Rachel Marsden ousted from FOX
Right wing pundit Rachel Marsden was escorted from FOX headquarters by security after being fired from the late night talk show Red Eye:
"I have been told that it is heading in a 'different direction' from its inception, and I am the 'first casualty,"' she wrote.
But the New York Post reported Thursday that Fox's reasons for dismissing Marsden might not have simply been about changing direction, quoting an insider as saying she was removed due to erratic behaviour. [CP]
I love how she describes herself as "the first casualty." Quintessential Marsden.


Now this is why they invented the word "schadenfreude."
Posted by: DJA | June 01, 2007 at 06:45 PM
Don't know about those Canadians. Lot of Doukhobors and shit up there. Maybe we should build the northern wall first.
Posted by: John Emerson | June 01, 2007 at 07:41 PM
From rachelmarsden.com:
Posted by: DJA | June 01, 2007 at 08:18 PM
It's pretty obvious to everyone who has spent time with Marsden that she's a sociopath. She causes chaos and destruction where ever she goes. It's rather amusing that she's become a U.S. Republican party calendar girl and self-styled political pundit. (link)
Posted by: Lesley | June 01, 2007 at 10:38 PM
Guaranteed we get Jim Treacher in here within three comments. He seems to be in every comment thread about Red Eye.
Posted by: Davey | June 02, 2007 at 02:42 AM
Oh...not a surprise.
I actually watch this show, thanks to DVR technology. (It comes on at 2am ) Its terribly stupid, but God, it can be literate, fast and a lot of fun. Ran into it the first time by accident, and thought that Fox News had lost its mind completely ( no comments, please! )
I'd recently seen a few articles on Marsden, and her very disturbed history
http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=441
She was never, ever the one to make the clever comment. She'd make the more predictable Coulterlike statement, you could see it coming for a mile.
She was hired solely for her good looks and her killer legs, which the camera always made a point to scoop up . Not that there's anything wrong with that! Eye candy was and is part of that show's late night success such as it is.
Posted by: The Phantom | June 02, 2007 at 09:43 AM
How much does Murdoch lose on Fox News? They run a LOT of commercials (mostly for a seniors market), which indicates they're hemorrhaging badly.
It's no surprise they took in a woman with psych problems and treated her like a disposable object. I hope she gets the help she so clearly needs.
Posted by: otherpaul | June 03, 2007 at 12:52 AM
Phanton reads Glenn Sacks? I am so not shocked.
Posted by: gordo | June 03, 2007 at 08:46 PM
gordo
Actually, I don't. He's not a regular read at all-I barely know who he is. If you're interested in who I read regularly, check my Hall of Fame blogroll, and you'll not go far wrong.
By way of a total segue, I am pissed at the recent closing of Brooklyn Record. Brooklyn still has loads of good blogs, but we just lost a good one.
Posted by: The Phantom | June 03, 2007 at 09:41 PM
"Guaranteed we get Jim Treacher in here within three comments."
Sorry I'm late!
Posted by: Jim Treacher | June 03, 2007 at 10:55 PM
--How much does Murdoch lose on Fox News?--
Since they're the number one cable news and have been so for a long time, the answer is that they don't lose any money.
Fox News Channel does not trounce CNN by the margins it once did, but they make money, trust me.
I'll trade the tabloidy Fox/CNN/MSNBC Olbeman-O'Reilly group for BBC World, unavailable to me, which pisses me the hell off.
Posted by: The Phantom | June 03, 2007 at 11:11 PM
"I'll trade the tabloidy Fox/CNN/MSNBC Olbeman-O'Reilly group for BBC World, unavailable to me, which pisses me the hell off."
Too much reality? I hate seeing our incompetence too.
Posted by: Jon H | June 04, 2007 at 12:21 AM
Fox News lost money it's first 5 years or so, but they've been profitable since then.
Never seen Red Eye, but I've heard of Marsden and her history. All I can say is, if she's too crazy for Fox, she's in serious trouble.
Posted by: TheOtherWA | June 04, 2007 at 02:28 AM
Jon, "Too much reality" isn't how I would describe the US media in relation to the Beeb. "Trash" is probably more accurate.
Posted by: Alon Levy | June 04, 2007 at 03:39 AM
uh, Marsden didn't describe herself as the "first casualty". If you read the article, you'd see that she was clearly quoting someone else at Fox.
I read on another blog that she has better plans than being on a show at 2am in the morning with a bunch of drunks talkingn about bestiality.
Posted by: anon | June 05, 2007 at 11:50 AM
Too bad for Marsden but you could see it coming a mile off.As for Red Eye,if they can hang on til school starts again they should be o.k.
Posted by: Rob | June 19, 2007 at 02:51 AM
The Toronto Sun has just fired Marsden.
http://torontosunfamily.blogspot.com/2007/11/rachel-marsden-update.html
http://torontosunfamily.blogspot.com/2007/11/rachel-marsden-gone.html
Wow, Rachel. You're a real winner.
Posted by: none | November 08, 2007 at 08:27 PM
But she has great legs. She should get a job on the op ed page of the NY Times for that reason alone
Saw Prince Charles walking on the street today in London like he was just another human being. No big deal for me, but boy did it freak out my fellow travelers in the taxi.
Cheerio
Posted by: The Phantom | November 08, 2007 at 08:58 PM
Prince Charles has nice legs. I got to shake his hand when I won a writing award in college.
Hope you're having a good trip.
Posted by: Lindsay Beyerstein | November 08, 2007 at 09:05 PM
I like London. And Londoners. It, and they are the real deal. They totally like America and love New York despite any Texas Presidents that they may dislike.
Good short trip that ends tomorrow but fear ye not. I arrive in Newark tomorrow out of Gatwick, and then Saturday, go to JFK to fly right back to Heathrow.
Why? I promised some friends of mine that I would get hammered with them in Brooklyn Friday night, and yeah, I need to install a license plate holder on my new used car. Reason enough to make my employer pay for two round trips in rapid succession. It is only right.
Posted by: The Phantom | November 08, 2007 at 09:26 PM