Glenn Beck makes his final appearance on Fox New in the 5 pm slot today. He ruled the roost for a while, with millions of viewers. Many people felt he was a cult leader. Beck started off with a bang–slamming the Obama administration and others associated as liberals. He at one time credited himself with being a Tea Party founder. He certainly was a cheerleader for the movement.
What has happened? As Beck got wilder and wilder with his accusations and inappropriate comments, moderates and those on the left complained more and more. Groups and individuals complained to sponsors. Beck lost many of his sponsors. Apparently Fox News told him to tone it down because he has. Then he just got boring and preachy.
Media Matters tried to take credit for his departure:
Beck’s departure from his Fox show didn’t just happen — this moment is the result of constant monitoring, meticulous fact-checking, and our dogged exposure of Beck’s toxic falsehoods and attacks.
We’ve worked every day to make sure reputable journalists, political leaders, and potential advertisers understood what kind of poison Beck injected into the debate. In the end, Beck lost his ratings, his relevance and, as advertisers departed, revenue for Fox News. And we were able to show the world that hate doesn’t pay.
The San Francisco Chronicle had more to say:
And while we’re sure there will be tears on the final show — from Glenn, at least — let’s understand why this happened: Ratings and money, i.e. advertising. This ain’t public TV, after all.
Beck’s rise coincided with that of the Tea Party and by the summer of 2009, three miiiiiiiiiiiillion people a day were tuning in to see what he’d scribble on his blackboard. Now — Beck is pulling about half that.
And advertiser boycotts, led by Oakland’s Color of Change, among others, hurt. Major corporations including Allstate and Honda said they wouldn’t advertise on his show. Large outlets in New York, Philly and Milwaukee dropped his radio show.
As liberal media critic Eric Boehlert — an inveterate Beck-watcher — notes: “Trust me, it’s not like Murdoch or Fox News boss Roger Ailes suddenly experienced an epiphany about the stark consequences of sponsoring Beck’s gutter attacks. Instead, Ailes likely concluded that Beck wasn’t carrying his weight financially, so Beck had to go.”
Boehlert says Beck’s “point of no return” came on July 28, 2009 when he said President Obama has “a deep-seated hatred of white people.”
In fairness, I know many conservatives who dislike Beck and who have disdain for his brand of politics and his behavior on the air. He insulted people, then wept like a cry-baby. Basically, he often came across as unstable.
Beck took credit for bringing many folks to the Tea Party Movement. He started off with a roar and rocketed to stardom. He was all over print periodicals as the man to watch. Many accused him of being a cult leader. That description really didn’t seem that far off base.
Complains came in. Moderates and everyone left of moderate voiced complaints and concerns both at Fox and to his show’s sponsors. The sponsors started dropping off like flies as the presidential children were mimicked and Beck accused George Soros of being a Nazi conspirator as a teenager. It seemed as though Beck had just overplayed his hand.
As he became more subdued, the audiences trickled away and most people fell asleep during the show. He apparently had had many ‘Come to Jesus meetings’ with Roger Ailes over what is appropriate and what is not. In the end, he just got sort of pathetic and preachy. I think towards the end he really was doing a lot of Mormon missionary work. he encouraged people to buy and store food for long periods of time and to be able to grow a garden. He had some link to special seeds that could withstand events that ordinary seeds can’t withstand. In essence, he was preparing his viewers for some sort of Armageddon.
His real pinnacle must have been his August 28 event at the Washington Monument. It was a national gathering of sorts, for the true believers in Beck. Since then, it has pretty much been a free fall. His rise and fall to and from stardom has been mercurial. Beck will probably go out in a flood of tears. He won’t be in the Fox News 5 pm spot any longer. But he will not stay away. He reappears in September on GBTV in a subscription capacity. It will be interesting to see if his faithful followers like him enough to part with just under $5 a month to listen to him.
Who will watch the swan song?
Godspeed, Mr. Beck.
@Marin, are you sad to see him go?
He was on the air at Fox for 29 months. Longer than I thought.
Thank God, maybe we found the bottoming out point for right-wing mania.
I think that this was a good farewell show. Very dignified. And, as he said, if he was fired….he’s the first fired commentator to be allowed a LIVE show to say goodbye……
I’m sorry to see him go. I enjoyed his show. It was one of the few that did not treat its audience as morons. It did not spoon feed information. And he was very thorough in connecting the dots.
As for his ratings…..his ratings did fall. Except, when you still beat the opposing shows 2 or 3 to 1 in ratings, that doesn’t matter much. Of course, it is from his site:
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/blog/stu/the-truth-about-glenn%E2%80%99s-ratings/
And the sponsor drops were because his political opponents organized boycotts. He made enemies, powerful ones. When you attack the politically connected, you risk a lot.
If you missed it, here’s a link that has some of the statements he made in the comments:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/30/glenn-beck-fox-news-last-show_n_888155.html
Oh, and I just joined GBTV.
Beck made a liar out of me as he did not cry on the last show.
Targetting sponsors is one of the tools that the Religious Right used most effectively. Yes, there was organized boycot of those products. Tit for tat I would say.
I believe his leaving was a negotiated decision. I believe he left on a friendly note. How can Fox News complain? His ratings were tremendous, although not all the watchers were beckites. I expect a third of those people were watching the enemy. Anyone who ignored someone as inflamatory and influential as Beck is a fool.
And by the way, I lost a friend for making that statement above. That is how enraptured she was with him. If she only knew I was on my good behavior when I said that.
@Cargo said:
I disagree. I thought he talked down to his audience. Then he built them up. “I have taught you this” and ” I have taught you that.”
He vacillated between supreme ego and being humble. He was quite the actor. I will hand him that.
His information was often not the findings of the most definitive work. He often ‘taught’ alternative opinion. Nothing bad about that if it is identified as such. It wasn’t.
Actually, he identified it as such. He stated that he found such and such a source that differed from other sources. Then he would explain why. He also said for his viewers to go read for themselves and make their own decisions.
Oh, well. He’s gone now. Media Matters is out of a job.
So why would someone deliberately start ‘teaching’ alternative materials at the expense of everything else. It isn’t just a ‘hey look at this alternative opinion.’ It always seemed to mimic tradtional and mainstream thinking. That’s a little bit different.
People who actually want to teach others to think give them two or more sources and ask them to compare, contrast, evaluate, analyze etc. and then draw one’s own conclusions. What he did was not teaching people to think for themselves. It was actually a form of brainwashing.
I grew tired of Beck’s TV program a long time ago. I can still listen to his radio show if there’s nothing else on, but I just couldn’t get into the TV show.
Brainwashing? Without compulsion? Telling people to go find sources of their own?
Yep. Brain washing.
He used alternative sources because he thought they were better. Some “mainstream” sources, line Zinn, are horribly biased and subversive.
Beck didn’t hide that he was seeking sources that presented information not normally found in history or that he had his own agenda. I think what disturbs some people is that his agenda and outlook resonated with so many.
Getting people to read the Federalist Papers or biographies…..oh my.
@Cargo,
What possibly makes him more of an authority on what is ‘better’ or ‘best?’ Obviously it was someone who supported his views. That doesn’t make something accurate. I could find something to support any ridiculous notion. If that’s all I read, I would be brainwashing myself.
Seriously Cargo, have you ever listened to him…really listened? He talks to his audience like they are children, feeds them full of crap, praises them, tells them how smart they are, feeds them more crap, brags.
I will admit, he is very good at persuassion. That is what makes him dangerous.
It didn’t upset me that his agenda and outlook resonated with so many. I have studied this phenomena for 25 years. I think it it sad. It was a cult following.
This woman I know was buying up all this food from this place. It became an obsession. If Glenn had told her to scrub the floor with her tooth brush she probably would have done it.
Don’t you see that as sad? Fortunately this woman could afford to buy up storage food. Many of those people couldn’t. Brainwashing occurs in many forms. Think of Hitler and other powerful leaders.
No, I don’t call that brainwashing. Because some people did everything he said to do, they already had those opinions and his arguments convinced them. If that is brainwashing, every politician does it. He presented an argument and they took it as plausible.
As for his recommendations…sure. That’s all they are. Why did people follow Oprah’s recommendations? Because she had a history of being right on those things.
I think his recommendation to read the early biographies, or the Federalist Papers, or even his books, are a good idea. Nothing forces the reader to take it as accurate. I’ve read many a book that I did not agree with. And he was the first to say that it was only his opinion.
He was convincing. That was his job. But no one is or was forced to believe anything he said, thus, it wasn’t brain washing. Delusional…maybe.
Would it be a good idea to buy food in bulk right now? Probably. Commodity prices are rising.
Would it have been a good idea to buy gold last year? ABSOLUTELY.
Is the Mid East acting the way he predicted? The unions? Yep.
And if you figure inflation the way the gov’t did in the past, taking in food and energy prices, that too is rising. Is there hyper-inflation? Not yet. Maybe never. We may even have deflation.
So, his track record is pretty good.
Cargo, I am speaking of survivalist food, not buying half a cow at discount prices. Storing vats of raw macaroni, that sort of thing. Who is going to eat that crap? I would eat it if there was an armageddon like catastrophe. I sure wouldn’t eat it otherwise. No one plans to live on Vienna sausage, macaroni and baked beans. He scared people.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. He didn’t predict much of anything. Most people have expected the middle east to explode for years. Do you seriously think some rube like Beck out-guessed the state dept?
Oprah has quite a following also. I think her charisma is more broad-based and doesn’t promote a political agenda. Her books were broad based and were both fiction and non-fiction. They were on a variety of topics. There really is no comparison. Oprah’s objective was to get America reading. Do you seriously think Beck’s objective was to get people to read or do you think it might have involved a little more insidious motive?
I would have appauded him if he recommended different articles/books with differing positions. However, that isn’t one he did. He was the great educator.
But…in the final analysis he was just another dude doing another 12 step program. He has gotten wealthy. He appeals to many. He moved on. I hope he takes his cult followers with him. As I said, once he stopped spewing the hate, screaming manically, and crying, he just got boring. I don’t do preacher mode too well.
@Moon-howler
Actually, from what I saw, yes, Beck outguessed the State Dept. This is the same State Dept that called Assad a moderate reformer. This is the same State Dept. that called the Muslim Brotherhood a secular organization. This is the same State Dept. that doesn’t know who the rebels are in Libya. He predicted that the Tunisian revolution would spread.
No one else was talking about that until it happened. He predicted riots and unrest throughout the MidEast and Europe weeks in advance. As for the food….he advocated both. However, most people can’t store bulky food so he also advocated food insurance. I already have two cases of MRE’s. I don’t need emergency food.
“Do you seriously think Beck’s objective was to get people to read or do you think it might have involved a little more insidious motive?”
Yes. It was his objective to a)read, b)get motivated to be politically active, primarily following what he advocated c) make money.
I didn’t find him boring. And I never saw him “spew hate.” But your mileage may vary.
The middle east wasn’t a surprise to the state department or to the many spook agencies that operate in that region. People don’t always tell everything they know or announce it. They certainly don’t go around talking about spook type stuff.
In the middle east, everything is relative.
Why do you think Beck has this inside track? He is one of those people who says…you heard it here first…there will be unrest in the middle east and there will be great change. He is never that specific. Well on any given day…..
Beck is just one big conspiracy theory but he had no inside channel to the middle east.
Did you think it was prozaic that made him stop ranting and raving on every show and that silly crying? He sure got his emotions under control real fast.
Sorry, I don’t fall for charlatans and he is a first class b rated actor if I ever saw one. He reminds me of that old SNL skit with Chris Farley about a van down by the river and the motivational speaker.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYBsFOZn9cg
I think that he was willing to look at the Middle East and the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood without PC blinders.
He was the only one in PUBLIC to state that the Egyptian revolution might not be a good thing, before everyone else.
He stated, before it happened, that the Middle East was going to erupt. No one expected this. This was on the same level as the fall of the Berlin Wall.
His inside track is simple. He watches what the left and the jihadists say and he took them at their word. He listens to them. They’re not hiding anything. It’s just that most of the media refuse to a) report it b) take them seriously, unless it advances THEIR agenda.
And I am saying that plenty of people expected the middle east to errupt. Perhaps they didn’t know the day or time but it was not a big shock to our operatives in the region. Why on earth would anyone watching announce that it was going to happen? That makes no sense.
These erruptions can be good things or bad things.
The Muslim Brotherhood was around for most of last century. Considering that most middle eastern countries are feudalm with great disparity between rich and poor, it only makes sense that there would be strong opposition. What would YOU do? I believe you are viewing it through American eyes rather than through the eyes of a middle easterner. They are also a charitable organization. They are just the largest and the most visible of the Islamic organizations. I am sure there is good and bad involved, like many other organizations.