Megyn Kelly Will Tell Fox Viewers What's Okay To Feel About the Duggars
By Spocko
This Wednesday Fox New's Megyn Kelly will interview Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar
Fox and Kelly will be shoring up, or breaking up, a narrative that the Duggars are trying to control. Just the fact that Kelly was chosen means part of a narrative is already in place.
I know, I know. "Why should I give a fig about these people and this interview?" I think this interview and the narrative line will be important because it will show what's acceptable on certain issues for GOP Presidential candidates. Why Kelly? Because it's been pointed out that Kelly has been given the latitude to ask a few sane questions.
She might give candidates permission to move to the left on the issue of female abuse victims. (Yes, they will need permission.) What I don't think we will see are challenges to a powerful version of Christianity. She might address female agency, but won't attack the religion. The position most likely will be, "These flawed human vessels tried hard to be good but failed, they are only human. They need forgiveness for their sins.
It will be Roger Ailes who will make the decision on how hard to hit the Duggars and what to focus on. But first he has to answer these questions three:
1) How important are the Duggars to the conservative movement now?
2) How important are they to GOPs electoral success?
3) How important is the powerful version of Christianity the Duggar's represent?
As of today the Duggars have lost most of their power and won't play much of a role in the GOP's electoral success. However, their version of Christianity is still a big deal, so she will tiptoe around that almost entirely, with the exception of a few easily answered question.
The other question that Ailes and the Fox producers ask themselves is:
In this story, who do our Fox News viewers relate to?
Is it Jim Bob, Michelle, Josh or various unnamed Duggar daughters? What do they think about the actions of that person? Will Kelly's questions, and the subjects' answers leave them satisfied? My guesses on the thinking of Fox viewers are in quotes:
Jim Bob ("He failed as a protector/father. He should take responsibility for his failures. I would never let anyone hurt MY girls like he let Josh!" )
They will want to see him as a horrible failure. I think he will take the brunt of the heat and he will "accept responsibility." What is interesting is that the world will see Kelly's "wimmin libber" type questioning as normal, so any condescension or cockiness on his part will look especially bad. Defensiveness will look like he is hiding even more.
Michelle. ("It's hard being a parent with kids! You try raising 19 kids! She was clearly out of the loop. Cut her some slack!"
She will wring her hands a lot in contrition and talk about how she failed Jim Bob, Josh and the whole family. Female Fox viewers who never experienced any abuse will feel sorry for her. They will heap more blame on Jim Bob. Any viewers who experienced abuse will be furious, 'She KNEW! She ALWAYS KNEW! She's the worse because she didn't protect the most vulnerable." )
Josh ("I remember being a horny teen, especially when my sisters had friends over for a sleep over, but but ick! Those are little kids, that's sick. I would never do something like that. Hopefully he has been cured, maybe he deserves a second chance. But I'd never let him be around my kids."
Nobody will admit to identifying with Josh, but they might allow him the old, "The Power of Christ cured him, we can forgive him." line that Christians on the right use as their get out of Hell Free card.)
Daughters, If the viewers are men, "I can't imagine what those poor kids went though. Their dad and mom should have protected them."
If the viewers are women they CAN imagine what they went through. "Both parents are guilty. Even if Mom and Dad claim they didn't know right away, they are messed up, they didn't listen to the girls. Not enough people listen to girls."
A number of them will acknowledge that something is messed up with the Duggar's version of Christianity. But it is mostly with just that version, their version of Christianity is better."
Kelly will voice her concern for the daughters. The issue will be:
What is the correct amount of concern for the Duggar daughters that needs to be addressed? This is where you will see Kelly support women and probably attack the parents. That is the "politically correct thing" to do, but will she give the religion a pass? I think so, because the religion can not be blamed.
The parents have failed, they are flawed humans, and you never go after Christianity, even the version of Christianity the Duggars practiced. Because if you do, then you are siding with the terrorists.
Faith, Family and Community, Good for Life, Bad for TV
When I read the Duggar stories I feel some emotions I'm not proud of, but they are there. One is my judgmentalness (Is that even an emotion?) Not just of the Duggar family-but of the people who watched the show and liked it.
I also feel my own anger at these men who want to control everything. And I want to punish them, make them pay. It pleases me when I see that they actually have been paying a financial price, because losing revenue is the key marker of failure in America.
But I also feel my own sadness and shame for knowing I'm more focused on the anger and punishment of certain men and their enablers than of offering an alternative--either in programming, or in life.
I don't think it would make good TV, but it would be nice to see some stories about people who have faith, family and community in their lives that reflect progressive values. I know they exist and there are more than 20 of them, but who's counting?