Well in a very strange and unexpected twist, apparently Rose McGowan cold-called Tucker's producers and asked to come on the show. Apparently Tucker knew very little about why she even wanted to do it but said OK.
I didn't watch it, but is it not so weird she would choose a network that is clearly the most female predatory network in the history of television (and before Fox fans go nuts, just look at their background and the number of sexual harassment and assault payouts they have made - from Ailes to O'Reilly and on down - O'Reilly alone paid one woman 30 million).
I can't speak to her motives but I can tell you that it was a civil, even cordial, exchange. The clip is only 5 minutes long. Might as well check it out.
Isn’t it ironic that they can’t go to the liberal outlets that claim to support them. They have to go to the REEEcist outlet that believes in free speech
My point was out of all history of news outlets, Fox News has been hit the hardest for systemic sexual harassment. No other network is even close, but she chose Fox, which to me is two things: 1 - bizarre and 2, possibly those insiders in the media world know a bit more about her than those not in the business. My own interpretation of her is that she has some serious mental issues (but I don't know the cause of such issues; it may be her life experiences and mistreatment.
As for not watching it, I consider Tucker Carlson to be a liar, fraud, and a horrible journalist and have no desire to listen to him on ANY topic.
20 years ago, NYT, CNN or BBC were examples of trustworthy and professional journalism. Fast forward to modern day, they're tabloids at best and pamphlets at worst. Back then, Fox was a joke. Modern day, while it's biased, it's way more moderate and professional than most of media landscape. Times have changed. O tempora, o mores.
My point was out of all history of news outlets, Fox News has been hit the hardest for systemic sexual harassment
That doesn't mean much. Current day, sexual harassment/abuse requires nearly zero evidence, and that makes it a very powerful weapon. If you wanna slander some person or organization, the easiest way to do it is to get some chicks to make some accusations. Since Fox goes against the tide in modern balance of power, it's logical that they're hit the hardest for that type of accusations. The odd thing would be the opposite.
My own interpretation of her is that she has some serious mental issues
This is one of the reasons I think wokeness, or modern left, is much more a religion than an ideology. Highly religious people often interpret the act of not sharing their faith as a mental issue.
reply share
It is a waste of time further discussing this with you, especially since you clearly ignore the factual history of Fox News and its environment of sexual harassment and settlements.
Well, it's not that difficult to discuss with me. You only need to provide actual evidence of those alleged harassments. I don't mean accusations, I mean actual evidence. As easy as that.
Seriously, this is my last reply to your nonsense because you are obviously one without integrity and honesty proven by your continued denial of facts. All of the sexual harassment at Foxnews has been well documented. But to you a Bill Oreilly pay out to one woman (of several) of 30 million is not evidence. You must be a Fox PR person or a Qanon nut.
I'll throw you a bone here and say that I'm sure there was something to at least some of the allegations, though it's worth noting that these days the term "sexual harassment" can refer to nearly anything where a man indicates he finds a woman desirable.
In any case, O'Reilly was fired, Ailes is dead, and it seems like the Fox execs have done a lot to clean up whatever issues the network had in that regard. Maybe Rose realizes that.
I get tired of how every time you use Fox as a source for anything there's always someone who stands up and acts like nothing worthwhile ever comes out of the network or like there aren't any genuinely talented journalists there.
I don't think Fox is a perfect network--it's still corporate media--but you're going to hear stories and get perspectives that you definitely won't get from the other outlets.
You are way too narrow-minded. It's like when people blamed ALL the police for the death of George Floyd. You can't blame all of Fox for a few incidents.
I can't tell you how many times I've encountered people who just shut down whenever you use Fox as a source, despite the fact that the information presented is accurate and useful. Gotta give the Leftist media credit, they've done an excellent job of conditioning their viewers to immediately distrust and dismiss anything the competition says.
Rose McGowan has been blacklisted by Hollywood because of her political views.
Ostracism is hard, it takes a toll both to your finances and to your social life. It's hard for men, but it's even harder for women, since female psychology is mostly based in bonding. A man fears being a loser unable to fulfill his goals. A woman fears being judged and rejected by the people around her.
That's pretty surprising. I wasn't aware she had ever been on Fox before and definitely wasn't aware she had called the Democratic Party a cult on national TV.
Quite interesting. She looks healthier there than in the clip with Tucker. She at least seems like the kind of person you could sit down and have a conversation with and agree to disagree when necessary. I respect that.
My big problem with the MeToo movement is that it happens to be too convenient. You make some accusations, no evidence required, zero risk, you destroy some career and reap the profits. What could go wrong?
But that was not the case here. McGowan made the accusations when Weinstein was at the top and when going against him seemed like a very bad idea. She took risks and lost some projects for being 'problematic'. Add to it that Weinstein being a predator was the most widely known open secret in Hollywood. There were even jokes about it in series. If I had to bet, I'd bet she's saying the truth.
I don't agree politically with her, I think she's wrong (politically). But I don't think it's fair to put her in the same bag than the usual Hollywood shady social climber.
I definitely agree that an accusation by itself is not much evidence and it's certainly not proof of anything. I do feel bad for any girl who was genuinely assaulted and has nothing more than an accusation, because she was legitimately victimized and yet has no real way to prove it happened.
McGowan is, at least, a person who is willing to live according to her convictions. I'm certain I don't agree with all of her political views, but she at least seems like a sincere person who has courage and I can respect that.
Her career was over a decade before she decided to go against the grain, which i think she did only to try to regain a little notoriety. She didn't get blacklisted as much as she just stopped being famous.