Following a post-debate backlash wave, ABC decided to terminate its entire workforce in a corporate cleansing reminiscent of a dystopian novel. From seasoned anchors to cafeteria staff, no one was immune to the network’s rapid reaction to the outcry that followed its now-infamous Trump vs. Harris debate. Critics on both sides of the political aisle have stated unequivocally: No one can expect to leave the office alive after fact-checking a political discussion in 2024.
ABC moderators attempted to fact-check Donald Trump’s slew of colorful assertions in real time for an eventful 90 minutes, but the network faced such intense public outrage that even their well-prepared public relations campaign collapsed faster than a healthcare policy discussion. Between claims of bias from Trump supporters and concerns about excessive moderating, ABC’s upper brass seemed to have determined that firing everyone was the only way to remedy their image problem.
“We assumed fact-checking would be welcomed,” a network executive allegedly stated as they emptied out their office, “but, well, turns out we were dead wrong. In retrospect, we should have simply let them shout at each other nonstop. The American people enjoy a good brawl. “Who knew?”
The much-anticipated Trump-Harris debate set the stage for the political confrontation of the century. ABC hosted the event, which promised to bring the high-stakes drama that Americans had come to anticipate from the 2024 election season. What viewers saw was something very different: a fact-checking marathon that made the moderators look more like fatigued referees in a wrestling match than unbiased facilitators of a polite conversation.
As Trump went off script, claiming that Democrats were intending to “execute babies after birth” and that Ohio immigrants were involved in a “pet barbecue” ring, moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis tried their best to keep the discussion based in reality. They corrected Trump on everything from immigration policy to economics, but the frequent pauses began to resemble a parental scolding session rather than a presidential discussion.
By the time Harris managed to speak up—though considerably less fact-checked—it was evident that the night was going off the rails.
Within minutes after the debate’s end, social media went wild. The hashtags #BoycottABC and #FakeNewsNetwork went viral quicker than anybody could have predicted, with Trump fans accusing the network of suppressing free expression. Even left-leaning spectators were dissatisfied, with some claiming that the moderators failed to hold Harris equally accountable, or worse, that the discussion was just unwatchable owing to the numerous interruptions.
Two irate groups caught ABC in the middle, forcing them to scramble. No amount of public relations damage control could quell the outrage, and advertisers soon began dropping out of future broadcasts. Faced with a wave of public fury that made the Hindenburg look like a little campfire, ABC officials called an emergency conference to discuss how to rescue the network’s image. And that’s when they decided that the best course of action was to start over—fire everyone on the network’s payroll.
“It was an all-hands-on-deck situation, so we figured no hands left on deck was the solution,” one former ABC executive explained. “It is not personal. Yes, it is personal, but it is also about survival. Our reputation was in danger, and letting individuals go was the simplest way to demonstrate to the public that we meant business.”
ABC’s mass dismissal was more than simply a purge of the journalists; it was a network-wide operation. ABC let go of the entire team, from senior anchors to young producers, without any prior notice. Even individuals who had nothing to do with the argument, such as janitors and cafeteria workers, received pink slips at the conclusion of the day.
“I was just here to make sure the floors were clean and the snacks were stocked,” said one cafeteria employee, clutching a bag of leftover pretzels as they exited the ABC building for the final time. “But I guess in today’s media landscape, even refilling the coffee machine is political.”
Despite their heroic efforts to keep the debate on course, moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis were among the first to go. As Muir packed away his framed Emmy medals, people overheard him saying, “We did what we thought was right.” “But in the end, I guess facts don’t pay the bills.”
With an empty newsroom and a network in peril, ABC executives are already devising new strategies to avert future criticism. One brave idea? Eliminate moderators totally.
“We’re considering a ‘no moderation’ format for future debates,” stated an unidentified ABC official. “Only two candidates on stage; no fact-checking or interruptions; and a 90-minute free for all.” The public plainly does not want us to interfere, so why not give them what they want: anarchy, unfiltered?”
Another potential strategy is to outsource future debates to artificial intelligence, ensuring that no human will ever be held accountable for interrupting a candidate’s pet-related conspiracy theory. “We could have chatbots ask the questions; maybe throw in some fun GIFs to keep things interesting,” one executive thought. Best of all, the bots won’t care if they lose their jobs later.
The public reaction to ABC’s decision to terminate its entire staff has been as polarizing as the argument itself. Conservative pundits applauded the decision, asserting that leftist bias had “corrupted” the network and an overhaul was long overdue.
“Finally, accountability in the media,” one conservative commentator tweeted. “Let’s teach all networks that disrespecting Trump has consequences.”
Meanwhile, progressives chastised ABC for not taking a more nuanced approach to dealing with the response. “Firing the entire staff doesn’t solve anything,” stated one liberal critic. “It just demonstrates that networks are willing to sacrifice their employees in order to save face. ” We need better media, not fewer journalists.”
Then there were others in the center who wondered how a simple argument could have such serious repercussions. “So, wait—they fired everyone because of Twitter complaints?” said a perplexed viewer. “Maybe we should just stop having debates altogether.”
With its whole crew gone, ABC has entered the unknown ground. The network, which formerly prided itself on journalistic brilliance, is currently experiencing an existential crisis. Will it start over with a new team of fresh faces, or will it shift to something else different—such as reality TV, where facts are optional and indignation is profitable?
Only time will tell if ABC can recover from this latest disaster, but one thing is certain: in an age of fact-free arguments and internet-fueled indignation, no network is immune from the firing squad.
And for the rest of the media, the message is clear: don’t bother fact-checking. Just let the candidates speak, and let Twitter determine who is telling the truth.
