Tucker Carlson REFUSES To Apologize To Outrage Mob after they call for him to be fired from Fox News. Far left activist group Media Matters for America published comments from over 10 years ago where Tucker Carlson said offensive things on a shock jock radio program. Following this #firetuckercarlson began trending on Twitter as activists demanded he be fired and supporters rejected the demand using the same hashtag.Activists have repeatedly tried to drum up old comments to get people in trouble but these comments, like other comments used by activists for political reasons, were made publicly on national radio. Far left activists try to use old out of context quotes to push their agenda because it seems our culture has not yet become resilient to bad faith attacks.In December activists targeted the advertisers of Tucker Carlson in an attempt to destroy his show and this seems to be another political hit job in bad faith by faux social justice activists.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Activists are calling for the firing of Fox News host Tucker Carlson after Media Matters for America, an activist group, unearthed old quotes from him after he appeared on several radio shows.
The comments cover a wide range of topics, but a few notable ones talk about child marriage and statutory rape.
I gotta say, this kind of feels like it may be faux outrage, at least from where it's starting from, because Media Matters for America is a left-wing group, and it's not the first time activists have tried to get Tucker Carlson taken off the air.
Only a few months ago, he lost a massive amount of his sponsors for things he said, and these comments that are being unearthed We're not made in secret.
They're publicly available comments.
Tucker Carlson wasn't hiding that he was saying these things.
He was going on public shows with massive audiences and saying these things.
So whether or not anyone is actually outraged, at least at the top, to me seems kind of unlikely.
Though, I'm sure there are some people who are offended.
This seems like it may just be a political hit job.
But today, let's take a look at exactly what Carlson said, and look at the issue of the left trying to get Carlson fired, and I also want to talk a little bit about outrage culture and the mechanics of social media, how it perpetuates this kind of outrage.
But before we get started, make sure you follow us over on Mines at Mines.com slash Subverse.
We have set up a distributed newsroom where you can share stories, get involved, and highlight information you think needs to be covered.
If you want to support these videos, just share them on social media to help spread the message.
As of the filming of this video, the hashtag FireTuckerCarlson is currently trending number 5 in the United States with thousands of tweets calling for him to lose his job, though many of the people tweeting with the hashtag are actually defending Tucker Carlson.
This all started with unearthed quotes from Media Matters for America.
In an article they write, In unearthed audio, Tucker Carlson makes numerous misogynistic and perverted comments.
During interviews on Bubba the Love Sponge, Carlson said he loves the idea of young girls sexually experimenting and used sexist terms to refer to a number of women and defended statutory rape.
They say, Between 2006 and 2011, Tucker Carlson spent approximately an hour a week calling into Bubba the Love Sponge, a popular shock jock radio program, where he spoke with the hosts about a variety of cultural and political topics in sometimes vulgar terms.
During those conversations, Carlson diminished the actions of Warren Jeffs, then on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted Fugitives list, for his involvement in arranging illegal marriages between adults and underage girls, talked about sex and young girls, and defended statutory rape.
Carlson, who was hired by Fox News in 2009, also used sexist language to talk about women, including then-co-workers at NBC and public figures.
He referred to Martha Stewart's daughter Alexis Stewart as the C-word, called journalist R.N.
Huffington a pig, and labeled Britney Spears and Paris Hilton the biggest white whores in America.
He also said that women enjoy being told to be quiet and kind of do what you're told, and that they are extremely primitive.
Media Matters published this video, where it goes through a series of quotes from Tucker Carlson.
However, Carlson has responded to the statements he made in the past, from Variety.
Tucker Carlson responds to radio controversy.
Tucker Carlson responded Sunday night to the discovery of controversial and off-color comments he made during conversations with a radio shock jock between 2006 and 2011, urging people who wanted to know more about what he thought to watch his primetime program on Fox News Channel.
Carlson posted on Twitter, Media matters caught me saying something naughty on a radio
show more than a decade ago.
Rather than express the usual ritual contrition, how about this?
I'm on television every weeknight live for an hour.
If you want to know what I think, you can watch, Carlson said in a statement Sunday night.
Anyone who disagrees with my views is welcome to come on and explain why.
The comments appeared to be made while Carlson was working as a host for MSNBC or as a contributor for Fox News Channel.
Back in December, activists had targeted Tucker Carlson's advertisers and he lost many of his sponsors.
This to me feels like a political hit job for one simple reason.
These are publicly available comments.
They weren't made in secret.
Tucker worked for MSNBC.
It really does seem like we live in a world where times will never change, opinions will never change, culture can never evolve.
People want to make sure everyone knows that everything that was contextually relevant 10 years ago that is no longer relevant today was made by you and insinuate you actually believe those things today.
I don't know if Tucker Carlson stands by those quotes that he made, but I think it's besides the point.
2006, 13 years ago, he worked for MSNBC.
Are people going to criticize that network for hiring him and allowing him to say those things?
No.
The issue is that today, Tucker works for Fox News, and activists have been trying to get him removed from network television.
On December 17th, we saw this story.
Tucker Carlson tonight loses at least 26 advertisers after immigration comment.
However, the story notes, the host defended his comments last night and his network pushed back.
At least 26 corporations have stopped advertising on Tucker Carlson's primetime Fox News show in response to a comment he made On December 13th, about immigration, with Norwegian Cruise Lines, Red Lobster, Farmer's Insurance, Lexus Toyota, Mint Mobile, Gray's Snacks, Samsung, SodaStream, Pfizer, Robitussin, and Sandisk, the latest companies to tell The Hollywood Reporter that they are pulling future advertising from the show.
Fox News responded to the advertiser effort on Friday by releasing the following statement.
It is a shame that left-wing advocacy groups, under the guise of being supposed media watchdogs, weaponized social media against companies in an effort to stifle free speech.
We continue to stand by and work with our advertisers through these unfortunate and unnecessary distractions.
On Tuesday, the network released a longer statement.
We cannot and will not allow voices like Tucker Carlson to be censored by agenda-driven, intimidation efforts from the likes of MoveOn.org, Media Matters, and Sleeping Giants.
Attempts were made last month to bully and terrorize Tucker and his family at their home, He is now once again being threatened via Twitter by far-left activist groups with deeply political motives.
While we do not advocate boycotts, these same groups never target other broadcasters and operate under a glossy hypocritical double standard given their intolerance to all opposing points of view.
Tucker actually addressed the controversy on his show by kind of doubling down and reiterating his statements on immigration.
These activist groups don't target MSNBC where he was actually working.
Why wasn't there activist outrage in 2006 when he worked at MSNBC?
There's a few reasons for it.
One, it's obvious.
Media Matters has a very overt political agenda.
They've even lied about me in the past and refused to correct when I asked them politely to.
They're trying to get Tucker Carlson removed.
That's what these organizations are doing.
But more importantly, it's that context changes.
Tucker Carlson made these statements in 2006, and while they were probably relatively offensive back then, things are different today.
This is why Kevin Hart made jokes in 2009 that were offensive today.
Times change, and culture evolves.
We understand that certain comments today that aren't acceptable were acceptable 10 years ago.
20 years ago, people were way more racist, and 30 years ago, 40 years ago, etc.
People likely won't make similar comments today because we understand why we should or shouldn't say these things and why they are or aren't offensive or respectable.
But still, we see articles from the likes of Washington Post and other outlets That act like these comments reflect where we are today, running this story, Fox News couldn't care less that Tucker Carlson is a misogynist.
Or this story, Tucker Carlson unapologetic over misogynistic comments on statutory rape, insults against women.
And I think that's a dramatic oversimplification of what's happening.
People are trying to act like what was said 10 years ago somehow reflects the opinions of Tucker today.
But there's a reason this is happening, and in my opinion, it comes from social media.
I made a thread earlier today about how the mechanics of Twitter encourages this outrage.
It's been widely covered and reported in stories that anger and justice are one of the primary emotions leading to shares.
Twitter is a fast-moving network, with new tweets flying in every second.
It's very different from Facebook with an algorithmic feed, but on Twitter, You get rewarded by being angry.
When people see that righteous indignation, they share it.
And this gives you access to a new audience.
It's not just about trying to remove Tucker Carlson.
It's about proving victory for your organization so you can raise money, get donations, and build a new audience.
People who are fighting for what they would call justice need to constantly have an enemy to rail against.
What do they do?
Well, did Tucker Carlson say anything overtly offensive today?
No, but they'll go back in time ten years to find it.
But what happens when someone doesn't even say anything offensive at all?
They just make it up or pull quotes out of context.
Because when they make that insane and aggressive hot take on Twitter, they'll get retweets.
People will rally behind it and they will donate to your cause.
This is what social media is doing.
This is the human machine solving the game that is the mechanics primarily of Twitter.
It's not necessarily human behavior.
Yes, sometimes humans like to do certain things and will lead a charge because they want to see change.
But the mechanics of Twitter specifically prioritize outrage and hot takes.
Look at Instagram.
Instagram doesn't have the same sharing system, so it doesn't encourage, at least not to this extent, the kind of hate we see from various political factions.
Twitter does.
The retweet button is right there.
And if you say something like, this specific thing is unjust, share now.
People will.
Reddit is very similar.
If you tell people there's some kind of egregious, unjust act occurring, please upvote.
They will.
Because people want to feel like they're doing good, they like justice, and they like anger.
They want to see problems solved, and this can be noble.
But the mechanics of many social media platforms are encouraging people to exaggerate, lie, and it's pushing us into an extreme future.
We're walking towards a nightmare dystopia.
And the thing is, it seems to me that the left is more susceptible to this because of collectivism.
When someone says, one group is being oppressed, the left wants to solve that problem to protect their collective, and they rally around that cause, even if it's a lie.
The right is more reactive because they tend to be more individualistic.
They say, well, if someone's pointing the finger at you, it's your responsibility.
This is why we often see issues like Steve King being removed from various committees after making offensive comments, but Elon Omar being defended religiously by people on the left.
They say, we don't care that people are offended because you have to understand the nuance and they want to protect their tribe.
But the right being particularly individualistic is going to say, you've made your own bed.
It's not absolute.
Absolutely not.
There certainly are people on the right who will lead the outrage charge.
There are people on the left who will defend and be reactionary as well.
But the issue is, often, as people want to defend their collective, it's easier to rile up the left with outrage.
And that's why, in my opinion, we see the left being much more censorious.
The right then responds to the change in culture, where people end up getting censored, with outrage and pushback.
Our society absolutely needs to develop some kind of resilience.
to faux outrage. And it's a problem. With the rise of deepfakes and photoshop fake quotes,
people can have their lives destroyed by fake news. When you find that there are many activists
working in media who can perpetrate these lies, or the Washington Post will claim that Fox News
doesn't care about Carlson's misogyny, omitting the context of the conversation being 10 years ago,
we're in trouble. People will end up finding themselves removed from society, fired from
their jobs, losing sponsors, because quotes are pulled out of context, because the true meaning
is lost by outrage culture. People who don't actually care about what's true or not are going
to try and generate traffic. And primarily, I don't know.
I blame Twitter.
Its simple mechanics encourage this kind of behavior.
Naturally, we do see high-profile people on the right come to the defense, pointing out the absurdity of criticizing a show called Bubba the Love Sponge.
Donald Trump Jr.
said, For comments made on Bubba the Love Sponge show, obviously a serious policy show where no satire would be made.
The left is not going after Tucker Carlson for any reason other than he's effective at destroying their agenda.
That's what they do.
Kurt Schlichter said, I can't believe somebody said something offensive to a bunch of leftist prudes on a show hosted by Bubba the Love Sponge.
Buzz off, you geeks.
How about Tucker Carlson and everybody else say whatever they want, and you sit there and be pissed off about it?
But of course me, your ever-lovable centrist type, will take the middle of the road on this.
I don't think we need to defend Tucker Carlson's comments.
We absolutely can be outraged by them and say, Tucker, straight up, those were some pretty dumb things you said.
However, does that mean ten years later he should lose his show?
Absolutely not.
Tucker Carlson doesn't need to apologize for what happened ten years ago.
We can recognize why what he said was bad.
And we can call him out when he says it again.
For the time being, though, Tucker is inviting you on his show to challenge him and have a discussion.
That seems like an absolutely appropriate response.
I don't think people should be defending someone making offensive comments at the same time trying to destroy his life and destroy his show.
It shows what your real agenda is here.
Because any rational and sane person would say something as simple as this.
Tucker, you made some offensive comments I don't appreciate.
I hope in the future you don't do that.
I hope going forward you recognize why those comments were offensive and you carry on with your business in a way that is more respectable.
That's it.
However, I think what we see from this is, well, like I mentioned, it shines a light on the agenda.
They just want to get him banned.
They want to remove someone from the political sphere because they can't answer his questions.
Tucker is effective at communicating to people who aren't on the left and shining a light on some of the hypocrisy of the left.
I certainly don't agree with everything Tucker Carlson says, but in America, and in this world, it's important to have diversity of opinion.
While Tucker Carlson may think diversity is a bad thing, I humbly disagree, and would like to point out that Tucker actually has diversity of opinion and thought on his show, or at least he tries to.
And that's what diversity is supposed to be.
Different people, of different perspectives, from different parts of the world, sharing how they see things.
I feel like both sides kind of misconstrue what's actually going on with calls for diversity.
But that being said, we should protect diversity of opinion.
And trying to get Tucker Carlson cancelled for something he said 10 years ago is nonsensical, and it reeks of political agenda.
But let me know what you think in the comments below.
We'll keep the conversation going.
You can follow me on Mines at TimCast.
Stay tuned.
New videos every day at 4 p.m.
Eastern.
And I'll have more videos on my second channel, youtube.com slash timcastnews, starting at 6 p.m.
