Here’s her tweet:
I truly just don’t get it. Of course she’s being raked over the coals, but I’m sure she must have known she would be. Is it a need for attention, even if it’s bad?
I think she comes across as ugly and small and mean. Yuck, I would never want to be her friend.
Jealousy. Who’s Megyn Kelly these days? Not much, that’s who.
She knows her audience eats it up. And without the backing of any other networks, audience engagement is all she has to keep her program going. (She apparently has a podcast on SiriusXM.)
Even people raking her over the coals only helps her cred in that community, one that is willing to turn its back on people quite quickly.
Like everyone who’s ever “starred” on FOX News, she’s a professional troll.
What makes her lash out that way is a blend of ignorance and, ironically, low self esteem.
She’s pandering to her audience to show that just because she left Fox News and scammed NBC for a $30M payout to make her go away doesn’t mean that that she’s too good to get down and wriggle in the muck with the rest of the swamp creatures. And frankly, this is what Twitter is built for; free and easy attention for the lowest troll in the sewer.
Nah, she knows who she is and what she’s doing. She’s just a nasty piece of work with no moral scruples or any sense of empathy for others.
Stranger
Ignorance is why she is unaware of the reason for the Dr. title, low self esteem is why she criticizes another. But I guess you’re just here to argue.
I’m pretty sure that most of her followers are right-wing loons (despite her own claim to be a political independent), so attacking the Bidens at every opportunity is pretty much a requirement. The fact that she’s a nasty piece of work is a bonus, because it lets her do it without any qualms at all.
None of these Trump/Faux motherfuckers require deep psychological analysis. It’s all just as thin as it seems.
It works. It gets her clicks. Being a decent human doesn’t make her money.
I’ve heard many people describe PhDs as not real doctors. Are they nasty too?
Oh, she knows. It isn’t even performative ignorance as much as rudeness.
Many people!
They might be nasty, but that’s not the appropriate word in this context. Try “ignorant”:
The word doctor is derived from the Latin verb “docere,” meaning to teach, or a scholar … Historically speaking, the title doctor was invented in the Middle Ages to describe eminent scholars. These doctorates date back to the 1300s. Such people were accorded a lot of respect and prestige.
… A doctoral degree (PhD) is a degree that one earns after a master’s degree. A PhD entitles a person to use the title doctor. These are the social and physical scientists who conduct and evaluate published research. A PhD degree is normally obtained after six to eight years of hard work past the bachelor’s degree.
When we are asked in a physician’s or a dentist’s office what kind of doctor we are, we respond, “the real one.” We are the ones who teach the others.
Whom should we really call a “doctor”? - PMC
Just using the OP’s word from their title.
Yes, ignorant describes this attitude perfectly.
Yabut many people. Many of the many people are, in fact, even saying.
I feel pretty confident Kelly wouldn’t have an issue with a male PhD referring to himself as Dr.
If I didn’t have to deal with the lousy Great Firewall of China, I’d spend some time looking for a video online of her talking on air with a PhD or othr non-medical doctor and she uses the title doctor while addressing the person. She’s bern on air and a “journalist” long enough that she must have done so, right?
Eight seconds into This clip from 2 weeks ago she refers to PhD holder Martin Luther King Jr. as Doctor.