Piers Morgan vs. Alex Jones feud: helping or hurting gun control?

Shouting matches, even one-sided ones, make for 'must-see' TV. That may be why CNN host Piers Morgan, at the receiving end of the yelling on gun rights, isn't letting it drop.

Jae C. Hong/AP/File
Piers Morgan, host of CNN's 'Piers Morgan Tonight,' leaves the CNN building in Los Angeles in this file photo. More than 31,400 people, including Alex Jones, have signed a petition calling for British CNN host Piers Morgan to be deported from the US over his gun-control views.

Piers Morgan’s instantly infamous interview with Alex Jones on gun control has started a feud that’s getting weirder by the day. CNN host Mr. Morgan on Tuesday described his encounter with Mr. Jones the night before on “Piers Morgan Tonight” as “terrifying,” and added that Jones’s unhinged rants are the best advertisement for gun control he can think of. Meanwhile, Texas talk-radio host Jones – a self-described “paleoconservative” – accused Morgan of joking on-air about shooting him.

Will any of this affect the actual chance of passage for national gun legislation? Well, maybe. Even staunch gun rights supporter Glenn Beck noted on Tuesday that Jones sounds “crazy” and makes it easy for liberals to portray the right as extremists on this issue.

But the whole thing is becoming so outrageous that it may end up as nothing but a vaudeville show that occupies viewers' time while VP Joe Biden meets with the NRA and other groups to try to come up with a serious approach to what might be done to lessen firearm violence.

OK, let’s back up a second to summarize the state of play. Jones is a main supporter of a petition on the White House citizen input website that calls for the deportation of British citizen Morgan because of his continued calls for gun-control legislation. On Monday, Morgan had Jones on his show to talk about this. “Talk” isn’t really the word for what happened, though. It was more of a one-person shoutfest, as Jones riffed about guns, oppressive government, the flag, his ancestors’ role in Texan independence, and what flag Morgan would have on his tights if they wrestled.

We’ll add here that Jones believes a conspiracy within the US government caused 9/11 and the Oklahoma City bombings and the Gulf of Tonkin incident (look it up). So it’s not as if he’s somebody who’s seen the mainstream for a very long time.

Our reaction was that it was a setup, in the sense that Morgan knew full well that Jones’s opinions would horrify much of America, and that the resultant car wreck of a segment would prove irresistible television.

On Tuesday, Morgan lit into Jones during a "CNN Newsroom" appearance.

“I can’t think of a better advertisement for gun control than Alex Jones’s interview last night,” he said. “It was startling, it was terrifying in parts, it was completely deluded.... It showed no compassion whatsoever to the victims of gun shootings, and the kind of twisted way that he turned everything into this assault on the Second Amendment is exactly what the gun rights lobby people do. And it’s a lie. It cannot be allowed to continue.”

Meanwhile, Jones’s camp responded with outrage to what it said was a threat on their guy’s life. On Morgan’s follow-up show Tuesday night, sportswriter Buzz Bissinger said this, according to Jones-affiliated website Infowars.com: “But what do you need a semi-automatic weapon for? The only reason I think you’d need it, Piers, challenge Alex Jones to a boxing match, show up with a semi-automatic that you got legally, and pop him.”

Was Mr. Bissinger talking about “pop,” as in “punch,” there, or something worse? In any case, if he really said that, he’s being reckless with his words, at best. Why give Jones something like that to work with?

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Piers Morgan vs. Alex Jones feud: helping or hurting gun control?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today