Title: The View, Whoopi Goldberg, and the Power ofSatirical Criticism

In the increasingly polarized world of American media, daytime television has become lessa platform for open dialogue and more a battleground of ideological theatrics. One of the most prominentexamples of this trend is The View, a long-running talk show that once prided itself on offering diverse opinions from across the political spectrum.However, as recent events demonstrate, the show has drifted into the realm of emotional performance, where dissent is treated as herand criticism is deflectedwith drama. At the center of this transformation stands Whoopi Goldberg, a celebrated actress-turned-commentator whose recent on-air meltdowns have become symbolic of The View evolution from forum to echo chamber.

Greg Gutfeld, a Fox News commentator knownfor his biting satire and unfiltered delivery, recently took aim at Goldberg and the broader View ensemble in a monologue that was both comedic and piercing. His commentary offers not just a takedown of one individual, but a broader critique of modern political discourse, media hypocrisy, andthe dangers of unchecked ego in public debate.

The immediate cause of this media clash was Goldberg’s controversial statement that the Holocaust was “not about race.” The comment, made during a segment of The View, triggered a storm of backlash and led to her suspension by ABC for two weeks. While Goldberg attempted to defend her view by framing the Holocaust as an example of “man’s inhumanity to man,” the historical inaccuracy and tone-deafness of her claim sparked outrage. What followed was not thoughtful reflection, but emotional grandstanding—a pattern that has become all too familiar on The View.

Gutfeld’s response to this incident was not subtle. He painted Goldberg’s reaction as theatrical, exaggerated, and devoid of substance. He described her meltdown as “so unhinged it makes a toddler tantrum look like stoic meditation,” pointing out the absurdity of her inability to engage in reasoned debate. In Gutfeld’s framing, Goldberg is not a thoughtful commentator but a performer, using outrage and emotion as shields against scrutiny. Rather than responding to criticism with facts or reasoned arguments, she defaults to indignation and victimhood.

Gutfeld extended his critique to the entire structure of The View. Once envisioned as a roundtable of varied perspectives, the show now resembles, in his words, “a live-action cosplay of a Twitter mob.” Dissenting voices are not engaged but shouted down or escorted into irrelevance. The panel’s discussions are less about dialogue and more about synchronized sanctimony, with each host trying to outdo the other in righteous indignation.

Perhaps the most telling moment in Gutfeld’s monologue was his comparison of Goldberg’s “emotional TED talks” to actual satire. While The View relies on prepackaged outrage and applause-triggering clichés, Gutfeld argues that true influence lies in humor grounded in truth. Unlike The View, his own program, Gutfeld!, draws its strength from the power of laughter and the willingness to mock both sides of the political aisle. This approach, he suggests, is why his audience continues to grow while The View struggles to maintain relevance.

A particularly biting segment of Gutfeld’s monologue involved Sunny Hostin, another co-host of The View known for her vocal support of reparations and racial justice. In a segment on PBS’s Finding Your Roots, it was revealed that Hostin is a descendant of European slave owners—a detail that undermines her long-standing narrative of racial oppression. Gutfeld pounced on this irony, using it to highlight what he sees as the performative nature of The View’s social commentary. He suggested that many of the show’s arguments are not rooted in self-reflection or understanding, but in a desire to project virtue—no matter how contradictory the evidence may be.

Gutfeld also skewered Goldberg’s continued support for President Joe Biden. He referenced a particularly absurd clip in which Goldberg declared that she “doesn’t care if [Biden] s***s his pants,” as long as he isn’t Trump. For Gutfeld, this statement epitomizes the irrationality of tribal political loyalty. It’s not about competence, leadership, or policy—just blind opposition to the other side.

Despite the harshness of his tone, Gutfeld’s criticism reveals a deeper truth about modern media and political engagement. Shows like The View often operate in closed feedback loops, where emotional affirmation replaces intellectual rigor. In such environments, challenges are not welcomed but seen as personal attacks. This is why Goldberg and her co-hosts react with such hostility to opposing viewpoints—they are not used to being questioned.

What makes Gutfeld’s satire effective is its foundation in reality. He doesn’t merely attack personalities; he exposes the contradictions in their arguments. His jokes land because they reflect what many viewers already sense but are rarely allowed to express: that much of today’s public discourse is performative, shallow, and fueled by ego rather than enlightenment.

The success of Gutfeld’s show compared to the declining relevance of The View speaks volumes. Audiences today, especially younger ones, are not interested in being lectured. They seek commentary that is honest, self-aware, and yes, even humorous. Gutfeld understands that comedy, when used properly, can be a powerful vehicle for truth. Meanwhile, The View continues to churn out episodes filled with predictable outrage, scripted emotion, and a refusal to engage in honest dialogue.

In the end, the clash between Gutfeld and Goldberg is about more than just two media personalities. It reflects a cultural divide between those who treat disagreement as an opportunity for growth and those who see it as a threat to their identity. Gutfeld represents a growing segment of media consumers who are tired of sanctimony and hunger for authenticity—even if it comes with a punchline. Goldberg, by contrast, has come to embody a style of commentary that equates volume with value and emotion with insight.

If The View wants to remain relevant, it must do more than just preach to the choir. It must rediscover the art of listening, debating, and perhaps even laughing at itself. Until then, critics like Gutfeld will continue to hold up the mirror—and the reflection, while uncomfortable, might just be what the show needs most.