Why would Fox News fire its most popular host? On average, a million more people watched Tucker Carlson each night than the Fox programs before and after his show. It attracted four times as many viewers as the 8 o'clock show on CNN, Anderson Cooper 360°. He was the main puller on Fox's streaming service, and no rising star at the network is expected to take his place.
Translation of an English article by Brownstone Institute
It wasn't a lack of success that Carlson worked out, so we might wonder why Fox fired their main anchor. It may have been a battle for egos between Carlson and the Murdochs (fox's biggest owner). Carlson may have threatened to air programs they didn't like related to the Jan. 6 tapes, the recent settlement with Dominion, or the coverage of Donald Trump.
Any of these statements would indicate that ego won out over financial sanity in the boardroom. Carlson is a source of income, and the company's shares plummeted after monday's announcement.
But what if there was a rational economic explanation for his resignation? What if the people who own Fox have far more interest in neutralizing criticism of their other economic holdings than they have in the success of Fox's television division?
Last Wednesday, Carlson opened his show with an attack on the pharmaceutical industry's manipulation of the news media.
"Sometimes you wonder how nasty and dishonest our news media is," Carlson began. "Ask yourself, is there a news organization you know so corrupt that it's willing to hurt you on behalf of its biggest advertisers?"
Carlson then attacked the news media for taking "hundreds of millions of dollars from Big Pharma companies" and promoting "their sketchy products on the air and while doing so, they vilified anyone who was skeptical of those products."
Five days later, Carlson was fired. Perhaps his stardom was not great enough to overcome the problem he described.
- In addition to MyPillow, the largest Advertisers from Fox News GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Novartis and BlackRock.
- Vanguard is the greatest Institutional owner from Fox Corporation, with a 6.9 percent stake in the company. BlackRock owns another 4.7 percent.
- Vanguard and BlackRock are the two largest owners from Pfizer. Together, they own more than 15 percent of the company.
- Vanguard and BlackRock are the two largest shareholders from Johnson & Johnson. Together, they own more than 14 percent of the company.
- Vanguard and BlackRock are the second and third largest owner from Moderna. Together, they own more than 13 percent of the company.
You may see a trend.
De belangen van Vanguard en BlackRock in Fox bedragen minder dan $750 miljoen. Hun investeringen in Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly, Pfizer en Merck bedragen meer dan 225 miljard dollar.
When Carlson attacked the pharmaceutical industry, he attacked the same funds that owned his network. But those investments in Big Pharma were 300 times larger than their shares in Fox. Carlson may have stepped on a landmine, saying the unspeakable to the entangled economic interests of the world's most powerful corporations.
Toen farmaceutische bedrijven tijdens Covid het overheidsbeleid overnamen, besteedden zij aanzienlijk meer geld aan reclame en marketing dan aan onderzoek en ontwikkeling (R&D).
In 2020 besteedde Pfizer 12 miljard dollar aan verkoop en marketing en 9 miljard aan O&O. Johnson & Johnson besteedde dat jaar 22 miljard dollar aan verkoop en marketing en 12 miljard dollar aan O&O.
The efforts of the industry were rewarded. Billions of dollars in advertising led millions of Americans to tune in to programs sponsored by Pfizer. The press promoted their products and rarely mentioned the history of Big Pharma's unjust enrichment, fraud, and criminal trials.
In announcing Pfizer's 2022 annual report, CEO Albert Bourla stressed the importance of customers' "positive perception" of the pharmaceutical giant.
"2022 was a record year for Pfizer, not just in terms of revenue and earnings per share, which were the highest in our long history," Bourla noted. "But more importantly, in terms of the percentage of patients who have a positive perception of Pfizer and the work we do."
Carlson committed the media's sin by attacking that positive perception, and it may have caused his resignation. Either way, the facts show a frightening indication that the establishment media is still dependent on Big Pharma, and that their programming requires the approval of the figures they are supposed to hold accountable.
Here is his broadcast five days before his resignation.