He’s as big a media personality as anyone, sure.
It’s important to listen to friends and enemies. I don’t think Tucker is going to press Putin on anything, which is fine, but I’d rather him not prance around as if he’s revealing some sacred truth.
Journalist Tucker Carlson interviews Russian President Valdimir Putin
- Thread starter fatpiggy
- Start date
It’s important to listen to friends and enemies. I don’t think Tucker is going to press Putin on anything, which is fine, but I’d rather him not prance around as if he’s revealing some sacred truth.
You should be willing to listen to everyone and be willing to challenge eveyone. The second half is where Tucker ceases to become a “journalist” and becomes the entertainer/hack we know he is.
I think it’s very possible to interview/report on dictators without giving legitimacy to their rule and worldview. I doubt Tucker will manage it
I mean sure, I can sign off on that, but do you really think this is anything other than an attempt to portray him as a kinder gentler Putin? Tucker hasn't been shy about his embrace of dictators(see Orban) and we know Putin won't tolerate crticism so what's the point other than an attempt to reframe him as a benevolent leader who we should all embrace.
Presenting a counter argument to the prevailing US narrative is a legitimate aim that I try to separate from Tucker’s ineptitude and lack of spine
Carlson has supported Russia / Putin for years. I follow a number of left, right, and center news outlets, as I appreciate there is almost always bias in reporting (even if unintentional).
Carlson has taken conspiracy theories (e.g., biolabs) and outright falsehoods to the extreme with respect to Ukraine. Pay attention to how he positions even the deaths in the war - “this is something Ukraine could stop,” “Zelensky is responsible”, etc. Never does he reference Putin in a critical manner - his intentions are always “misunderstood” and the West “forced him to invade” (a country a fraction the size of his with zero intention of invading a militarily superior neighbor). This interview will almost assuredly meet the definition of propaganda.
Carlson makes little effort to hide his bias. If you believe Carlson is a journalist - at least in the way that we used to define journalism - then you are at best ignorant and at worst simply stupid.
Carlson has taken conspiracy theories (e.g., biolabs) and outright falsehoods to the extreme with respect to Ukraine. Pay attention to how he positions even the deaths in the war - “this is something Ukraine could stop,” “Zelensky is responsible”, etc. Never does he reference Putin in a critical manner - his intentions are always “misunderstood” and the West “forced him to invade” (a country a fraction the size of his with zero intention of invading a militarily superior neighbor). This interview will almost assuredly meet the definition of propaganda.
Carlson makes little effort to hide his bias. If you believe Carlson is a journalist - at least in the way that we used to define journalism - then you are at best ignorant and at worst simply stupid.
the fact that this is even controversial tells you everything you need to know about the ignorance and arrogance of the entitled fkn morons in the us today. if you have a problem with it, you are the problem. wahh putin lies? show me a government who doesn't.
unfortunately, people have become such gullible simpletons they have no concept of actual journalism. in a world where people use logic and demonstrate self-awareness, journalism isn't reduced to only that which validates whatever it is you think you know. it's actually ok to have different voices, opinions, and explanations be given a platform. you can use this little thing known as your brain to digest what multiple sources might say on a subject and form an informed and independent opinion. if you are too stupid or uninformed to have any knowledge of the lessons history has taught us on the horrors wrought from banning voices or opinions, you need to do less talking and more learning. the stupid people who go along with this are the very reason those historical horrors were enabled in the first place.
unfortunately, people have become such gullible simpletons they have no concept of actual journalism. in a world where people use logic and demonstrate self-awareness, journalism isn't reduced to only that which validates whatever it is you think you know. it's actually ok to have different voices, opinions, and explanations be given a platform. you can use this little thing known as your brain to digest what multiple sources might say on a subject and form an informed and independent opinion. if you are too stupid or uninformed to have any knowledge of the lessons history has taught us on the horrors wrought from banning voices or opinions, you need to do less talking and more learning. the stupid people who go along with this are the very reason those historical horrors were enabled in the first place.
I think Putin is winning elections in Russia...right? You guys think our elections are free and fair but Russia has rigged elections?
Biolabs are not a conspiracy theory. They exist in Ukraine. Are they weapons labs? We don’t know either way and no one can say for sure. But no one denies they exist.
Carlson is more of a journalist than anyone out there.
Let me guess you guys think that Kristen Welker is a journalist? She constantly interrupts her subject with “fact checks” which turn out to be false.
If we limit journalism to the way that we used to define journalism, then there are no journalist left in this world at all.
Claiming that Tucker isn’t a journalist is irrational and false. His interview will get more views than any other news source this month. He is quite possibly the most influential journalist out there. And he is still getting paid by FOX for a few more months lol.
There a Pro-Hama wing of the democrat party.
And there seems to be a Pro-Putin wing of the Republican party.
And there seems to be a Pro-Putin wing of the Republican party.
You're not wrong about who he is, but the only way you learn is by listening. It's very dangerous to put yourself in a bubble and surround yourself with the same info and thoughts every day.
Maybe you learn nothing from listening to it. Maybe you learn just 1 little thing. I don't think 100% of what anyone says is truthful, but neither is 100% of it false or something I can't learn from.
It's wild to me the thought process of some on here who absolutely refuse to even listen to something opposite of them with an open mind. I'm not saying you're this guy at all, so please don't misunderstand me. It's just alarming to me the amount of people not willing to even hear the other side.
I feel like we're already too far as a country. The line had been drawn and nobody even listens to anyone anymore. Therefore, we cannot learn about or from each other. We are no longer a country working with each other from different viewpoints, instead we're working to ensure our team wins at whatever cost. "We don't want to hear the other side and the other side doesn't want to hear us".
Threads like these are the perfect case study. Nobody is learning or discussing, just name calling, doubling down and refusing to even watch videos or listen to any viewpoint from the opposite side and then we say, "where's your proof" or "why trust them?" It's as if we're pretending, we're one big happy country and we're far from it. We've long been divided and now, we're finally at the point where we don't want to listen or even care about the other half, per se. What's next and why fight to keep it from happening?
Just an observation from a guy who hopes good prevails.
While I don't disagree with the premise. In this instance we have an interviewer and an interviewee who are both constant and proven liars. Why give them more opportunity to spread lies and discourse?
When you know this about these people, why give them a larger audience to lie to?
Yeah I mean neither party has earned the benefit of the doubt. You have one guy whose own lawyers said doesn’t state actual facts, and that any reasonable person should be skeptical of what he says.
And on the other side you have a murderous dictator. I’ll probably watch some of it, but I don’t expect to hear anything but harebrained conspiracy theories and 100% of the blame to be placed on Ukraine.
I don't disagree, but you act as if our media is completely truthful and there's no need to listen to any opposing view.
It's not about giving someone else a platform or benefit of the doubt. To me, and my entire point was; I'm an adult who can discern from what's conspiracy, stupid or whatever you prefer to call it. But I'm not afraid to listen to someone.
Let's play devil's advocate here:
Let's say in the 60 minutes or so he says 60 seconds of something that's truthful, and you've not heard it or it's opposite of what you've been told or maybe it's just something that makes you go "hmmm". Wouldn't you be interested in that?
I think you should listen to Biden's entire speech, just as you should Trumps. You should also do your best to find real transcripts or real time translations when other global leaders speak. I don't want Fox to tell me what Biden said just as I don't want CNN to tell me what Trump said. I listen for myself. I have for several years now, did my best to listen to what they say, not what they tell me they said.
Our National Media is no exception when it comes to global leaders and what they say. I'll listen for myself, and I suggest as many people as possible do the same. There's nothing to lose by listening to your enemy.
The problem I have, is there’s nothing he’d say that I find truthful. He hasn’t earned the benefit of the doubt that I would view anything he says as fact. Furthermore, how would you prove what he says is truthful? Is he going to pull out data and information backing up his argument? If so, how are we to determine if that information hasn’t been doctored or manipulated in some way?
I don’t have an issue listening to people I disagree with politically or philosophically. I have an issue with known liars and murderers attempting to whitewash their behavior over the last X years. You may be able to discern what is truth and fiction from the interview, but there is an absolute horde of idiots out there who don’t have that ability. That’s who I’m concerned about with this interview - the army of morons who are going to latch on to everything Tucker and Putin discuss as truth and all the fallout that will come from it.
Edit: that all being said, I don’t disagree that it’s important for world leaders, even war criminals, from being interviewed. I just don’t find Tucker Carlson to be a credible journalist - as evidenced by what his own lawyers and producers said under oath.
I wish it was someone like Brokaw or Cronkite conducting the interview, tbqh.
Brokaw and Cronkite are cop-out answers as they are obviously too old (Brokaw, fighting cancer) and dead (Cronkite).
Who would you realistically propose do the interview? Who do you trust?
And you can't say Rachel Maddow.
Yes my inference was that there aren’t really any journalists nowadays with the credibility Brokaw and Conkrite had.
I think Mehdi Hassan or Jon Sopel would be good interviewers bc they’ve historically done a good job of pushing back at interviewees who don’t give straight answers. Aside from those two off the top of my head I can’t think of really any journalists who I’d feel comfortable giving a decent interview. My original statement was more an indictment on journalists today, and the lack of journalists you can trust to be fair.
I think it would take a female reporter to feel safe enough to ask him the tough questions - someone with gravitas like Christiane Amanpour, Margaret Brennan or big-balled Clarissa Ward. I'll never forget her knocking on the door of one of the Russians who poisoned Navalny.
the hypocrisy of the ignorance and arrogance emanating from people outraged about putin being interviewed on a highly visible platform is incredible. they justify this position because this evil dictator invaded a sovereign nation. funny how the waterheads had no issue with putin when they laughed along with obama and the media mocking mitt romney for calling putin/russia the us biggest threat in 2012 - which was deserved, then 4 years later immediately fell for a completely false narrative that convinced them he was the antichrist. of course, that's after decades as russia's leader where they had no issue with him. every admin since bush cordially received him. but overnight they fell hook, line, and sinker for a laughably irrational story.
sure, he ain't exactly a great person, and war is always horrible, but uhhhhh....hey idiots...you know that little expression about stones and glass houses? have you forgotten about the countries we invaded on false or embellished reasoning? did you just ignore all of the innocents we droned to oblivion? of course, the govt often lied about those incidents with their media lapdogs parotting their narrative until irrefutable proof embarrassed them. then they just pretended that never happened and moved on to the next lie. maybe you forgot those little whoopsies like you pretended they never tried to sell benghazi being incited by a youtube video. putin could never dream of reaching the number of innocents the us govt is responsible for, and that's only referring to their work in iraq and afg, nevermind the numbers they've piled up elsewhere. so maybe, just maybe, you might have the self awareness to recognize whatever names or labels you want to apply to him using that justification apply 10x over to your own govt. that's across both parties over every administration. you have to have a room temperature iq to think the us govt is more honest than almost any on the planet at this point. maybe people should be a little more worried about cleaning up our own house before getting on a soap box to castigate someone else's.
of course, the useful idiots can't process thoughts like this. they'll predictably default to smooth brain name calling and labeling like "putin apologist" because they lack the cognitive bandwith to actually substantiate their positions. they're incapable of anything beyond buzz words and headlines.
sure, he ain't exactly a great person, and war is always horrible, but uhhhhh....hey idiots...you know that little expression about stones and glass houses? have you forgotten about the countries we invaded on false or embellished reasoning? did you just ignore all of the innocents we droned to oblivion? of course, the govt often lied about those incidents with their media lapdogs parotting their narrative until irrefutable proof embarrassed them. then they just pretended that never happened and moved on to the next lie. maybe you forgot those little whoopsies like you pretended they never tried to sell benghazi being incited by a youtube video. putin could never dream of reaching the number of innocents the us govt is responsible for, and that's only referring to their work in iraq and afg, nevermind the numbers they've piled up elsewhere. so maybe, just maybe, you might have the self awareness to recognize whatever names or labels you want to apply to him using that justification apply 10x over to your own govt. that's across both parties over every administration. you have to have a room temperature iq to think the us govt is more honest than almost any on the planet at this point. maybe people should be a little more worried about cleaning up our own house before getting on a soap box to castigate someone else's.
of course, the useful idiots can't process thoughts like this. they'll predictably default to smooth brain name calling and labeling like "putin apologist" because they lack the cognitive bandwith to actually substantiate their positions. they're incapable of anything beyond buzz words and headlines.
Here’s the BBC’s perspective: Tucker Carlson: Putin takes charge as TV host gives free rein to Kremlin https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68248740
Bet Tucker regrets doing this interview haha. Putin has emasculated him. What a chud...
news.yahoo.com
Vladimir Putin Delivers Damning Assessment Of Tucker Carlson Days After Interview
The Russian leader wasn't exactly impressed by the former Fox News host.
Putin supports Biden.Bet Tucker regrets doing this interview haha. Putin has emasculated him. What a chud...
Vladimir Putin Delivers Damning Assessment Of Tucker Carlson Days After Interview
The Russian leader wasn't exactly impressed by the former Fox News host.
I get confused when it’s ok to listen to Putin.
Our grocery prices are high here because we have to pay for pronouns in Washington DC
