The National Association of Broadcasters is pulling an award it had planned to give actor Robert De Niro after the Oscar winner made an appearance this week outside the trial of now-convicted felon, Donald Trump.
While the organization that represents over eight thousand television and radio stations, nationwide, is perfectly entitled to give their awards to whomever they choose, is it a coincidence that several members of NAB's Board of Directors sit at the top of Right-wing media juggernauts? A quick, ten second search on their website reveals these extreme conservatives to be, including, but not limited to, execs from both Fox Corp., as well as the Sinclair Group.
One needs no introduction to the spigot of lies that is Fox. The Rupert Murdoch-owned media monolith was forced to pay close to $1 billion after admitting its 'news' division lied to its viewers, re: Dominion voting machines and the 2020 election. Sinclair, however, has managed to avoid such costly public scrutiny... for now. Outside of being the favored broadcast network of Donald Trump, and outside of hiring Trump campaign manager, Boris Epshteyn, and outside of being called out for imposing 'mandatory, Trump-favored scripts' on its anchors, and outside of one of its anchors claiming he was "getting ready to ram a hot poker up Parkland shooting survivor and activist David Hogg's ass,'' (you can read a dozen more examples on their Wikipedia page) they've managed to stay under the radar.
Is it a coincidence Mr. De Niro has been all over television the past several years telling anyone who'd listen what he thinks of Trump, yet, as soon as he officially joins forces with the Biden campaign, and appears outside Trump's Manhattan trial, suddenly, he's "political"? Surely, he must've been notified months ago of this award? Are we to believe NAB's Board of Directors just realized De Niro is a Trump hater, yesterday? Gimme a break.
The NAB claim their event is "proudly bipartisan, uniting those from across the political spectrum." Which, when converted to Non-Spin, translates to, "Even though we see what's going on, even though an entire political party has decided to bow in fealty to the whims of a wannabe fascist who attacked his own Capitol and called for the execution of his vice-president, even though the Speaker of the House, the man second in line to the president, just threw his support behind a now-convicted felon and, in doing so, threw the entire American judicial process under the bus, even though not one, but two justices on our Supreme Court are conducting themselves like presidents of the MAGA Fan Club, we're going to pretend it's still 'business-as-usual' on Capitol Hill, and sit on this comfy fence. Even though we represent the nation's broadcasters, we're going to betray the legacies of Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite by, like so many of our cohorts, playing both sides of this thing, and join the Ford Foundation in the Democracy Hall of Shame."
The NAB needs to wake up and smell the swastika. The time for political correctness disappeared the moment 147 Republicans voted to side with the architect of the Insurrection and attempted to overturn a democratic election. Probably even before that.
They also claim their goal is to "maintain the focus on the award winners." Do they think, by kicking arguably the greatest actor of all-time out of their dinner, and rescinding his award, they're keeping that focus? Surely, no one’s going to write a story drawing attention to their cowardly move and away from the dinner.
Here's another head-scratcher for you: If the NAB is so concerned with 'unity', 'neutrality', and 'political correctness', why, then, are the aforementioned networks, who've shown more than a little bias towards the Right, allowed to remain on their board? Shouldn't their board only be made up of networks who've shown complete fairness, and not had to pay billions in fines, in reporting the news? #Crickets
What do these smug defenders of broadcasters think will be the first thing to go on the first day of the next Trump administration? Give you a hint, it rhymes with "Freedom of the Press." Thus, by publicly denouncing Mr. De Niro for using his right to free speech to help defend our democracy from those trying to destroying it, the NAB indirectly notched a win for these miscreants, and in doing so, bring us one step closer to that reality. Congratulations! Another episode of "The Unwitting MAGAts" is a wrap! Tune in next week for CNN's takedown of Biden's latest "feeble attempt" at saving our democracy.
I saw the revival of Cabaret the other night. More than a few of us walked out wondering, "Is it 1934, or 2024?" Is there a difference? There is no difference. Not when those entrusted with reporting the news decide it's in their own best interest to keep quiet. Are you listening, Washington Post?
Our news organizations' lack of courage to speak out -or worse, their incessant attempts at normalizing it, no doubt, play a major role in why we are where we are. Case in Point: When execs at NBC News thought it was a good idea to bring Trump toadie, Ronna McDaniel, to MSNBC, it was their own anchors, in an unprecedented, on-air mutiny, who put a stop to it. Had they not done so, you can bet McDaniel would've been sitting there today, alongside Rachel and Lawrence and co., talking about how the 'Biden DOJ' didn't give her old boss a fair shake. Incidentally, in the six weeks since their public shaming, not a single NBC-UNI exec has been fired for their part in that fiasco.
A few months back, I co-authored an article entitled, The Media Isn't Part of the Problem, It IS the Problem. The piece focused on outlets such as Yahoo News' continued shameless capitulation to Fox News by happily propagating its lies, on its front page, to its millions of readers, day in/day out, in exchange for clicks; how Meta, Youtube and X have all done more than their fare share of spreading disinformation, and continue to do so, etc. etc. Sadly, the National Association of Broadcasters have proved theyare no different. Sure, they're not actively spreading lies, but by the simple act of rescinding an award from one of the most prominent, and only, non-political defenders of democracy, they're saying that those who do deserve 'equal time', and by doing so, take their rightful place along the rest on the wrong side of history.
Perhaps the best, and most ironic part of this latest pathetic attempt at bothsideism; the award is actually called the Service to America award. I don't know about you, but I can't think of a better service to America, at this point in time, than using your fame to stand up in Lady Liberty's defense. If only there were more like you, Mr. De Niro, perhaps we wouldn't be where we are.