Ads pulled from Laura Ingraham's Fox News show after she mocked Parkland survivor

[webfact]

Ads pulled from Ingraham show after she mocked Parkland survivor

By Suzannah Gonzales

 

A combination of file photos show media personality Laura Ingraham in Washington October 14, 2017 and Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School student David Hogg, at a rally in Washington March 24, 2018. REUTERS/Mary F. Calvert, Jonathan Ernst/Files

 

(Reuters) - At least five companies said on Thursday they were dropping advertisements from Laura Ingraham's Fox News show after the conservative pundit mocked a teenage survivor of the Florida school massacre on Twitter and he responded with a call for a boycott.

 

Parkland student David Hogg, 17, tweeted a list of a dozen companies that advertise on "The Ingraham Angle" and urged his supporters to demand that they cancel their ads.

 

Hogg is a survivor of the Feb. 14 mass shooting that killed 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in the Parkland suburb of Fort Lauderdale. He and other classmates have become the faces of a new youth-led movement calling for tighter restrictions on firearms.

 

Hogg took aim at Ingraham's advertisers after she taunted him on Twitter on Wednesday, accusing him of whining about being rejected by four colleges to which he had applied.

 

On Thursday, Ingraham tweeted an apology "in the spirit of Holy Week," saying she was sorry for any hurt or upset she had caused Hogg or any of the "brave victims" of Parkland.

 

"For the record, I believe my show was the first to feature David ... immediately after that horrific shooting and even noted how 'poised' he was given the tragedy," Ingraham tweeted.

 

But her apology did not stop companies from departing.

 

Nutrish, the pet food line created by celebrity chef Rachael Ray, travel website TripAdvisor Inc <TRIP.O>, online home furnishings seller Wayfair Inc <W.N>, the world's largest packaged food company, Nestle SA <NESN.S> and travel website Expedia Group Inc <EXPE.O> all said they were cancelling their advertisements.

 

Wayfair said in a statement that it supports dialogue and debate, but "the decision of an adult to personally criticize a high school student who has lost his classmates in an unspeakable tragedy is not consistent with our values."

 

Replying to Hogg's boycott call, Nutrish tweeted: "We are in the process of removing our ads from Laura Ingraham's program."

 

A Nutrish representative did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

 

Responding to public pressure, Nestle wrote on Twitter that it had "no plans to buy ads on the show in future."

 

CNBC cited a TripAdvisor spokesman as saying the company does not condone "inappropriate comments" by Ingraham that "cross the line of decency."

 

TripAdvisor representatives did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

 

Expedia, which was not on Hogg's list or another list of sponsors that Hogg retweeted, "no longer advertises on this show," Expedia spokeswoman Maureen Thon said in an email.

 

Hogg wrote on Twitter that an apology just to mollify advertisers was insufficient. He said he would accept it only if Ingraham denounced the way Fox News treated him and his friends.

 

"It's time to love thy neighbor, not mudsling at children," Hogg tweeted.

 

Ingraham's show runs on Fox News, part of Rupert Murdoch's Twenty-First Century Fox Inc <FOXA.O>.

 

(Reporting by Suzannah Gonzales in Chicago; Additional reporting by Gina Cherelus in New York; Editing by David Gregorio and Matthew Lewis)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-03-30

[Samui Bodoh]

3 minutes ago, webfact said:

At least five companies said on Thursday they were dropping advertisements from Laura Ingraham's Fox News show after the conservative pundit mocked a teenage survivor of the Florida school massacre on Twitter and he responded with a call for a boycott.

I am quite conflicted about this and similar stories.

 

I think she is a vile, loathsome, ideologically-scary, giant B****, but on the other hand her show isn't news (despite trying to look like it is) and even she has the right to free speech, no matter how offensive.

 

There is already waaaaaaay too much tribalism and polarization in the world; do we really want to go down the road where advertisers have to "pick a side" as well?

 

Based on the story above, it sounds like she was insensitive and stupid, but are those crimes? Not to me.

 

Perhaps we all need to chill a bit...

[stevenl]

22 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

I am quite conflicted about this and similar stories.

 

I think she is a vile, loathsome, ideologically-scary, giant B****, but on the other hand her show isn't news (despite trying to look like it is) and even she has the right to free speech, no matter how offensive.

 

There is already waaaaaaay too much tribalism and polarization in the world; do we really want to go down the road where advertisers have to "pick a side" as well?

 

Based on the story above, it sounds like she was insensitive and stupid, but are those crimes? Not to me.

 

Perhaps we all need to chill a bit...

Of course advertisers have to pick. They are associated with a show, and are choosing the audience they want.

 

If it were crimes justice would be on her heels in stead of advertisers.

Edited March 29, 2018 by stevenl

[Credo]

What this lady said is abhorrent.   Nobody has to agree with these young people and what they are doing, but it is important to remember that many of them are still children and they have been through a horrific, life altering event.   Many survivors of shootings suffer with PTSD for years.    

 

A number of politicians have made some vile remarks about the survivors as well, and all of them deserve to be publicly chastised and voted out of office.

 

It is sad that a discussion about how to best deal with school shootings can't be held in a decent and respectable manner, but it can't as long as the adults aren't going to act like, well, adults.   

 

Personally, I hope she ends up off the air.   

 

[pedro01]

Hard to say.

 

According to the article, she didn't mock him for being a victim. She mocked him for whining about college places. So before passing judgement - I'd like to know if that's true or not.

 

I'd normally say "follow the money" and side with the advertisers but the world has gone so PC lately that pulling ads is almost an ad in itself. "look how PC we are, we pulled our ads". It's a great way to get coverage.

 

In fact, who knows - the advertisers may have been in on it...

[daoyai]

 Hogg is a media <deleted>,  drunk on his fame as a "survivor".  Now he is claiming to be a "child"... I can finally agree with him on something.

[Langsuan Man]

On 3/30/2018 at 8:17 AM, daoyai said:

 Hogg is a media <deleted>,  drunk on his fame as a "survivor".  Now he is claiming to be a "child"... I can finally agree with him on something.

Normal conservative reaction; shoot the messenger, never mind the message

[jobwolf]

This picture of her shows what Make up can do, or not.!

She has always been bigmouthed and uninformed like most at Fox.

The loudest, foulmouthed and screaming bunch of opinionated presenters in the world.

Hope Trump will hire some of them, they would fit in perfectly.

[mok199]

I think her and Hannity make a perfect couple...

[daoyai]

44 minutes ago, Langsuan Man said:

Normal conservative reaction; shoot the messenger, never mind the message

actually, I am liberal/libertarian...  Hogg boy is using his media attention to winge about   not being accepted to the uni. of his choosing...  he is now crying about the reaction to that and trying to ruin careers for being called out, such a little wimp.

[Expatthailover]

Well done the advertisers.

Shame on fox for not terminating this vile woman's contract immediately.

Shame on trump ( not an emotion he has ever experienced) for not denouncing  fox and its management for allowing this to happen .

All in all typical events perpetrated by trump supporters.

Roll on his earliest possible demise

 

 

[korkenzieher]

The point ultimately is that he *wasn't* a survivor of the shooting, which initially he admitted. He was at home and rode to the school when he heard about the attack. He *is* a media whore, milking the attention because his classmates died - not because he survived. Ingraham is right to call him out, IMO. Hogg is a turd, pure and simple.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, pedro01 said:

Hard to say.

 

According to the article, she didn't mock him for being a victim. She mocked him for whining about college places. So before passing judgement - I'd like to know if that's true or not.

 

I'd normally say "follow the money" and side with the advertisers but the world has gone so PC lately that pulling ads is almost an ad in itself. "look how PC we are, we pulled our ads". It's a great way to get coverage.

 

In fact, who knows - the advertisers may have been in on it...

They can't shut them down due to freedom of speech, so the plan is to target individual opinion leaders on Fox and get them defunded, so they are shut down. Censorship by removal.

They already tried with Hannity, but failed.

I don't understand how the funding is targeted to individual shows, rather than as a station as a whole, but apparently it is.

Personally, she is not my favourite host on Fox by a long shot, but she has a following.

The ultimate aim is to remove any that have a public platform opposing the leftist movement, and it seems like Fox is the main one at present.

O Reilley is an example of what happens when successfully targeted. Removed because of bad publicity, but never proven to have done anything wrong.

[thaibeachlovers]

16 minutes ago, Expatthailover said:

Well done the advertisers.

Shame on fox for not terminating this vile woman's contract immediately.

Shame on trump ( not an emotion he has ever experienced) for not denouncing  fox and its management for allowing this to happen .

All in all typical events perpetrated by trump supporters.

Roll on his earliest possible demise

 

 

Vile? Have you actually watched her show?

I'm not a fan of hers, but she's hardly "vile". There are others in the political scene that are "vile", but all she does is oppose the leftists, which, last time I looked, was a normal part of political discourse. 

[mwbrown]

On 3/30/2018 at 9:27 AM, korkenzieher said:

The point ultimately is that he *wasn't* a survivor of the shooting, which initially he admitted. He was at home and rode to the school when he heard about the attack. He *is* a media prostitute, milking the attention because his classmates died - not because he survived. Ingraham is right to call him out, IMO. Hogg is a turd, pure and simple.

 

This is a lie, spread by the typical conspiracy theorists.  Perhaps you are the turd, pure and simple?

 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/david-hogg-on-campus-rumor-hoax/

[meinphuket]

Excellent ! Dump Trump's propaganda channel, and that opionated b*¥>=  !

[scorecard]

4 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

I am quite conflicted about this and similar stories.

 

I think she is a vile, loathsome, ideologically-scary, giant B****, but on the other hand her show isn't news (despite trying to look like it is) and even she has the right to free speech, no matter how offensive.

 

There is already waaaaaaay too much tribalism and polarization in the world; do we really want to go down the road where advertisers have to "pick a side" as well?

 

Based on the story above, it sounds like she was insensitive and stupid, but are those crimes? Not to me.

 

Perhaps we all need to chill a bit...

 

So what you're really saying, bottom line, is that her comments are OK?

 

Freedom of speech is just fine, but surely it comes with responsibilities and with some ethical boundaries? Perhaps it's also true that the media has a responsibility in this area?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is there not st

[kamahele]

1 hour ago, daoyai said:

actually, I am liberal/libertarian...  Hogg boy is using his media attention to winge about   not being accepted to the uni. of his choosing...  he is now crying about the reaction to that and trying to ruin careers for being called out, such a little wimp.

Mr. Hogg didn't "winge" about not being accepted to the university of his choice. A journalist asked him about the universities he's applied to and he answer that he was rejected by several and accepted by several, getting his first rejection letter the day after the attack (certainly sent prior).

[Jonnapat]

Well done to these people, hope there are more to follow which according to later accounts is continuing.

Why people ever tune in to Fox baffles me completely. 

It's not a news programme, merely right wing propaganda. 

[inactiveposter]

She was chastised a little while ago for saying basketball players should shut up and dribble, as if their opinions don’t matter. She needs to think before she speaks, if possible.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[selftaopath]

Typical Fox dribble.

[Thingamabob]

Personally I find Hogg extremely irritating. 

[biggles45]

"But isn't it a counter to CNN, which to this outsider seems to comprise left-wing, democrat supporting propaganda?

[Srikcir]

“Whining” is what she says based on a retweet from Dailywire.com (  https://twitter.com/IngrahamAngle/status/979021639458459648 ) of an article written by Joseph Curl wherein he says Hoggs is a gun rights provocateur and self appointed spokesman for a generation. Curl makes no mention of Hoggs “whinning.” That apparently is Laura’s interpretation of Hoggs statement that it was “kind of annoying.”

https://www.dailywire.com/news/28770/gun-rights-provocateur-david-hogg-rejected-four-joseph-curl

The majority of replies to Laura’s comments on her retweet were not very nice.                                     

PS: Hoggs did get accepted by Caltech. Ranked 7^th in the US and 3^rd in World University Rankings (2018)

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/california-institute-technology

 

[Andaman Al]

8 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Vile? Have you actually watched her show?

I'm not a fan of hers, but she's hardly "vile". There are others in the political scene that are "vile", but all she does is oppose the leftists, which, last time I looked, was a normal part of political discourse. 

No, she really is vile. Not sure about her photo at the start of the OP though, it looks like a very poor photoshop effort of making her look overly wrinkly with bad skin.

[dunroaming]

11 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

I am quite conflicted about this and similar stories.

 

I think she is a vile, loathsome, ideologically-scary, giant B****, but on the other hand her show isn't news (despite trying to look like it is) and even she has the right to free speech, no matter how offensive.

 

There is already waaaaaaay too much tribalism and polarization in the world; do we really want to go down the road where advertisers have to "pick a side" as well?

 

Based on the story above, it sounds like she was insensitive and stupid, but are those crimes? Not to me.

 

Perhaps we all need to chill a bit...

You are quite right, a "Fox News Show" is not about news at all.  Unfortunately many think it is and Fox should rename such shows accordingly.  I also agree about freedom of speech as long as it is presented as opinion and in no way attached as so called "news".

[rgraham]

These survivors are anything but brave, they were simply lucky. Life goes on, live it and stop whining about an isolated event.

[IAMHERE]

I remember the rabble rouser students from the 60's and 70's; no wonder a college doesn't want him on their campus. Of course he has every right to whine, it is an entitlement of American teenagers after all. 

[starky]

13 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

I am quite conflicted about this and similar stories.

 

I think she is a vile, loathsome, ideologically-scary, giant B****, but on the other hand her show isn't news (despite trying to look like it is) and even she has the right to free speech, no matter how offensive.

 

There is already waaaaaaay too much tribalism and polarization in the world; do we really want to go down the road where advertisers have to "pick a side" as well?

 

Based on the story above, it sounds like she was insensitive and stupid, but are those crimes? Not to me.

 

Perhaps we all need to chill a bit...

Yep she has her right to free speech and the advertisers have the right to sponsor whatever shows they feel reflect their corporate message. The advertisers aren't picking sides they don't want to be associated with her vile rubbish, perhaps she will find sponsors who agree with her views. She can continue to say whatever she wants.

Edited March 30, 2018 by starky

[greenchair]

People are just way too sensitive these days. 

I have seen quite a few celebrities lose their careers over a small comment that really wasn't that offensive. 

It's a great attention getter for the person that pulls the victim card.