what single word dominated the commentary about the strike in syria. the one word i heard the most was decisive. in times like these i find myself thinking about another set of decision makers. the media leaders and producers who decide what gets heard. because there are hawks and there are dogs and on tv and online, we need to hear from both. actually from all of them because there are a lot more than two sides here. proponents of military force. there are reluctance supporters. there are syria skeptics, absolute opponents. and syria has sort of flipped the trump media landscape on it s head. lots of trump skeptics were supportive of the strikes. d.c. establishment types cheered him on, but then there are the die hard trump supporters who have turned into die hard trump opponents at least on this issue. some may be frustrated because they were told during the campaign that syria was not our fight. indeed. politics are so scrambled these days, some of trump s most loyal fans join
audience, a very loyal fan base and we actually sent a reporter out to watch the ocho ray l o r factor and our reporter watched the show with a woman who is a big fan of the show and she said she was conflicted about watching it but she s still loyal to him and to his show. so he doesn t have top advertisers, david, but he does have the audience. does that mean he s invincible? he s damaged but not necessarily mortally wounded. it depends whether or not there is sustained outrage but fox has been able to place almost all of those advertisers on other shows and do make goods, whether or not that is with other shows, as well. the company says no financial ad impact from the ad boycott. if bmw, mercedes says we re not going to advertise on fox news, that s a bigger issue. or be on fox news, the fox
roger ailes who was ousted this summer. it s an interesting thing i ve been making calls this week on this and during the ailes issue, murdoch senior said to his sons, you know if we settle this without a fight, we re just going to invite more and more lawsuits. a and. which has happened. there have been more and more lawsuits and clearly implied that they accepted these lawsuits and allegations in the lawsuits. when trying to walk up the middle of the road, clearly what you have in any situation like where you have easy money settlements, you re going to get more lawsuits. in any situation where you have
author in the country. that s true. they are the era to the new york times and to other people who hate fox and hate trump and that is where this kind of cloothis is an issue as much about politics as it is about sexual harassment. i ll bring that back to the murdochs because within the murdoch empire, that s also where the clefs. you have murdoch who may, i think it s inmaterial whether he s been a fan of bill ocho ray l o reillys or not and bill o reilly supports his company. in a big way. he very, very much wants to keep bill o reilly. it s his sons deeply ambivalent about o reilly, about fox, about
way other companies do. the point is actual hasexual harassment is against the law. you are not supposed to treat women like there in the work force. allegations or believed or not, this is an important issue and women deserve to be treated with respect in the workplace. additionally, there is a federal investigation going on into whether or not payments to some of these women settlements to keep allegations private and away from public eye were masked to keep them away from shareholders and investors that could be a violation. right now that s going on in the prosecutors office and handling that investigation in new york. that could have implications, as we well. i think you re hearing silence because they want it to blow over and see how it plays out. there is a story they are trying to monitor here. i don t think anybody knows how this ends. dade, emmppleeppleynenemily, th. quick reminder on the