Story is very fresh right now with several outlets blowing it up as a 'we won!' moment and AOC calling for his arrest for incitement or some shit.
He needs to do a Rubin or something similar as he was the one thing that made people even watch fox sometimes because of his anaylsis. I sense Fox's viewing figures are going to dive again...
This is unfortunate, because even though he may have a bigger audience being on his own, he was reaching a lot of folks on Fox who are boomers and who do not seek out alternative content. Now he will reach only people who are already critical of the establishment.
It depends, I've seen more boomers using YouTube now and podcast information services. I think we're at the point it's less tech illiteracy and more loyal viewing patterns so once what the watch is gone and the switch, they're never coming back.
It's cultural. Just like how Zoomers were raised by iPads and phones, Boomers were raised by the television. So they have an entire lifetime of reflexively turning on the TV and absorbing whatever it outputs.
My parents are hilariously frustrating with this. I will go on and on to them about how insidious TV is and how propaganda-laden all TV news outlets are and they will totally agree with me. Won't stop it from being on the TV though. And if I am there and I see it on and I mention it again, they will agree but then say "we know it is biased BS but then where would we get news from?"
my mom is the same way. she litterly goes stir crazy and starts pacing wildly around the house. she 'has' to do something, and sit down for the tv is it. she can't accept that the restlessness comes from lack of purpose, and she just needs a fucking hobby as an outlet. but she is 'to old' to 'learn' because you are 'born with all your braincells you will ever have, and they just die of after that' (supper old quack science)
She is anti tv now, so she just watches youtube all day, the algorithm feeds her stuff it thinks fits her views, trying to pull her to the mainstream, and she just clicks through her subscriptions and the alternative stuff, and ignores the mainstream stuff.
the only way she was able to make the transition was to get a roku (which she used to love, but has moved away from as they locked down and got more shitty) to make her youtube on the tv work like a cable box.
My dad is exactly the same way. I've repeatedly told him that TV news is BS propaganda, and he even agrees, but he still nevertheless tunes into it.
You can't put a group of people defined by being born in an 18 year period into a category like you're trying to do.
People are individuals. You might be able to predict trends, but not individuals.
You should be addressing concepts here. Some people are going to keep watching Faux, some are going to leave MSM altogether. Try to exert some influence in the right direction when you get a chance.
Generalizations are 100 percent necessary to have any meaningful discussion about many of the topics discussed on this board. That doesn't mean there aren't plenty of individuals that buck the trend, and it doesn't mean people shouldn't do all they can to help those that seem helplessly predisposed towards being apart of the trend. This is setting aside whether or not this specific generalization is accurate or not.
In my family (not the other poster) we have no ability to influence when the older generation.
They watch the perceived "authority figure" on tv, use it to jockey for position amongst each other. There's not much space left for us that doesn't threaten their sense of losing control to their "below them" children.
I've been able to convince my older family of this or that, or convince them something they're pushing is bad before, but all that happens is they go back home to watching their media and debating amongst themselves and come back just more enraged that I disagreed with their group consensus - who's fundamental center is the big screen they watch every day.
With them captured by the big screen there seems to be no room left to influence them.
True. Some people are like that. Not exactly what 1984 depicts, but effectively at least as bad.
Tucker leaving Fox is another nail in the coffin of traditional television media.
Who is going to watch that shit anymore when all the talent has gone elsewhere?
Boomers are going to finally start using Youtube so they can subscribe to Tucker.
It will hopefully bring some of those people over to alternative content specifically to watch Tucker. And, once there, their eyes will open even wider.
They will find another limited hangout for the boomers dont worry
So... FOX is literally tossing their highest rated/viewed program?
My guess is his firing was part of the Dominion settlement. The left has been trying to get Tucker fired for years. They'll take any leverage they can get.
Yeah that settlement really opened some eyes as far as corruption goes.
I wouldn't want to work anywhere that is in bed with widescale voter corruption. This might be a good sign that Tucker wants to speak about things but Fox won't let him, so he has to go his own way.
Tucker's no dummy. He's been cozying up to Elon Musk lately. It wouldn't surprise me if Musk gave him a platform.
I didn't realize that was a thing you could do. But yeah suspicious timing.
I don't really get settling that lawsuit because Fox was the first to declare Biden the winner. The lawsuit seemed to revolve not around what was said about Dominion but simply that Fox News personnel questioned the election. That was all the evidence that they brought up in the media. Obviously it never went to trial.
My guess with the lawsuit is they were told by a judge or someone in power that they were going to lose and that it would be in their best interest to settle without going to discovery in court and revealing anything more about Dominion. Otherwise, why settle? It's not about legal fees when the settlement is 3/4 billion. Hell the money you save by simply not making the payment NOW is worth it.
The straight legal answer is that it matters that the Fox News personnel didn't believe the Dominion allegations but aired them anyway. What makes proving defamation so difficult, particularly in the case of matters of public interest, is that it requires actual malice or reckless disregard for the truth. Without that evidence that the Fox News personnel didn't believe Sydney Powell and her allegations, it's a near slam dunk case for Fox to say they were just covering all sides.
They already had discovery -- that's where the internal communications from Fox News personnel were produced. Having reviewed discovery from Dominion, the judge stated it "is crystal clear that none of the statements relating to Dominion about the 2020 election are true." It's very possible they still win. But, it would have been a Delaware jury and a giant spectacle with their stars being brought in to testify. It also works for their general transition from Trump.
What kind of internal communications?
E-mails and text messages.
Here is Dominion's brief in support of their motion for summary judgment that includes the communications they were relying on (although not the exhibits themselves):
https://archive.is/XcO64
I don't know if that archive link actually lets you go through the PDF, but here is the direct link: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/redacted-documents-in-dominion-fox-news-case/dca5e3880422426f/full.pdf
Well that's really damning, but doesn't it mean the Fox execs pushed him to read his stuff about it while making his meme faces?
Or did he find out only later?
what did they say about Dominion? Nobody talked about that. They just kept ragging on Tucker for being two faced.
It is useful to the powers to have a high dollar and high visibility settlement from a media organization to the corrupt voting machine fraudsters, because they can point to it as a counter to claims of fraud.
"Why would fox settle if it was true?"
Why, would big media ever play fucking games around the truth? Would big media not lie if it was convenient for their masters?
But the soy goblins that believe leftist media and fox are actually enemies will screech, point at this and slam their hands over their ears any time the subject is brought up for the next five decades until we're all dead.
The settlement is a psyop.
tucker has been.. saying things, in the podcast world. He went on and said he sold out his soul basically to work at fox and it ore him up all the stuff they censored and wouldn't let him say, and he hated going along with the narrative as much as he did. I have thought this was coming for a while, and honestly, I had no idea about the dominion stuff. It is a clever excuse they can sue though. If they fired him for what he said on podcasts, and said that, people would go look for it.
I heard it's because he called out media's part on pushing the vaccine and Big Pharma's dollars behind it on Friday. Didn't see his show, but if that's true then I wouldn't be surprised and I applaud him for his integrity on the subject
https://conspiracies.win/p/16b5la1ysS/bobby-kennedy-on-why-fox-fired-t/c/
I just saw. I hope he does pull a Rubin or go to Rumble.
His streaming show would get more views than FNC primetime.
lol RIP Fox
Counterpoint: Stephan Molyneux had a million subscriber youtube channel and dropped into obscurity after he was banned.
Of course Tucker is in a better position than Molyneux, but my point is that it's not always all sunshine and roses when goes (or are forced to go) independent.
There’s definitely a critical mass below which a political commentator cannot survive without the big platforms (YouTube or a TV network). Molyneux was below the threshold.
One scary implication of this face is that it’s in the best interests of the leftist establishment to crush newcomers before they reach the threshold. I’m sure they’ve figured this one. I wonder how many great people were spotted by the algorithm as having a sharp upward trajectory and preemptively banned and the rest of us never know they existed.
Yeah I used to watch this guy's channel who was like a "Styx but right-wing and more normal looking" in terms of content and presentation. I think he got to 1000 subs before he ducked out because he was taking some job adjacent to academia and couldn't have what he was saying associated with his face and work in that field.
Then on the other side you have chucke2009 who had this welding channel with a million subs and a bunch of corporate sponsorships, and aside from a few minor hints at being a Trump supporting normiecon was completely apolitical until his last video where he went full-on "we must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children" and nuked his channel. Half the comments on that video before it went down were "wait, what? I thought this was a welding channel" and the other half were "based!". It was a sight to behold.
Kinda wish guys like the latter would use their sponsorships to covertly fund patronage networks so guys like the former don't have to depend on the System to eat, but we're some years from that happening.
I was a fan of Molineux and tried to follow him after his was kicked off of YT. His demeanor immediately changed for the worse. He stopped doing his well-prepared "the truth about" shows and switched to doing call in shows and lazy live streams. All he could talk about was his getting banned. And, stupidly, he declared "I'm done with politics!" I can't understand that one. That was time time to double down. He'd already been kicked off the normie internet. In general it seems like he was addicted to the fame of his YT channel and couldn't handle losing it.
It's really funny how if you Google both Moly and Hitler compare their Wikipedia blurps that Google uses to describe them it's like he's literally "worse than Hitler" in his views.
LOL guy's an AnCap who thinks the Non-Aggression Principle even extends to parents using corporal discipline on their children, and that's how they describe him.
Sorry if I'm being dumb, but what groups are you referring to with this:
Without the threat of a firing hanging over dissidents' heads and them being able to essentially earn a potential unlimited amount of income doing whatever they want with their following they are going to be a far worse threat to the establishment than before.
Bingo. They foolishly believe that removing an internet platform will shut a man up.
The truth is that it spills into reality.
See “Handsome Truth” as part of the Goyum Defense League as an example.
Unfortunately, I think they know what they are doing. They don't care about shutting you up. They care about so marginalizing you that you're not heard by anyone except those who already agree with you.
Tucker was dangerous because he was telling the truth to boomer Republicans who normally support everything GOP politicians tell them to support. So he had to go (if he was forced out).
This is absolutely correct.
The audience that will watch a online Tucker podcast is not going to be the same as the cable TV news mainstream audience.
Tucker's show on Fox had immense value for getting certain key right wing ideas into the mainstream Overton window.
This is what they wanted to end and they actually achieved it.
This is a net loss for anyone who believes in conservatism, right wing policies, nationalism, populism and America first policies.
This. It's hard to understand how people continuously fail to get that, in order for the right to "win" here, they have to reach more than just the people that are already firmly on their side. Stuff like Tucker, O'Reilly, and Rush - as much as they are known for being just "right-wing blowhards", at least had some ability to reach people in the middle; some ability to reach people who weren't actively following politics.
Now, in the span of two elections, all three are gone. The left has near uncontested ability to set the narrative, and indoctrinate the middle. The more time passes, the more they entrench themselves.
Yup. Regime-controlled media only. If you told anyone in 2016 that they'd be criminally prosecuting memes on the internet and banning the most successful political show on TV they'd call you a conspiracy theorist. But it's true.
Complete censorship is coming.
I meant the different "theys" confused me. I think Antonio got it.
Cue a fresh wave of concern about doing something about 'dangerous' online disinformation.
These people seem to think that silencing dissent will just make it magically go away. They're very determined in their stubbornness - heaven forbid they try and seek an understanding.
At that point Tucker would die in an unfortunate plane crash.
Some tranny working as a YouTube administrator is salivating at the prospect of shadow banning and de-listing Tucker’s upcoming independent channel, I’m sure.
Fox actually fired him.
Holy fuck.
This is a terrible blow to getting stories that no one else covered to the mainstream audience.
Some people here are coping and saying this frees Tucker up to be more subversive and bold but this is essentially deplatforming his voice.
This is a sad day for anyone who cares about speaking truth to power and talking about stories the rest of the national media won't even touch.
People think like he actually cares about what he's been reading ideologically. His job was making silly faces while other employees worker on preparing his show (including a host of writers). He's also a rich dude that can just easily retire already if he wants so.
How do you know Fox fired him?
I am not certain but It is my hypothesis since this happened so soon after the huge Dominion settlement.
The left has wanted to deplatform Tucker for a while now and this settlement highlighted to Fox management the risks of keeping Tucker on air.
Tucker will talk about controversial topics that can result in various parties filing lawsuits against Fox.
This whole event screams to me that Fox is focusing on risk mitigation and future lawsuit prevention.
Who else on Fox even has a large audience and talks about controversial topics?
No one else.
They lost the lawsuit because they "knew" Sydney Powell was making unsubstantiated claims and the evidence for that was Tucker saying in corp records that she was lying.
So they're worried about Tucker just telling the truth and getting them sued for what their other hosts are saying.
As long as everybody is on board they can make whatever fake news they want and not get sued because with no evidence they knew it was wrong there's no evidence they did it maliciously.
https://twitter.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/1650550341027475479
This was either the most calculated move with Tucker wanting out but doing it in a way that meant Fox HAD to get rid of him as they are Pharma's bitch
Or he had enough and wanted to really tell it as it is. Either way he leaves with his creditability extremely high as the majority of his audience agrees with him about the vaccine and Fox's..... ok it was already shit, anyone got something worse than shit that isn't a leftist, or a politican?
from his podcast interviews it sounded like he had enough, and wanted to really tell it like it is. they have been holding him back for a long time. He also does want out, but don't think he wanted to just walk away. I think he is 3d chessing them. He has dilbert levels of fuck you money like scott adams.
Oh dear. I don't even watch Carlson and even I know this is a "if you strike me down I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine" moment.
it was hard catching carlson without supporting fox before. now hopefully it gets easier.
This is the dumbest decision they've ever made.
I'm also sad as this probably means the documentary he did on Canada will never see the light of day.
Depends, if the team he had follows him out the door and he sets himself up as independent (or more independent than fox) he can easily do it again or the footage 'happens' to be on his laptop and only requires re-editing to remove anything fox.
It'd be a great opening video for his platform if that was his first release.
Tucker both has nothing to lose and too much to lose.
With his Swanson wealth he can speak his mind and doesn't have to work, but he's never going to risk that on stealing footage from Fox.
Like O'Keefe could have his people sign a statement claiming the footage was their own and didn't belong to Veritas even knowing it did, but Tucker wouldn't. He'd just redo the work.
I could see Musk helping with such a venture.
CNN: Cuts off one of their lowest performing guys
FOX: Cuts of one of the only reasons people watch FOX in the first place.
LOL. He should team up with James Okeefe and his new OMG (Okeefe Media Group). Just hope he isnt foolish enough to get into the Daily Wire.
I get a kick out of it as james and co chase people around "I'm with OMG!" like yeah, you do want to shout omg to some of these revelations.
'veritas' sounded very.. corporate.
'OMG' is like, this is whats really fucking happening?!?!
the new branding is better imo.
Don Lemon is out at CNN now too.
That's but a trifle here.
I was wondering about announcing it on the same day though.
It was to lessen criticism. But who was first? Which news outlet is using the other as cover? Or were they conspiring?
I'm afraid the same thing will happen to him as Bill O'Reilly. Bill was on top of the mountain and no one hears him anymore
Possibly he got fed up with the censorship and rage quit.
https://twitter.com/justin_hart/status/1650540385561894912
Fox is controlled opposition anyway, but is there even another channel Tucker can go to?
He was very popular for them, there must have been a very good reason for this, nobody kills their golden goose without regrets.
Does Bubba still have a show maybe he can guest there
Reminder that Tucker has called Trump a "demonic force".
He has certainly been one pushing this gay shit lately
No enemies to the right