The Difference Between Russiagate and Watergate: Nixon Didn’t Have Fox

“It is an incredibly well-financed and a massive ‘get out the vote’ operation.”

President Donald Trump shakes hands with Fox News Channel's Sean Hannity during a campaign earlier this month in Missouri.Jeff Roberson/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Who said it, Trump or Nixon? “They got the hell kicked out of them in the election… They are trying to use this to smear the whole thing.”

Answer: Richard M. Nixon, the 37th president, in a taped Oval Office conversation with his legal adviser, John Dean, on March 13, 1973.

Gallons of ink have already been spilled about the parallels between Presidents Trump and Nixon, and Russiagate and Watergate. Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey recalls Nixon axing of Archibald Cox, the special Watergate prosecutor who got too close to the truth. Trump’s press-bashing and conspiracy-mongering were innovated by Nixon. Conservatives protect Trump now, conservatives protected Nixon then. The comparisons keep adding up: demonizing law enforcement, keeping a list of enemies, an all-out war on leaks… it goes on and on.

There is, however, one key difference: Nixon never had Fox.

“It is hard to overstate how unusual what is happening on Fox is,” argues Vox media critic Carlos Maza on this week’s episode of the Mother Jones Podcast. “It is not just a right-wing network. It is an incredibly well-financed and a massive ‘get out the vote’ operation,” instructing viewers on how to vote, district by district, along strictly Trumpian lines.

“This expectation that we’ll have a revisit of what happened with Nixon, that the public will just wake up and say, ‘enough is enough,'” Maza notes, “assumes there is not this incredibly sophisticated, well-funded, and wide-reaching operation.”

He warns Fox News has now become “a different kind of beast than just a propaganda network.” Fox’s coverage of the migrant caravan in the run-up to the election, for example, was so relentless and extreme that it became a de facto “mobilization network,” argues Maza— adopting and amplifying the president’s false claims that the group’s inexorable northward march was nothing less than an “invasion,” had as its objective acting as a catalyst to get his base out to vote.

“It was pretty much constant ‘caravan’, ‘invasion’, ‘disease’ ‘vermin,'” says Margaret Sullivan, Washington Post media columnist who joined Maza in the studio for the taping of the podcast. Fox News is “so far off the charts that they basically function as state media for Trump.”

Vox’s Carlos Maza (L) talks about the media’s biggest failures in 2018 (and even some stellar moments) with Margaret Sullivan, of the Washington Post, on this week’s episode of the Mother Jones Podcast.

Sam Van Pykeren / Mother Jones

For this week’s Mother Jones Podcast, we wanted to reflect on the role of the press in 2018 and ask two experts to assess what worked for audiences, and what didn’t. Other items on the agenda, during a wide-ranging conversation led by host, Jamilah King, were Sullivan’s argument that Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg should step down as the company’s chairman, and Maza’s tips for surviving the onslaught of disinformation. Put simply: “If you’re still using Facebook as a source of information, also oh my God, please, please stop!”

Listen to the entire conversation below:

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate