She’s bright, beautiful, quick-witted, and silky-smooth with her supply. But why is she so frequently overlooked?
There’s an intrinsic discrimination to this comment, after all, by every conceivable measurement that matters, Laura Ingraham is enormously prosperous. She had the fifth largest radio audience in the business, she’s written best-selling books, she’s ventured into new media with Lifezette .com, and she hosts” The Ingraham Angle” during the 7: 00 p. m. EST hour on FOX News. That’s midnight, baby! Undoubtedly, she’s been the most appropriate female voice in the traditional motion for a decade.
Advertisement
But something’s missing.
In a way, it’s to her record that our objectives are so high. She was a White House ghostwriter during the Reagan administration, but few commentators can compare to her intellectual prowess and academic credentials. She later earned a J. D. from the University of Virginia, was director of the” Virginia Law Review”, and clerked for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. After that, she adapted to the Tucker Carlson job unit for television: Laura had coffee with MSNBC and CBS before finding success on FOX News Channel.
Unlike Tucker, once Laura had her foot in the door, she was n’t going away. But it did n’t always run like clockwork. She originally had a 5: 00 p. m. FOX News program (” Just In with Laura Ingraham” ) before getting a show during the 10: 00 p. m. hour in September of 2017. Her nighttime program was a smash hit right away.
But it never had the greatest success.
And that’s really been the biggest factor holding her back: She was tremendous on television, but not a top-three skills. She is a very wise legitimate pro, but she has never been your go-to resource for breaking legitimate information. And her FOX News show ( s ) always do well, always generate solid ratings, and always perform as expected, but she’s never been the lead draw. There’s always someone else bigger, anyone more brighter.
Advertisement
And someone else more viable.
On June 26, 2023, FOX News announced that they were moving Laura again, this day to the 7: 00 p. m. EST afternoon, where she’s remained ever since. Hopefully, this period the walk will be everlasting. This newscast fits her sensibility, and she deserves an opportunity to create a focused market.
It’s a little surprising that FOX News has n’t done more to raise her profile, especially since Megyn Kelly left the network in the beginning of 2017. Casually, both Kelly and Ingraham overlapped each other as beautiful, beautiful blondes, concretely, they were both lawful experts ( albeit that Ingraham’s qualifications blew Kelly’s out of the waters ). But, with Kelly’s return, you would’ve expected some new, wide-open real estate for Ingraham to hold — especially when you factor in the absence of adult conservative voices on Television, coupled with the black fog of the Bill O’Reilly / Roger Ailes scandals. Why not promote Laura Ingraham?
However, when the dust settled, Jesse Watters emerged as the novel experience of FOX News. Ingraham was his lead-in.
Laura, who is now in her early 60s, also looks amazing and is still capable of outperforming her FOX News cohorts any day of the week. Without any problem, she remains one of her show’s brightest constellations and most trusted standing draws. But slowly and steadily, the FNC light is moving away from her. Laura’s parts sometimes go popular, and Sean Hannity, Greg Gutfeld, and Jesse Watters all seem to bust more media —more often , — with bigger star interviews.
Advertisement
Maybe that’s Laura’s curse: She’s like a wonderful utility player, it’s very tempting for network executives to walk her round and raise others. Whether it’s 5: 00 p. m. or 7: 00 p. m. or 10: 00 p. m., it does n’t matter: Laura will figure it out. But in doing so, she became the B part to the A skills, and at this point, it’s probably too late in her job to break that tale.  ,
GRADE: A-
Due Commentators Critiqued:
