Boycotting Laura Ingraham Over Parkland’s David Hogg Is The Right And Just Thing To Do

16
2054

We can in fact go even further than this, boycotting Laura Ingraham’s show, those who advertise on it, anyone associated with it, is the morally necessary thing to do if you are indeed outraged over her comments concerning David Hogg of the Parkland shooting. Of course, if like most you don’t give the proverbial flying about any of them or it then you’ve not got to raise yourself into boycott mode either.

The point being that you do indeed have a moral duty to try to shape the world to your desires. The market is where each dollar and decision is a vote where you get to do so. Thus a boycott of someone, something, you don’t like, upon whatever grounds – moral, taste, interest or any other damn notion that crosses what passes for synapses – is exactly what you should be doing. For that’s how you train the providers into that market to supply your desires. Of course, it’s also true that everyone else gets to do the same and we end up with varied supply of varied things and pretty much all of those things which can be marketed at above their production cost do get made available. We’re all as well off as we can be that is.

So, yes, boycott away:

A number of advertisers have abandoned Fox News host Laura Ingraham’s weeknight show after she alleged that Parkland, Florida, shooting survivor David Hogg was bitter over being rejected for admission by multiple universities.

Those companies pulling their ads include TripAdvisor, Expedia, Hulu, Johnson & Johnson, Wayfair, Nestlé and Nutrish. A spokesman for TripAdvisor said the company doesn’t “condone the inappropriate comments made by this broadcaster. In our view, these statements focused on a high school student, cross the line of decency. “

That spokesperson is spouting great big hairy ones of course. This is about dollars not sense. That’s also how it should be. The corporation has no interest at all in what is moral nor decent. It does care, deeply so, about what its potential market think is moral and or decent. And it’ll run a mile from anything which might make them not buy the products as a result of an association the punters don’t like. Which is exactly that training method. Our custom is the doggie chocco drop turning corporations into Rover willing to beg for treats. That’s what we’re supposed to be doing too – if not training Rover at least teaching the corporations.

Ingraham had obviously seen this story played out before, almost one year ago, via her friend and former co-worker Bill O’Reilly, a cable-news icon who eventually saw too many advertisers flee his program, forcing the network to dispose of the popular primetime figure who had been with it for decades as the industry’s top-rated host.

It works, it really works, and it’s supposed to as well. The restaurant turning out terrible food goes bust. The media show turning out unappetizing fare goes bust. Great, excellent.

Hogg responded by listing 12 prominent advertisers of “The Ingraham Angle” in calling on a boycott. He proceeded to expand the list to 100 by sharing a list by Media Matters, which has ample experience in this arena from targeting Fox News hosts before. Notably, Hogg chose to accelerate his boycott effort after Ingraham’s apology.

The old point was that you don’t insult those who buy ink by the barrel. But now we all do, Facebook and Twitter mean that we do – if the wind’s behind us at least – have that media power. Which, again I insist, we should be using.

So what is this boycott about exactly? Ingraham immaturely mocking a public figure in the form of Hogg around some schools that rejected him? Or is it about Ingraham’s career as a conservative talk radio and television opinion host overall?

Either way, we’ve entered some dangerous territory here, if boycotts like this one succeed.

Nope, it’s not dangerous, it’s what should be happening.

Now, I should note that I’m generally much more on Ingraham’s side in the culture wars here. I’ve even been a guest on a show she was doing (radio, I think she was sitting in for someone on some show or other). I’ve actually no idea what’s getting people irate here either, nor do I care. But I am insistent that boycotts are just great:

Midday Thursday, we asked readers to weigh in on the proposed advertising boycott of Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle.” Stoneman Douglas student David Hogg called for that boycott after host Laura Ingraham mocked him on Twitter for not getting into a few of the colleges of his choice.

Just a few hours later, at least three — maybe four — companies have pulled their ads, Ingraham has offered an apology to Hogg, Hogg has refused to accept it, and readers seem fairly split on whether advertising boycotts are an effective means of protest.

Ingraham’s apology came after two advertisers, the Nutrish pet-food company and travel site Trip Advisor, announced they were pulling ads.

The thing to understand here is that the media is a business. Fox wasn’t set up so that Rupert Murdoch could change the views of rural rubes. Rather, media plays to extant prejudices and Rupe noted that extant American media didn’t play to conservative Americans. So, he went out to make money by pandering to those prejudices. Just as much as all the other American media channels pander to rather more leftist prejudices. Super, that’s just what the system is. And what it does mean is that if you don’t like what people are doing or saying then not only can you but you should be boycotting the advertisers who fund them. Because that’s your vote, your cash, by circuitous routes certainly, that funds those salaries. You should make your desires known by diverting your money, using your votes. That’s how markets work.

Compare this to the alternative. That people who say what you don’t like aren’t allowed to say it by law. How then do we deal with the fact that other people are just fine with what is being said even as you aren’t? Well, quite, that market solution is vastly better, isn’t it?

Do note that your boycott will only work if everyone does agree with you which is why it’s such a great system this market thing. The very test of whether all do agree is the thing which brings about the end desired by all. Which is pretty good for a socio-economic system really.

16
Leave a Reply

avatar
9 Comment threads
7 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
10 Comment authors
GamecockTim WorstallSteveSpikeBenaud Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Bloke on M4
Guest
Bloke on M4

There was an attempt to boycott Chick-Fil-A over some LGBT rights issue, but they stood against it. And I’m certain it’s because Chick-Fil-A is more in the guns and Jesus bits of America.

Spike
Member

I don’t know the proportions, but there are bits of guns-and-Jesus even here on the coast. Chick-Fil-A got notoriety for closing on Sunday and has an customer-first employee manual that David Hogg would consider it an affront to obey. Conservatives patronize Chick-Fil-A believing that they are voting their values, likewise Walmart before it went wobbly.

Spike
Member

David (Camera-)Hogg is exploiting his Instant Martyr status to paper over the fact that he is vulgar and ignorant. He is espousing value-signalling legislation that will not solve the problem, would not have prevented the massacre, and will render his schoolmates more vulnerable and embolden the next shooter. To the point, he is a leftie, lefties are always looking for Poster Children, and Ingraham is a rightie, notorious for writing a book that advises performers not to use their situations to falsely imply expertise but to “Shut Up and Sing.” And the boycott is not because Ingraham was impolite to… Read more »

Benaud
Guest
Benaud

I agree but would go further.

Hogg is a monster. Adults are reinforcing the nasty side of a atypical teenager.

He will soon be irrelevant, take to booze or drugs and my guess pass away before he forty.

He and they (parents and media) have ruined his life they haven’t seen it yet.

And Emma ‘the gunman should have been bullied’ should similarly be dennouced.

And then sent back to Cuba.

Spike
Member

PS – NBA basketball players last week made a video, “No, we will not ‘shut up and dribble.'” Ingraham, although her time slot is not exactly over that of Rush Limbaugh, is a second-tier talk host, tougher to find on the dial outside the city. She is benefitting more than Hogg from the attention and will certainly add radio stations based on input from conservative listeners who want to know what the fuss is.

Gamecock
Guest
Gamecock

Bit of a Streisand Effect.

Ljh
Guest
Ljh

It’s a huge distraction from the failure of those authorities supposed to keep schoolchildren safe: the FBI, employer of Davd Hogg’s father which failed to respond to two warnings, one explicit from a family member that young Nikolas planned to shoot up the school; the police department whose armed officer on the spot failed to enter the building in which people were shot; the police department conniving with the education authority to keep young ethnic men from getting a criminal record despite umpteen callouts to the Cruz household; the social work industry protecting the rights and privacy of the obviously… Read more »

Rhoda Klapp
Guest
Rhoda Klapp

It’s not a proper boycott it’s engineered by shakedown. It’s just another form of no-platforming, and it stinks.

David Moore
Guest
David Moore

I have no problem with market forces, but this one is a highly distorted one. Very small interest groups can make noise vastly greater is actually reflected in the market.

There is far more producer interest at work here, than actual market forces.

Dennis the Peasant
Guest
Dennis the Peasant

If you are stupid enough to enter into a serious debate over any aspect of public policy with a kid in high school, you deserve whatever comes your way.

David Moore
Guest
David Moore
Spike
Member

Ingraham gloated about Hogg’s personal misfortune (having his application rejected by four universities). That was a weak point, though not worth giving an inch to the left. Instead, play his potty-mouthed rant again on the radio and ask listeners whether there is a chance the universities thought he was as immature as the rest of us think he is.

Steve
Guest
Steve

Rather, media plays to extant prejudices and Rupe noted that extant American media didn’t play to conservative Americans. So, he went out to make money by pandering to those prejudices. Just as much as all the other American media channels pander to rather more leftist prejudices. That doesn’t add up, given a significantly larger percentage of Yanks identity as conservative compared with liberals. So if Fox was set up to address an underserved market (which seems reasonable), why was the market underserved in the first place? Why is it still underserved? Why, in a country where only 25% of adults… Read more »

Gamecock
Guest
Gamecock

It is a good question, Steve. I haven’t come up with anything better than, “Because they can.”