Henpecked in the Fox House

Henpecked in the Fox House

At least give President Obama and his administration credit for this: usually it’s the chickens (Democrats for the politically impaired) who run around like a chicken with its head cut-off. After several White House staff members made like Marc Antony - hey, why should Robert Gibbs have all the fun? - the folks over at Fox reacted like, well, like a fox running around with its head (or tail?) cut off.

It all may be great fun - turnabout is fair play (or choose a payback cliché) - but is it worth it? Maybe what’s good for the goose is good for the fox - stirring up the base and all that. But President Obama hasn’t achieved 60% approval ratings by playing rabid the fringe.

Are such tactics a diversion - a diversion from real issues? Do they “demean” (interesting word, that) the President or his agenda? Or, do they give too much attention to the irrelevant, making those who otherwise resemble the three year old having the ‘give me candy’ tantrum seem important to the national dialogue? (That assumes, of course, we’re actually having a national dialogue.)

The rhetoric of audience helps us understand what’s going on. It posits three general audiences: hostile, neutral and friendly, each with two sub-audiences, defined by their receptivity. At one edge is the antagonistic - a hostile audience that won’t listen - or believe - a thing you say. (The fingers in their ears ‘I’m not listening’ crowd.) At the other edge is the fanatic. (The how-high-do-I-jump, tell-me-when-to-stop crowd).

Most audiences lie somewhere along the spectrum. If we do the math, we’l see that each segment commands between 15% and 20% of the total possible audience - since we’re dealing with people, and multiple factors persuade and influence, the numbers of any one segment are in a proportional flux with those of the others. But the edges - the antagonistic (haters) and the fanatics - remain fairly static. In commonplace terms, you can always find about 20% of the population to support - or oppose - just about anything.

So if a significant portion of the Fox audience lies outside the rabid - antagonistic - segment, belittling and marginalizing Fox News doesn’t make rhetorical sense. But if most of the Fox audience lies within the intransigent - then trivializing and scoffing - henpecking the Fox - makes perfect sense, rhetorically.