Question

* THIS IS FROM A BUSINESS ETHICS CLASS*

From 'Acknowledging the Rot' by Eric Alterman, in The Nation, 4/11 Dec. 2017, p. 6:

With the recent accusations of child molestation against Alabama Republican senatorial candidate Roy Moore, the network's [i.e. Fox News'] top-tier 'talent'—Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and Laura Ingraham—have all questioned the veracity of the Washington Post report, which cited four on-the-record victims and more than 30 sources, and then changed the subject to the sins of either Harvey Weinstein or Bill Clinton. The Fox News anchors might as well have been taking their orders directly from Breitbart impresario Steve Bannon. Six advertisers abandoned Hannity after his defense of Moore, perhaps leading him to rethink his public position on Moore's 'consensual' sex life. Still, Hannity happily cheered on a campaign by his acolytes to attack and destroy Keurig coffee machines, following the withdrawal of the company's advertising from his show. All of this demonstrates the fact that Murdoch [CEO of Fox News] has decided to throw in with the crazies, perverts, and Nazi sympathizers who populate Trump's base, with no limits as to how low he will go. And, lo and behold, it works. During this period, Fox News secured its prime-time ratings lead over MSNBC, with Hannity handily beating Rachel Maddow, whose numbers had surpassed Fox's for three months in a row.

From this passage, reconstruct an argument concerning Murdoch in premise-conclusion form. There's also a fallacy here; bonus will be awarded for correctly naming it.

Answer 1

Note: This response is in UK English, please paste the response to MS Word and you should be able to spot discrepancies easily. You may elaborate the answer based on personal views or your classwork if necessary.

(Answer) In any scenario where opinion leaders seek to promulgate or rather create a propaganda, they are generally with accomplices. In this case, the propaganda is white-supremacy and the opinion leaders are Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson and others of the Fox network.

Every propaganda generally has a line that when crossed, should have the belief questioned. This line was clearly crossed when these anchors blatantly supported Roy Moore despite witnesses and victims confirming his sexual misconduct. Hannity also clearly attacks the advertiser who withdrew their sponsorship from his program, simply because they weren’t “yes men.”

Furthermore, every propaganda has a captain that keeps the boat sailing. In this case, it is Murdoch, who is the CEO of Fox. He might-as-well wave a flag with the face of Trump on it.

Logical fallacy – Ad Hominem – When the argument at hand is ignored for an attack on the person, their character or other issues that are not particularly related to the matter at hand. (Hannity diverted the story about Roy Moore by diverting the argument towards attacking the character of Bill Clinton and Harvey Weinstein)