
Apple boycotts Fox News because of Glenn Beck - olefoo
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/03/29/apple-boycotts-fox-news-because-of-glenn-beck/
======
joegaudet
I for one am glad about this. Glenn Beck is the worst kind of person, stirring
up fear for his own personal gain.

This along with google's decision to leave china, have been two great examples
of companies doing (at least what I perceive to be) the right thing.

~~~
mynameishere
Glenn Beck is not the worst kind of person. You see? You're saying something
blatantly false and everyone agrees with you. It's sad.

~~~
RevRal
I can't think of a worse _kind_ of person.

Glen Beck obviously isn't the worst in this category.

~~~
endtime
What about, say, Hitler?

Don't get me wrong, I can't stand Beck, but I do think he compares favorably
to Hitler, Stalin, et al.

~~~
stcredzero
This is an interesting variation on Godwin's. What does it mean when someone
is being compared favorably to Hitler?

Reminds me of a friend's quip about another friend's father: "I was surprised
to learn he leans a little to the left of Mao."

~~~
endtime
I knew someone was going to call Godwin's, even though I don't think it's
justified. The thing is, if you're going to make extreme claims (like that
Beck is the worst kind of person) then you are really asking for it.

------
spamizbad
It's more accurate to say they've withdrawn advertisement due to pressure from
Color of Change.

Given Fox's ratings I'm sure they can fill the void with less picky companies.
The network's demos don't mesh with Apple's target market anyway.

~~~
krschultz
I bet a lot of people in marketing disagree with that last statement.

~~~
spamizbad
Are you one of those people in marketing? If so, straighten me out because I
don't believe you!

~~~
pak
There are conservative folks with plenty of expendable cash... it's not like
Apple caters its products to liberals. In many ways Apple tries to position
itself as a BMW or Mercedes Benz of the computer market; think of the target
for those products.

~~~
Alex3917
Apple absolutely caters it's products toward liberals. Think different? 1984?
The power of the imagination? Dancing hipsters with iPods?

~~~
torial
Just to add to a good list -- Al Gore on the board is catering toward liberals
and not conservatives!

------
nlwhittemore
Totally reasonable decision. It's one thing when you're talking just political
debate and a company explicitly backing one party. But Beck has created an
entirely alternate universe that feeds the insane, irrational hatred that the
GOP has turned to instead of coming up with good ideas in the last year.

I hope there is a major shift in the political conversation and the
Republicans actually have a platform again, but Beck is a whole different
ballgame for now than someone like O'Rielly even, and I wouldn't want to
associate myself with him either.

~~~
joezydeco
I say let Beck go on and fracture the party.

------
brown9-2
Here is a longer list of other companies that have joined the same campaign:
<http://colorofchange.org/beck/more/companies.html>

Highlights:

-AT&T

-Bank of America

-Best Buy

-Citrix Online

-Johnson & Johnson

-Mercedes-Benz

-Procter & Gamble

-SC Johnson (makers of Ziploc, Off!, Pledge, and other products)

-Sprint

-Toyota-Lexus

-The UPS Store

-United States Postal Service

-Verizon Wireless

-Wal-Mart

~~~
adolph
Did they pay for this brand placement, or is it as free as posting to
ycombinator.news?

------
dschobel
Interesting, the article mentions that ads from smaller companies have been
running in place of the boycotting corps, didn't a HNer get his Google TV ad
run on Beck's show a week or so ago?

~~~
dschobel
found it: _How I Ran An Ad on Fox News via Google TV Ads_

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1206394>

$1300 got them seven airings on Glen Beck reruns.

------
delackner
A friend in town from London reminded me that his show is actually shown
outside the US, and said that British advertisers are quite understandably
unhappy with his show. I've never seen it, but I can't imagine it appealing to
an international audience.

~~~
mahmud
I was once in a feel-good Arab-American lovefest summit where influential
Arabs were being shown around NYC and DC at the behest of Karen Hughes and the
Bush administration. I was in it for the free food.

They bused an assortment of Iraqis back to their hotel after a day of
sightseeing historic places in town. And I stuck around interpreting for one
of the artists ..

Long story short. The Iraqis gathered in the hotel lobby where the TV was set
to Fox news and, I must say, a day's worth of diplomacy was undone with one
hour of the O'Reilly Factor.

I am all for freedom of expression, but Fox News is something I rather keep in
the U.S. Fox can broadcast overseas as long as they supply traveling and expat
Americans with Canadian-flag backpack badges.

It's just embarrassing, eh.

~~~
chriskelley
I know your last comment was in jest, but as someone from the US that travels
a lot, I would like to mention that I think it is really important for
educated/reasonable US Citizens to engage with locals and other travelers
while abroad and let people know that what they see on Fox News (et al) isn't
all we have to offer!

Many of my friends and colleagues here at home are some of the most wonderful,
intelligent, caring people I have met anywhere on the globe, and it does them
a great injustice to let people around the world judge the US based on what
they see or hear on TV.

It's the responsibility of those of us that travel to spread the good word of
the reasonable US Citizen!

~~~
dhyasama
I couldn't agree more. I traveled to Croatia a few years ago and stayed with
locals. One of the first things each of them said was some variation of "I
don't like George Bush." Simply saying "I don't either" brightened them up
considerably.

~~~
jdminhbg
It's kind of sad to be so narrowly defined by politics like that.

I'm not really interested in being friends with someone who would dislike me
due to someone there's a 75% chance (totals + participation) I didn't vote
for. Which doesn't even begin to scrape the surface of the importance of
knowing and talking to people with opposing views in the first place.

------
ttrashh
Anyone else notice Carbonite is a sponsor? I'm going to move to another backup
solution.

------
gjm11
The TUAW article is just repeating a small amount of the content of this
Washington Post story: [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2010/03...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2010/03/14/AR2010031402312.html)

------
TomOfTTB
This is just more proof that politics makes people stupid. Boycotting the
whole network does the opposite of what they want because people tend to pull
together when they're being jointly attacked. So this move is more likely to
make Fox stand behind Beck than it is to get them to fire him

(As has been pointed out Fox News has double the viewers of it's nearest
competitor so it isn't going to be lacking for advertisers)

A better move would be to move all their advertising to other shows. Cause all
the other ships to rise while Beck's sinks. Then the network won't feel under
fire and will instead be asking "Maybe this Beck guy is more trouble than he's
worth?"

~~~
lallysingh
Sure, but:

(1) I can't imagine Steve's a fan of Fox.

(2) I think Apple may get more favor with their key demographics this way than
by supporting Fox. There's a pretty liberal bias in Apple's demographics, at
least from my anecdotal experience.

~~~
TomOfTTB
1.You’re right but Jobs has shown that he doesn’t think it’s a good idea to
mix politics and business: [http://gawker.com/505501/apple-crushes-iphone-
developers-dre...](http://gawker.com/505501/apple-crushes-iphone-developers-
dreams)

2.I would hope not. Say what you will about Fox News it’s no worse than MSNBC
on the other side. Unless you truly believe Scott Brown is a “Irresponsible,
Homophobic, Racist, Reactionary, Nude Model, Teabagging, Supporter Of Violence
Against Women and Against Politicians with whom He Disagrees”. Apple’s fans
clearly skew liberal but I’d like to think anyone would be opposed to that
kind of hypocrisy.

Edit: I don't mean to be rude but I just don't have the energy to argue with
political nonsense. So all those who claim MSNBC is so much better than Fox
News are just being ridiculous. One's left wing and one's right wing and the
only reason a person would think one is better than the other is if they
subscribed to the political agenda of that station.

Citing Joe Scarborough is no different than Fox citing Alan Colmes (no longer
on the network but who would still have a job there if he wanted it). And it's
just silly to say someone like Olbermann is better or worse than Hannity or
O'Reilly.

~~~
lenley
Please, MSNBC is definitely biased, but... You are falsely equating the
FoxNews and MSNBC. Further, FoxNews is run by Roger Ailes ... which says an
awful lot -- just read his descriptions of FoxNews.

MSNBC... 1.) Morning Joe in the morning is 3 hours of conservative programming
every morning.

2.) Olbermann and Matthews are over the top, but nowhere near Hannity and
Beck.

3.) Maddow's an excellent interviewer and actually allows her opponents to
answer questions and engage in substantive dialogue -- unlike anyone else on
FoxNews or MSNBC. Maddow is progressive/liberal whatever the folks call
themselves; however, she is critical of Democrats and Republicans both all the
time from her ideological positions -- not just by party like Fox hosts,
anchors etc.. tend to do.

~~~
jbooth
Matthews isn't even a liberal. He's one of those "definitely-not-liberal-and-
drawing-contrasts-all-the-time-to-prove-it-so-he-can-keep-social-climbing"
people who were uniquely produced by the DC climate over the last 30 years.

~~~
lenley
Yeah, I'd agree Matthews is a poseur "hard-hat - union" Democrat, but not so
much a liberal.

------
btilly
(I can't believe that we have a Glenn Beck discussion without this comment
yet.)

I am not saying that Glenn Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990. I'm
not saying that he didn't. But I'm asking why he hasn't _denied_ it.

Also see Jon Stewart's take: [http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/20/jon-
stewart-becomes-...](http://unreasonablefaith.com/2010/03/20/jon-stewart-
becomes-glenn-beck/)

------
sdfm
I, personally, am a news junkie and I watch almost ALL of the news
networks....CNN, MSNBC (when I can stomach THEIR own brand of vitriol), ABC,
FOX, CBS and CSPAN. Other than CSPAN, FOX is the only network news channel
that even attempts to balance its news shows with opposite points of view. I
was watching Chris Matthews last night as he interviewed two people about some
stupid subject.....including Matthews all three of those guys completely
agreed with each other about what they were discussing and it was, of course,
the leftist viewpoint. If you turn on FOX news shows they always have someone,
whether it is Juan Williams or Mara Liasson of NPR fame or other liberal
commentators on their Sunday Business News show to "balance out" their own
conservatives. Yes, Beck is outrageous but what about that maniac Keith
Olberman over at MSNBC? The problem with all this censoring of FOX or anyone
else is that it is just that.....censorship.

------
hkuo
The only reason Fox News has the numbers it has is because it is the only
channel that panders to the lowest common denominator of idiots. Every other
major channel has some moralistic sense, so all of the smarter people on the
curve get spread out amongst them.

~~~
CWuestefeld
Downvote because of your assertion that "Every other major channel has some
moralistic sense".

In fact, Fox is _intensely_ moralistic. You just happen to disagree with what
those morals are.

Also, you imply that holding these morals indicates that one is less
intelligent than those that share _your_ morals. I'm sure this is incorrect,
and it's certainly true that you haven't offered any reason to believe it.

~~~
roc
Fox _markets to_ a certain group of intensely moralistic people.

That's a very important distinction to remember.

If the network were _actually_ moralistic, it wouldn't defend, promote and
directly pay so many people who talk the talk, but have been exposed as acting
in stark contrast to the network's stated morals.

(I'm not claiming other news networks are different in this regard.)

~~~
CWuestefeld
That's a fair clarification.

But I'd claim this is turtles all the way down. The politicians that they're
covering exhibit the same dichotomy of actual morals versus play acting for
market share.

I could go on for days with examples, but here are a few:

* Apparently Republicans themselves were the first to suggest an "individual mandate" for health insurance. Yet they're opposed to it now. See discussion here ([http://volokh.com/2010/03/29/was-the-individual-mandate-a-re...](http://volokh.com/2010/03/29/was-the-individual-mandate-a-republican-idea/) ) for example.

* Barney Frank and friends twisted the arms of mortgage lenders to get them to extend loans to people that wouldn't traditionally be considered good candidates. A few years later, he's on TV crucifying banks for doing just that.

~~~
roc
Absolutely agreed.

All the more reason to note the distinction between words and deeds
(marketing/reality). If we point out the lack of clothes, refuse to discuss
talking-head spin and instead stick to reality and actions, I think we'll be
better off.

We (private citizens) aren't served by allowing that marketing to be
perpetuated as truth.

~~~
CWuestefeld
Philosophically this is true. But in the real world...

First, the "Myth of the Rational Voter" tells us that for any individual, deep
research on politics doesn't pay off economically (their individual opinion
makes little enough difference that what they lose due to a bad decision is
smaller than what they'd have to invest to make the right decision). Thus, the
actual democratic process is an example of the tragedy of the commons.

Second, I wonder to what degree people _really_ hold the positions that they
talk about. To what degree are the people trying to fit into the norms of
their community? Perhaps the people are showing a behavior that's analogous to
the "marketing" chameleon behavior of politicians and the MSM.

------
johnwh
I know that many Fox News Anchors use Macs on their respective shows (Fox News
is on the TVs at work, do not judge me!), I wonder if Fox will react to this
by pulling those computers.

------
jsz0
As big business gets even more directly involved in politics through nearly
limitless donation we need to become much more aware of which companies we
choose to purchase products from. Realistically I don't expect people to
totally change their buying habits but if it's a simple Coke vs. Pepsi sort of
choice it's easy enough to make a difference.

------
quizbiz
Is there a way to analytically test if Fox News is bringing in their target
demographic? Aside from Girls Gone Wild and Comedy Central, I haven't observed
matches that make really good sense. The web is such a better platform in my
ignorant opinion.

------
cageface
I haven't been very happy with several of Apple's latest moves but I have to
applaud them for this. It's encouraging to see that some tech companies have
the guts to stand up for their values, even if it costs them real revenue.

~~~
danudey
They'll move their ad dollars from Fox to some other channel and get their
sales there instead. I doubt Apple has a huge market among people who only
ever watch Fox.

------
daniel02216
I love how they think their network's reputation is 'beginning' to change, and
that it isn't already hopelessly ruined.

~~~
nollidge
I wish it weren't so, but they do have a solid viewership.

------
Daniel_Newby
Apple is just cultivating brand blandness. Steve Jobs aspires to be
inoffensive to everyone, like Jim Davis does with Garfield the cat. If Glenn
Beck had the personality equivalent of rounded corners and a shiny finish,
Apple wouldn't be doing this.

------
shrnky
Man I hate when entertainers start getting political. BUZZ KILL!

------
Neon2012
Glenn Beck primarily speaks out against progressivism and he believes that the
United States is spending itself into oblivion. I, for one, completely agree
with him.

If we are lucky, one day we will all be able to make ipods for China. :)

~~~
pstuart
Please define how 'progressivism' equals 'spending into oblivion'. Does that
include the 2 wars the U.S. has been waging for the last 7 years?

~~~
anamax
Let's make sure I understand.

Someone says "X is bad". Your response is "bad person Y also did X".

It's unclear how that's an argument for the goodness of X.

Note that the person who said "X is bad" may have disagreed with it when Y did
it. If you find X acceptable now, it's unclear why you're criticizing Y for
doing it.

And, FWIW, the Iraq/Afghanistan war has been cheaper than Obama's other
adventures. And, for all the pre-election talk, Obama has followed the Bush
timetable/plan wrt Iraq/Afganistan.

Bush's errors do not justify or excuse Obama's actions. However, they do
constrain them.

WRT govt debt/spending, it's one thing to say "I'll start a diet tomorrow" if
you're 20 pounds overweight and quite another if you're 200 pounds overweight.
If you honestly think that Bush put us in a hole with spending, you can't
seriously argue for digging it deeper.

------
CoachRufus87
"fair & balanced" -LOL

i wonder why i'm getting downvoted...we all know that each news outlet has
their own angle on the way our country is going. if you don't believe that,
then you sadly have your blinders on. see things for what they are folks

~~~
jon_dahl
You're downvoted not because you're right or wrong, but because this is not a
political discussion forum. (This whole post is borderline, but at least most
people have stuck to talking about the Apple/Fox News issue, not which side is
destroying the country.)

~~~
olefoo
I had some serious doubts about putting this on HN, and I'm glad to see that
my worst fears weren't realized. What swung me towards posting it was the hope
that someone on here would have some insight as to why Apple is following this
course; unfortunately I have not seen anything solid in that regard.

My own take is that to some extent, it's about social class. There may be
FoxNews fans who are Mac fans as well, but Apple's brand is an aspirational
one; and like BMWs or Volvos it ends up being associated with upper middle-
class liberal values even though the product itself has no such bias.

