Oprah Winfrey, once universally adored as the queen of daytime television and a symbol of empathy and empowerment, recently found herself at the center of a fierce live TV critique by Fox News’s Greg Gutfeld and former NBC host Megyn Kelly.

What began as a nostalgic fondness for Oprah quickly turned into a harsh dissection of her media empire, her public persona, and the contradictions that define her influence today.

The exchange, part roasting and part serious analysis, exposed the complexities behind Oprah’s carefully curated brand and raised questions about her role in media, culture, and politics.

 

For decades, Oprah has been a household name, known for her warmth, inspirational messaging, and ability to connect with audiences.

Yet, as Gutfeld and Kelly pointed out, this image masks a more complicated reality.

Oprah’s transformation from a talk show host to a billionaire media mogul has positioned her as an all-encompassing media powerhouse with stakes in television networks, streaming platforms, magazines, and wellness products.

Gutfeld described her as a “friendly neighborhood media shark,” circling patiently to dominate entire industries.

This media monopoly, they argued, raises concerns about the concentration of cultural influence in one person’s hands.

 

Kelly emphasized Oprah’s role as a “cultural puppeteer,” someone who shapes public opinion with a velvet glove that hides an iron fist.

Oprah’s endorsements—from books to health trends—are not just recommendations but commands that steer consumer behavior and cultural conversations.

This gatekeeping, while lucrative, can create a sanitized echo chamber where dissenting views are sidelined, limiting diversity of thought and debate.

 

One of the flashpoints in the critique was Oprah’s annual “Favorite Things” list, a much-anticipated holiday tradition featuring Oprah-approved luxury items.

Gutfeld mocked the extravagance of the list, highlighting items like a $1,000 pizza oven and a $590 coffee maker, which seemed out of touch with the economic struggles of many Americans.

The most controversial item was a journal titled *“I’m Dead Now,”* meant for people to record their final wishes—a morbid suggestion that struck many as insensitive.

 

This list, Gutfeld suggested, symbolizes the disconnect between Oprah’s billionaire lifestyle and the everyday realities of her audience.

While millions struggle to make ends meet, Oprah jets around the world on private planes, sipping rare teas and doling out advice on gratitude from her “golden tower.

” The message, critics argue, is one of compliance and thankfulness for whatever scraps fall from the table, rather than a call for systemic change.

Gutfeld and Kelly also revisited Oprah’s controversial 2019 interview with Michael Jackson accuser Wade Robson, which aired after the documentary *Leaving Neverland*.

They accused Oprah of misleading viewers by presenting the interview as factual journalism while allegedly ignoring critical evidence that might have challenged the accuser’s claims.

Kelly pointed out that Oprah had access to compromising documents related to the case but failed to question the accusers’ motives or the lawsuits against Jackson’s estate.

 

This critique struck at Oprah’s credibility as a journalist, suggesting that her interviews sometimes serve her brand’s narrative rather than the pursuit of truth.

The implication was clear: Oprah’s media empire prioritizes storytelling and emotional impact over rigorous journalism, blurring the line between news and entertainment.

 

Oprah’s embrace of the wellness industry also came under fire.

Gutfeld likened her wellness advice—detox teas, kale smoothies, spiritual seminars—to the pitch of a used car salesman, packaged as self-care but ultimately a marketing ploy.

Kelly highlighted that Oprah’s wellness empire is less about health and more about branding, selling a lifestyle that caters to the wealthy while millions face food insecurity, medical debt, and systemic neglect.

 

This wellness kingdom, critics argue, commodifies spirituality and health trends, turning personal transformation into a luxury product.

Oprah’s spiritual musings, from spirit guides to universe energy, were described as confusing and performative, contributing to a “new age cult” atmosphere that feels disconnected from genuine enlightenment.

 

Oprah’s political influence and rumored presidential ambitions were another target.

Gutfeld compared her political maneuvers to a reality TV soap opera—full of suspense but ultimately inconclusive.

Kelly noted that Oprah maintains a delicate balance, staying progressive enough to please liberals but vague enough to avoid alienating her billionaire peers.

Her political game, they argued, is less about policy and more about preserving her image as a unifying figure and media mogul.

Oprah’s reluctance to take clear stances on systemic issues reflects a broader strategy to maintain broad appeal and protect her business interests, rather than push for radical change.

 

A cornerstone of Oprah’s brand has always been authenticity—her ability to appear vulnerable and relatable.

However, Gutfeld and Kelly questioned the genuineness of this authenticity, suggesting it is often scripted and choreographed for maximum emotional effect.

They likened it to reality TV, where every tear and smile is timed to keep viewers engaged and wallets open.

 

This commodification of vulnerability turns personal stories into entertainment, raising concerns about the ethics of emotional manipulation in media.

Oprah’s carefully crafted persona, while powerful, may sometimes prioritize brand loyalty over honest connection.

While Oprah’s philanthropic efforts are substantial—donations to education, scholarships, and disaster relief—critics argue that her giving often serves public relations more than systemic transformation.

Gutfeld described it as “give a little, gain a lot,” where philanthropy polishes her brand but leaves the underlying structures of inequality intact.

 

Kelly emphasized that true change requires challenging power systems, not just charitable gestures.

Oprah’s empire, they suggested, benefits from maintaining the status quo, where billionaires remain at the top and systemic issues persist.

 

Oprah’s influence as a cultural tastemaker is undeniable.

She has launched careers, shaped national conversations, and created a devoted following.

But Gutfeld warned of the dangers of concentrated power in one individual’s hands.

When Oprah’s voice dominates, the marketplace of ideas can become limited, suppressing innovation and dissent.

Kelly added that the “Oprah Protection Program”—a network of celebrities and influencers loyal to her—creates a media culture where ambition is measured by proximity to Oprah rather than merit.

This cozy arrangement stifles genuine critique and reinforces a sanitized, celebrity-driven narrative.

 

Despite the sharp critiques, Gutfeld and Kelly acknowledged Oprah’s magnetic allure and cultural significance.

She remains a symbol of success and hope for many, especially as the first Black female billionaire.

Yet, their roasting peeled back the layers to reveal a complex figure balancing empowerment with commercial ambition, authenticity with branding, and influence with control.

 

Oprah’s empire is both inspiring and problematic—a business built on selling aspiration rather than systemic change, on curated narratives rather than hard truths.

Her story reflects the contradictions of modern media moguls who must navigate the delicate dance of power, profit, and public perception.

The live TV critique of Oprah Winfrey by Greg Gutfeld and Megyn Kelly was more than a roasting—it was an unveiling of the realities behind a media icon’s polished image.

Oprah’s journey from empathetic talk show host to billionaire media overlord is marked by contradictions that challenge how we view celebrity influence today.

 

As audiences, it’s important to recognize the machinery behind the magic—the strategic branding, the curated authenticity, and the business imperatives that drive even the most beloved figures.

Oprah remains a cultural phenomenon, but beneath the dazzling smile is a mastermind orchestrating an empire as much about control as it is about inspiration.

 

Whether you admire or question her, Oprah’s story is a powerful lens through which to examine the intersections of media, culture, and power in the 21st century.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.