Posted on 04/28/2023 10:57:51 AM PDT by Red Badger
Inside sources at Fox News have leaked rumors that, despite being dropped from the network as of this past Monday, Tucker Carlson is still beholden to a contract that would prevent him from undertaking a new media venture until after the 2024 presidential election.
Former Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly, who now hosts her own podcast on Sirius XM, reported on information allegedly coming out of the collapsing “conservative” media company indicating Carlson has yet to reach terms of a complete exit from his contract.
“I want to, I think, break some news for you,” Kelly began on her show. “Tucker Carlson hasn’t actually been fired. He’s still an employee of the Fox News Channel. What happened was Suzanne Scott called him she’s the CEO on Monday morning and said he was not going to be allowed to do any more shows, and that he had been kicked out of his company email.”
“And now they’re going to have to negotiate an exit. Some reporting to me, suggests that, she said it’s going to be an amicable parting. Right, isn’t it?” she continued.
“I’m completely catching Tucker, off guard. But Tucker is not fired. That’s my information, that he still needs to negotiate the exit. And that right now he’s not free to launch a podcast or a digital show or negotiate with other employers at all. Because he’s still under contract,” she suggested for a second time.
Take a look at the clip below.
VIDEO AT LINK...............
At this point for Carlson, the proverbial sky is truly the limit for the former host of cable television’s hottest broadcast. Carlson regularly drew over three million nightly viewers and crushed the competition at CNN and MSNBC. While he will no doubt court offers from the likes of OANN and Newsmax, his own viral Twitter video likely proves he has enough name-brand recognition and following to strike out on his own.
In truly epic fashion, Carlson released a video – the first public response offered since the shocking news of his Fox cancellation – which garnered tens of millions of views almost instantly. People want to hear what Tucker Carlson has to say. And by extension, they will no doubt pay for it.
Carlson could branch out on his own and follow in the steps of Megyn Kelly, for example. He could also field offers from other conservative media outlets, but just as with Fox the possibility of being constrained would no doubt loom over him.
Kelly had a lot more to say on her show, as she addressed speculations about why Fox would let their top host go and also addressed the troubles with filling his massive shoes.
“It’ll be interesting to see what the ratings were for the APM hour last night, Brian Kilmeade hosted it. It’s a rotating cast for now,” Kelly noted on her podcast. “And we’ll see what they decide to do their stuff, Brian’s fault. I mean, here’s Brian, FYI, here. Here he is, in a moment where he is kind of acknowledging what happened. I’ll just play the 14 seconds.”
“Hi, everybody, and welcome to Fox News tonight. I am Brian Kilmeade. As you probably have heard, Fox News and Tucker Carlson have agreed to part ways. I wish Tucker the best. I’m great friends with Tucker, and always will be,” the fill-in host can be heard saying.
Yup, non-compete contracts are especially hard to hold up.
Interesting take, though they will likely say just cancel your cable.
Trapped...
SNORT.
Yes and no. If the blow back wasn’t so bad and if Tucker didn’t hit 70 million views on his Twitter speech on Tues it would be easier for Fix. Times and communications means have changed. Fox is a day late and a dollar short.
Give me $20 Million and you can ‘trap’ me........................
This is exactly my thinking. He didn't sign up for the possibility of not doing a show. By stopping his show, *THEY* violated the contract.
At least that's what I would expect to see argued.
Yes they are very difficult..
It’s becoming pretty clear why Rush set up the EIB Network.
Somebody that may own a lot of shares in FOX should sue them to high heaven for violating their fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders for political destruction of their enemies, and FOX’s losses for doing this to Tucker should also be considered a donation to the DNC.
don’t need a lot of shares, one is enough with financial backing..I agree with your post 100% fight like you are the third money on the ranp to the ark and its starting to rain....
The big indicator here was the report that Carlson had retained a top media attorney to represent him. That suggested to me that he was looking to get out of a contract that would have bound him to Fox News even after they "fired" him.
On the one hand, he'd have a hard time making the case that he needs the money if Fox News is willing to pay him $20M/year to do nothing.
On the other hand, he could easily claim that he's worth far more than that on the open market -- and that Fox would be diminishing his value and future earning potential by keeping him off the air.
But I guess we'll find out shortly.
So, they have to pay him and he has to perform as they order him to? That'll get old real fast, paying a guy big bucks to stay off the air.
Maybe after being used by key people at Faux to torpedo Trump, she finally gets it.
I was thinking the same thing. As long as he isn't the host, or being paid he should be free to be a regular guest "interviewee" one would think he wouldn't be violating a non-compete. He could also post video commentary on Twitter where he could be amplified.
I do like some of the remaining Fox talent but I will no longer watch them. The management of Fox News is evil.
You cannot take someone’s career from them.
ping
It’s a violation of his freedom of speech. A contract is not that kind of muzzle.
I agree! Lawsuit time!
Hummm, but it would not prevent him from being Trumps VP pick and engaging in robust media conversations about the election. Fox News would be paying him the entire time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.