More FNC Gun Control Controversy?

Once in a week wasn’t enough apparently. New York Magazine’s Gabriel Sherman is back with another FNC gun control story only this time from the other side of the spectrum…

Since the Newtown massacre, Lott, one of the country’s most vocal Second Amendment absolutists, has been donating his time to CNN while Fox News, the network that pays him and employs his son as a producer, has held him at bay. Lott told me that he submitted a column for Fox’s website on Monday about assault weapons but was informed yesterday afternoon by a Fox News staffer that the article would not run. “They didn’t send me an e-mail. I got a call,” he explained. “They said, ‘This is just too sensitive.'”

In the unpublished column, Lott described the differences between the Bushmaster rifle used by Adam Lanza and weapons actually used by the military. “No self-respecting military in the world would use the civilian version of these guns,” he wrote. Lott argued that lawmakers were using the Newtown tragedy to scare citizens. “Some politicians want to truly frighten the public by painting a false image of machine guns on America‚Äôs streets to push regulations on semi-automatic guns,” he wrote. “Despite the rhetoric used by many such as President Obama, not a single multiple victim public shooting has involved a machine gun.” Lott concluded his column writing that new gun laws will make Americans less safe. “The Bushmaster, like any gun, is indeed very dangerous, but it is not a military weapon,” he wrote. “If you want to ban semi-automatic guns, ban all of them, not just guns based on how they look. Yet, despite the immediate emotional appeal, banning semi-automatic guns will jeopardize safety.” A Fox News spokesperson told me in an e-mail that Lott’s column was rejected because it was “too technical for that period of time.” He added that “Lott accepted the reason and moved on. As an aside, we have published ten of his columns since September.”

Too technical for that period of time? Since when is FNC concerned with technicality by a contributor penning an Op-ed? And what about this discrepancy in reasons for the spiking between Lott and FNC? ‘Too technical for that period of time’ hardly equates to “They said, ‘This is just too sensitive.'”

.

About these ads

4 Responses to “More FNC Gun Control Controversy?”

  1. Too technical? How about too sensationalistic. He lies that people think “semi-automatic” and “fully-automatic” are the same thing, then presents the preposterous notion that Americans are less safe if semi-automatics are banned. FNC kept him off the air because he’s insane.

  2. And if there’s anybody qualified to render a verdict on sanity… or lack there of…

    Ugh.

    I think the word they (the author and the FNC person) were looking for was “nuanced.” Give a technical reason for why that gun is okay, versus fully automatic or military-style weapons is a point lost on many.

    I’d bet they spokesperson said both… it was too technical on too sensitive of a topic, and so it didn’t ran. In short, too nuanced for the public at large, and the FOX haters who would have used a nuanced point (ironically) as a weapon. Pick and chose your battles.

  3. I’m sticking with “insane”, which is all you get when you say stupid shyte like “banning semi-autos makes us less safe”.

  4. That’s fine.

    In fact, it’s the same rational I use when describing most of your posts.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 221 other followers

%d bloggers like this: