Tucker Carlson was unceremoniously fired from Fox, which tells you how much Rupert Murdoch really wanted him out the door. Don Lemon was fired from CNN, but unless the two join hand for the new Hannity and Colmes, who cares? But as Fox’s top performer, what does Carlson’s tossing mean?
As an entertainer, Bret Stephens catalogues his fall from grace and where he might land.
Part of it is the thought that, whatever Carlson does next, it will probably be even more unhinged and toxic than his previous incarnation: This is a guy whose career arc has moved from William F. Buckley wannabe to Bill O’Reilly wannabe to soon, I expect, Father Coughlin wannabe. Nobody should rule out the possibility of his going into politics, either as Donald Trump’s running mate or as the Republican Party’s compromise candidate between Trump and Ron DeSantis.
Not too many have voices the possibility of Carlson becoming Trump’s “running mate,” but it could happen. But does this departure mean Murdoch has a second chance to reinvent Fox the way it could have been, should have been?
But there’s also the sense of what Fox might have become. Murdoch had an opportunity to build something the country genuinely needed in the mid-1990s, when the G.O.P. was moving away from the optimistic and responsible party of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush toward the angry populism of Newt Gingrich and Tom DeLay: an effective center-right counterbalance to the overwhelmingly liberal tilt (as conservatives usually see it) of most major news media.
In other words, instead of trying to surf a killer wave, Murdoch could have purchased a ship and steered it. It might not have had the ratings that Fox would get — though Fox was always about influence, as much as money, for Murdoch. But, executed well, it could have elevated conservatism in the direction of Burke, Hamilton and Lincoln, rather than debase it in the direction of Andrew Jackson, Joe McCarthy and Pat Buchanan.
Then again, was Tucker Carlson to blame for his happily spewing nonsense he knew to be lies to his audience with his oddly twisted face making his insipid questions appear quasi-legit? Will anyone miss that look when he’s gone?
Tucker Carlson’s abrupt departure from Fox News today is being hailed by many as a positive development that will improve our political discourse. But I fear it won’t make nearly as much difference as some hope.
At the same time, I think it’s at best premature to conclude that Carlson’s departure will significantly improve the right-wing media scene. Tucker Carlson didn’t become popular by persuading his audience to change their minds. He did it by telling them what they wanted to hear. Whoever replaces him is likely to do the same.
Was it ever really about Tucker Carlson, or some talking head on the boob tube telling his audience what they want to know? It’s not that this is a phenomenon only affects the right, or that Fox’s friends gave much consideration to the revelations in the Dominion suit that their fav hosts knowingly lied to them, making up absurd excuses rather than saying, “crap, I was wrong.”
Not too long ago, the question was posed whether the disclosure that Carlson, Fox’s Number One property, hated Trump and thought his crew were all lying idiots, would finally get Fox’s audience to open their minds, just a little bit. Now that Carlson’s been canned, will he double down on an even less credible network or will he come clean and try to recapture his Bill Buckley image? What if, instead of starting that new show on OAN with Don Lemon, Ebony and Ivory, Tucker Carlson actually told the truth about all of it? Would it matter?
*Tuesday Talk rules apply.
No comments:
Post a Comment