And where does the Kossack nation respond? Dare they call Gibson and request the chance to rebut? Or is the "no Dems on Fox" principle going to stand for the time being? Ask MSNBC or CNN for rebuttal time?
"and acknowledge that Gibson has a show?" the other networks answer...
Suddenly speech is limited. But it's not Fox's, it Kos's. Or any other candidate trying to reach out to a wider range of voters. Which is the actual subject of the thread. What are the unintended consequences of banning your candidates from appearing on any given network?
In terms of displaying clout, there's no question the Nev Debate Collapse was a victory for Kossacks. They were upset with a state party's decision, alerted the netroots, and forced the hands of the Nevada State Party (OK, maybe the netroots walked them to the edge, then Roger Ailes himself pushed them over it with his comments the other evening). No doubt that the smaller Democratic Party operations noticed, and will take give more consideration to the netroots.
So we've seen a solid display of a short notice raising of the net militia. And it worked. But what did it really achieve? An ego boosting victory over the Big Bad Fox? What's lost? An opportunity to showcase a candidate's true views in a forum where the norm is only selected "damaging" soundbites?
I would call this a tactical victory, but possibly a strategic blunder. To cut off a line of communication just because you don't like the neighborhood it runs through?? And look how quickly you get the "blowback"...
Gibson wants to talk about Dems fighting Dems, the Nevada debate, the war. Who better to comment on that then Kos himself? But he and fellow Kossacks are boycotting FOX. So they go searching for another blogger from the Left, and low and behold, it's MSOC! Given the recent meta flap, you can imagine that the DKOS line wasn't the line heard by Gibson's audience.
I'm sure there'll be a boisterous response in diaries here, but that's a viewpoint that's not going to be heard by Gibson's audience, and other audiences where that will hear references to the MSOC dialogue when the Nevada Debate/Democrats Fueding story line might appear, soley because of the DKOS policy to boycott the network.
I can see not viewing the network, not catering to it's advertisers. But to be given the opportunity to have a voice, and then turn it down? To me, it's a case of cutting off the nose to spite the face.
And if you're interested in exactly what MSOC had to say, find the podcast.