Is Gawker's 'Fox Mole' a real person?

Gawker has hired an unamed worker at Fox News who will be writing "reports" on what actually happens at the Number 1 cable news network:

What follows is the inaugural column of a person we are calling The Fox Mole-a long-standing, current employee of Fox News Channel who will be providing Gawker with regular dispatches from inside the organization.

What actually follows is hardly newsworthy and calls into question whether any real person could harbor such outrageous stereotypes of conservatives. If Gawker wants the "mole" to be taken seriously, shouldn't he, like, you know, be more than a one-dimensional stick figure - a satire of a typical leftist? His blowhard generalities about the right can be found on any run of the mill lefty blog, but elevating this schmuck to the level of "informer" is laughable on its face.

Here are some deep thoughts from Gawker's "mole":

The [Fox] Nation (website) aggregates news stories, gives them provocative headlines, and invites commenters to weigh in. The comments are fascinating actually, if you can detach yourself enough to view them as sort of the id of the conservative movement. Of course, if you can't detach yourself, then you're going to come away with a diminished view of human decency, because HOLY MOLY THESE PEOPLE DO NOT LIKE THE BLACK PRESIDENT. I'm not saying they dislike him BECAUSE he's black, but a lot of the comments, unprompted, mention the fact that he is black, so what would you say, Dr. Freud?

That is soooooo 2005. Everyone knows that internet comments are not reflective or representative of anything on any website. That tacit agreement was reached years ago between right and left bloggers who got tired of the opposition pointing to individual wackos who commented on their sites. Violating internet protocol by raising the specter of racists in the comments who watch Fox News shows how truly bereft our mole is of original thought.

The post neatly summed up everything that had been troubling me about my employer: Non sequitur, ad hominem attacks on the president; gleeful race baiting; a willful disregard for facts; and so on. It came close on the heels of the Common controversy, which exhibited a lot of the same ugly traits. (See also: terrorist fist jabs; Fox & Friends madrassa accusations; etc.)

Yes, the mole is actually saying criticizing the president is akin to racism. Is accusing the president of attending a "Hip-Hop summit" really a case of "race baiting?" Perhaps it is - on a planet where trotting out the race card is actually taken seriously anymore. Making a big deal of the president hanging around with Hip-Hop artists who condone violence and disrespect toward women, police officers, white people, and others is, in most places, legitimate news. But the guilt factor in accusing the right of racism at the drop of a hat is gone - it's impact diminished substantially thanks to the overuse of the word by liberals.

"So why not just leave Fox News?" you might ask. Good question! I've asked myself that same thing many times. And I am leaving. Sooner rather than later, I'm guessing. But I can't just leave quietly, can I? Where's the fun in that? So I'm John McClane-ing this s**t. I'm inside the building, crawling through the air vents, gathering intel, and passing it along to Carl Winslow.

This is a dead giveway that either Gawker is pulling our leg, or they have a certified loon acting as their "mole." The mole claims to be "blacklisted" in the industry because of his employment at Fox News. This is  utter, unbelievable nonsense. No Fox employees have ever left for another network? Is he serious?

Could it be that our "mole" just isn't good enough to get a job somewhere else? Perish the thought that anything as mundane as the abilities of the mole to perform his job might enter into another company's decision not to hire him. That wouldn't be fair. That wouldn't be interesting enough. So by blaming his employer for his lack of success in life, our mole gets himself off the hook quite nicely, while keeping his ego structure intact.

If this is an example of the kind of stuff we're going to be getting from Gawker's "mole," Fox is hardly quaking in its boots. Typical liberal pablum about conservatives can be found on dozens of lefty websites on the net. Why go to Gawker to read the same crap you can find at Daily Kos or Firedoglake?

I guess because someone who think's they are imitating John McLane is pretty cool.

If you experience technical problems, please write to