wing agenda.The phenomenon is new in the French media landscape, and it has prompted fierce jostling among other billionaires for media holdings. It has been the hidden drama behind the 2022 elections, with some of the media billionaires angling strongly against Mr. Macron, and others in support of him.On one side are Mr. Bolloré and his media group, Vivendi; on the other are billionaires regarded as Mr. Macron’s allies, including Bernard Arnault, the head of the LVMH luxury empire.The political reach of media tycoons has become enough of a concern that the French Senate has opened an inquiry. In hearings broadcast live in January and February, they all denied any political motive. Mr. Bolloré said his interests were “purely economic.” Mr. Arnault said his investments in the news media were akin to “patronage.”But there is little doubt that their media holdings give them leverage that France’s campaign finance laws would otherwise deny them. In France, political TV ads are not allowed in the six months before an election. Corporate donations to candidates are banned.Personal gifts to a campaign are limited to 4,600 euros, or about $5,000. In this election cycle, presidential candidates cannot spend more than €16.9 million each, or about $18.5 million, on their campaigns for the first round; the two finalists are then limited to a total of €22.5 million each, or about $24.7 million. By comparison, when he was a presidential candidate, Joseph R. Biden Jr. raised more than $1 billion for his 2020 campaign.Bernard Arnault, the head of the LVMH luxury empire, with President Emmanuel Macron of France in Paris last year. He is regarded as an ally of Mr. Macron.Christophe Archambault/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“Why do you think that these French capitalists whose names you know buy Le Monde, Les Echos, Le Parisien?” Jean-Michel Baylet, whose family has owned a powerful group of newspapers in southwest France for generations, said in an interview, mentioning some of the country’s biggest newspapers.“They’re buying influence,” said Mr. Baylet, a former minister of territorial cohesion, who himself has been accused of using his media outlets to advance a parallel career in politics — a charge he denies.The control of media by industrialists, whose core businesses depend on government contracts in construction or defense, amounts to “a conflict of interests,” said Aurélie Filippetti, who oversaw the media sector as a minister of culture.Armed with media properties, businessmen enjoy leverage over politicians.“Politicians are always afraid that newspapers will fall into unfriendly hands,” said Claude Perdriel, the main shareholder of Challenges, a weekly magazine, who said that he made sure to sell his previous outlets, including the magazine L’Obs, to other businessmen who shared his left-leaning politics.For Mr. Macron, that is what happened when early this year Jérôme Béglé, who is a frequent guest on CNews, took over the Journal du Dimanche, a Sunday newspaper once so pro-Macron that it was called the “Pravda” of the government. After Mr. Bolloré gained control over the newspaper’s parent company last fall, it began publishing critical articles and unflattering photos of Mr. Macron.It recently zeroed in on what right-wing competitors consider the most vulnerable aspect of Mr. Macron’s record: his crime policy, which the publication referred to as a failure and his “Achilles’ heel.”Though not widely read, the newspaper enjoys a following among the French political and economic elite and an agenda-setting role. “It’s one of the two or three most influential newspapers,” said Gaspard Gantzer, a presidential spokesman under Mr. Hollande.A newsstand in Paris. “If you’re a billionaire, you can’t entirely finance a campaign,” said Julia Cagé, an economist at Sciences Po, “but you can buy a newspaper and put it at the disposal of a campaign.”Christophe Petit Tesson/EPA, via ShutterstockOne of Mr. Bolloré’s television channels, the youth-oriented C8, has served as a powerful echo chamber for promoting far-right ideas. A recent study by the CNRS, France’s national research organization, showed that from September to December last year, C8’s most popular show devoted 53 percent of its time to the far right and to one figure in particular: Mr. Zemmour.But it is through CNews, created in 2017 after his takeover of the Canal Plus network, that Mr. Bolloré continues to extend his influence in the final stretches of the campaign. With its ability to shape the national debate around issues like immigration, Islam and crime, CNews quickly grew into a new, and feared, political force in France. It made Mr. Zemmour, a newspaper reporter and best-selling author, a star.Learn More About France’s Presidential ElectionCard 1 of 6The campaign begins. More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Fake news alert! Donald Trump’s new social media app is a triumph | Arwa Mahdawi

      by

      Fake news alert! Donald Trump’s new social media app is a triumphArwa MahdawiThe former president’s media venture, Truth Social has got off to a rocky start – with technical problems and potential legal issues to boot Truth hurts, everyone knows that. Nevertheless, I wasn’t expecting my experience with Truth Social, Donald Trump’s new social media venture, to be quite so painful. After months of fanfare, the former president’s new app, which is essentially a Twitter clone, was opened to the US public on Sunday night. Obviously, I signed up straight away – or at least I tried to.Donald Trump’s social media app launches on Apple storeRead moreI spent 20 frustrating minutes attempting to create a new account and getting error message after error message. Eventually, I managed to sign up with the username @stormyd, only to be told that I had been put on a waiting list “due to massive demand”. I was number 194,276 in line, apparently. Which, I’m sure, is a very precise number and not something they just pulled out of the air.It is unclear how many people were actually successful at getting on Truth Social – although the Guardian has reported that at least one Catholic priest managed to join. The fact that you, apparently, needed God on your side to secure an account wasn’t the only issue with the launch: the app has also run into potential legal trouble. It turns out Truth Social may not have just taken inspiration from Twitter, the app’s logo looks suspiciously like that of a British solar power startup called Trailar. “Great to see Donald Trump supporting a growing sustainability business!” Trailar tweeted on Monday. “Maybe ask next time?”If Trump’s new app failed to successfully launch on time, it would hardly be the surprise of the century. The last time he made a lot of noise about launching a new media platform, it turned out to be an underwhelming blog, which shuttered after just a few weeks. It’s not as if Trump put a technological genius in charge of Truth Social: Devin Nunes, head honcho at the app’s parent company, Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG), may be most famous for the fact that he once unsuccessfully sued a cow.In 2019, Nunes, who used to be a Republican congressman, filed a $250m lawsuit against Twitter and two parody Twitter accounts: one was called “Devin Nunes’ Mom” and one was called “Devin Nunes’ Cow”. This is no laughing matter, I’ll have you know. The cow was very mean to him: it called the politician a “treasonous cowpoke” whose “boots are full of manure”. It was all very hard for the poor man, whose lawsuit claimed that the parody accounts subjected him to a “defamation campaign of stunning breadth and scope, one that no human being should ever have to bear and suffer in their whole life”.Nunes doesn’t just have beef with cows, by the way. He’s a big fan of suing anyone who says anything mean to him, and has launched defamation lawsuits against a number of journalists. He managed to juggle all these lawsuits with his political career for a while but, in December, announced he was leaving Congress to join TMTG. “The time has come to reopen the internet and allow for the free flow of ideas and expression without censorship,” he proclaimed. Unless cows are involved, obviously. No free speech or free flow of ideas for cows! Or pesky journalists. Or anyone who says anything unflattering, if we’re being honest.Truth Social’s marketing material talks about welcoming diverse opinions but the app’s terms and conditions are rather more restrictive. Under “prohibited activities”, the rules state that users of the site agree not to “disparage, tarnish, or otherwise harm, in our opinion, us and/or the Site”.A cynic might wonder whether the fact that you are not allowed to say mean things about Trump on his app may factor in why Melania doesn’t appear to be a big fan of her husband’s latest venture. A couple of weeks ago, you see, the former first lady entered into a “special arrangement” to share “exclusive communications” with the conservative social media app Parler. Why would she announce an exclusive relationship with a direct competitor to Truth Social shortly before it launched ? I’m not even going to begin to speculate. The truth is out there, but there’s a very long waiting list to get to it.
      Arwa Mahdawi is a Guardian columnist
      TopicsDonald TrumpOpinionUS politicsSocial mediaDigital mediaInternetcommentReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Fox anchor survives second Covid case and tells detractors: ‘Sorry to disappoint’

      by

      Fox anchor survives second Covid case and tells detractors: ‘Sorry to disappoint’Neil Cavuto returns to Fox Business to say doctors told him only vaccination saved his life this time The Fox anchor Neil Cavuto returned to the air on Monday, to say he nearly died from a second bout with the coronavirus and to tell detractors including those who sent death threats over his support for vaccines: “So sorry to disappoint you.”Queen cancels virtual engagements due to CovidRead moreMore than 935,000 Americans have died of Covid-19 in the last two years. The seven-day average daily death rate is just under 2,000 – the vast majority unvaccinated.Fox has strict vaccination requirements for staff. But hosts, prominently including Tucker Carlson, have spread misinformation about vaccines and resistance to Covid-19 public health measures including vaccination mandates.Cavuto is immunocompromised, with multiple sclerosis and having survived heart surgery and cancer.After his first positive Covid test, in October, he implored viewers: “My God, stop the politics. Life is too short to be an ass. Life is way too short to be ignorant of the promise of something that is helping people worldwide. Stop the deaths, stop the suffering, please get vaccinated, please.”Some viewers did not stop the politics. Cavuto revealed that he received disturbing messages, including death threats.On Fox Business on Monday, Cavuto said he had been hospitalised for weeks but Fox had not publicised his condition out of respect for his privacy.His second Covid case, he said, was a “far, far more serious strand” because of his immunocompromised status. He had, he said, been in “intensive care for quite a while”.“It was really touch and go,” he said. “Some of you who’ve wanted to put me out of my misery darn near got what you wished for. So sorry to disappoint you.”Cavuto also said: “Let me be clear: doctors say had I not been vaccinated at all, I wouldn’t be here.“This was scary. How scary? I’m talking, ‘Ponderosa suddenly out of the prime rib in the middle of the buffet line scary.’ That’s how scary.”Fox News/Business host Neil Cavuto explains on air that he was out for a while because he was hospitalized with Covid, adds, “doctors say that had I not been vaccinated at all, I wouldn’t be here.””I’m not here to debate vaccinations for you. Just offer an explanation for me.” pic.twitter.com/DwI5dKZAL3— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 21, 2022
      He also dismissed the idea the vaccine caused or contributed to his second Covid bout.“No, the vaccine didn’t cause that,” he said. “That ‘grassy knoll’ theory has come up a lot. Because I’ve had cancer, and right now I have multiple sclerosis, I am among the vulnerable 3% or so of the population that cannot sustain the full benefits of a vaccine.”In October, Cavuto described some of the threats he received for taking and advocating the shot.He also said: “I cannot stress this enough: it’s not about left or right. This is not about who’s conservative or liberal. Last time I checked, everyone regardless of their political persuasion is coming down with this …“Take the political speaking points and toss them for now, I’m begging you. Toss them and think of what’s good not only for yourself but for those around you.“I dare say people who experienced this and see loved ones who have been affected by this or have died from this are not judging the wisdom of mandates.“They’re wishing they got vaccinated, and they didn’t.”TopicsFox NewsCoronavirusVaccines and immunisationUS televisionUS politicsnewsReuse this content More