Frances Fox Piven Is Way Tougher Than Glenn Beck

Frances Fox Piven Is Way Tougher Than Glenn Beck

Frances Fox Piven Is Way Tougher Than Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck must have thought he had an easy mark when he targeted Frances Fox Piven. But Glenn Beck is wrong.


Glenn Beck must have thought he had an easy mark when he targeted Frances Fox Piven. Let’s face it. On paper she’s a female widowed lefty academic now approaching eighty. Most of her life’s work has been focused on enfranchising the poor through welfare reform and voter registration. Surely Beck thought that nearly fifty broadcasts worth of inflammatory disinformation and hate-mongering about Piven and their inevitable result—hate mail, comments and phone calls that range from brutally nasty and paranoid to those that cross the line into the genuine death threat category—would shut her up.

But Beck was wrong. Yes, Piven finally called the New York State troopers last Friday, but that was only after a fresh wave of death threats. And some of her friends are reaching out to the Manhattan District Attorney’s office and the FBI to see if there’s anything they can do. (After all, those e-mailed death threats may be anonymous, but ISPs can be traced.) But she’s not shutting up or going away. And she sees right through Beck and his ilk.

“The right’s propaganda campaign continually accuses the left of conspiracy when in fact the real conspiracies are on the right,” Piven told me. (This was after she carefully parsed the distinction between genuine death threats and people who write her notes saying, “I hope you fucking die you fucking bitch.” The latter, she explained, “Are just people wishing death on me.”) “The Koch brothers have called a meeting in CA next week for their supporters. Glenn Beck has these different corporate entities that boost him.”

Beck’s biggest corporate supporter, of course, is Fox News, whose very business model relies on false, inflammatory attacks. Hell, let some lefty like Vince Warren of the Center for Constitutional Rights talk about how “Fox has a moral responsibility to make sure their employees are reporting the news accurately and are not inciting violent reactions to the subjects of their commentary.” The lock-and-load-‘cause-they’re-coming-to-get-you attitude that fuels Fox’s commentators and feeds their base keeps ratings high and revenues flowing. (Full disclosure: I’ve done consulting work for CCR.)

And every so often someone gets killed: Fox host Bill O’Reilly popularized the inflammatory “Tiller the Baby Killer” tag and inveighed against Dr. Tiller in nearly 30 episodes before his murder. And then Fox News and the right are shocked, simply shocked, that the liberal media would be so base as to imply that people like O’Reilly and Beck help create an environment where violence against the left and government targets is acceptable.

So what happens when Beck’s repeated mischaracterizations of Piven as an “enemy of the Constitution” or “fundamentally responsible for the unsustainability and possible collapse of our economic system” get Fox’s viewers a little heated up—say to the point where they post comments like “ONE SHOT…ONE KILL!”? The Center for Constitutional Rights sends Fox CEO Roger Ailes a letter asking him to “help in stopping false accusations by Glenn Beck that are putting Professor Piven in danger.” Fox’s legal department sends back a letter that evades all responsibility for the hatred their business model incites and accuses CCR of “trying to create ill will for our company.” 

And Piven? “They’re trying to shut the left up and make them hide,” she says, “So I think that every bit of public outrage we can muster against them is useful.” When I press her to explain, she mentions that she appreciates the protests against Fox and Beck, but quickly moves from there to the bigger picture. “I’d like more and more re-assertion of the politics being attacked—more focus on the economic and political rights of working and poor people, such as welfare rights and voter registration. These are the victories that have suffered the biggest reversals. We need to stop letting the right peel us off.”

Like this Blog Post? Read it on the Nation’s free iPhone App, NationNow.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy