this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2024
323 points (92.2% liked)

World News

38956 readers
3492 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

What's America's view on this Tucker Carlson?

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Tarkcanis@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

I expected nothing less.

[–] banneryear1868@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

This line of critique is wrongheaded and empowers Tucker. Putin already commands a platform far above Tucker's, a media figure cannot provide a bigger platform for Putin than the one he already has. Many liberal journalists have interviewed Putin without facing this critique, it's applied here because Tucker is a reactionary shithead.

The better critique is that you have for-profit entertainment companies capitalizing on this, and how that affects the content.

[–] LiamMayfair@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

What liberal media journalists have managed to interview Putin since he began his invasion of Ukraine in 2022? I thought Carlson was the first Western person to manage that.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'd argue Carlson also didn't manage to interview him, apparently Putin just rambled along without answering any questions.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Orbituary@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Most sane people hate him. That's why we will lose the election to Trump.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 5 points 8 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The American had touted his sit-down with Putin as a triumph for free speech, asserting that he was heading where no Western news outlets dared to tread.

Carlson's claim also ignored the fact that Russia's president has spent the past two decades in power systematically stamping out free speech at home.

He talked about a Russian "patriot" who had "eliminated a bandit" in a European capital, seeming to confirm previous reports that Russia is demanding a prisoner swap with Vadim Krasikov.

It's all part of how Putin justified his full-scale invasion, almost two years ago - along with "de-Nazifying" Ukraine, which he claimed is still a work in progress.

"Sooner or later this will end in agreement," was Putin's message, arguing that Nato was coming to realise that defeating Russia on the battlefield would be impossible.

The American did not push Putin at all on political repression at home, which includes locking up vocal opponents of the war in jail.


The original article contains 999 words, the summary contains 160 words. Saved 84%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›