The Mainstream Media Hates Tucker Carlson—Because He's Eating Their Lunch
For mainstream journos, Putin isn't the problem; the newly untethered Carlson is.
In June 2021, while still at Fox News, Tucker Carlson was informed by a U.S. government whistleblower that members of Biden's National Security Agency were spying on Carlson, and that government agents were attempting to leak his private communications to opposition media. The surveillance, Carlson claimed, was due to his attempts to secure an interview with an unnamed world leader.
On Tuesday, Carlson confirmed that the leader was Russian President Vladimir Putin, who Carlson finally interviewed in Moscow this week. The interview will air Feb. 8 on the Tucker Carlson Network, Carlson's new independent venture, as well as the social media platform X.
As soon as Carlson announced the interview, a furor ensued from the chattering class. Never-Trump standard-bearer Bill Kristol wrote on X: "Perhaps we need a total and complete shutdown of Tucker Carlson re-entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on."
It's worth nothing, once upon a time, when Kristol was Tucker's boss as the now-defunct Weekly Standard, he constantly praised his mischievous gadfly, once telling the Washington Post about Tucker, "He's engaging and boyish, people take a liking to him... Tucker, to his credit, reports it like it is."
Meanwhile, former Trump hire Sebastian Gorka, who once sold "Let Tucker Speak!" t-shirts on his website, lashed out at the former Fox host, writing on X, "I remember when Americans didn't do PR for KGB colonels. Well, without being agents of the Kremlin."
News of the Moscow trip once again entangled the name Tucker Carlson with "traitor" and "Putin puppet" across the mainstream blabbersphere, a reoccurring theme for Carlson. CNN said Russian state media was "breathlessly celebrating his visit," and that the interview "gives Putin a chance to sit down with a big supporter," adding that in Russia, Carlson is "a big hero."
It's not that journalists believe Putin should be blackballed; rather, they want the credit and to control the message. CNN's own Christiane Amanpour announced her envy on Twitter: "Does Tucker really think we journalists haven't been trying to interview President Putin every day since his full scale invasion of Ukraine? It's absurd—we'll continue to ask for an interview, just as we have for years now."
Amanpour was telling the truth: The BBC's Steve Rosenberg said his outlet lodged several requests with the Kremlin for a Putin interview in the last 18 months. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed that Western media relentlessly pesters his boss for a chat.
"We receive numerous requests for interviews with the President, but mostly, as far as countries in the collective West are concerned, these are from major network media: traditional TV channels and large newspapers that don't even attempt to appear impartial in their coverage," he told Russian state media. Carlson "has a position that differs from the rest. It's not pro-Russian by any means, and it's not pro-Ukrainian; rather, it's pro-American. But at least it stands in clear contrast to the position of the traditional Anglo-Saxon media," he added.
"It's our job; we're in journalism. Our duty is to inform people," Carlson put it succinctly in a video teasing the interview and explaining his decision to come to Moscow.
Americans have always been told that journalists ought to speak to everyone they can—even autocratic, dangerous, and violent figures. Wasn't that the case in 1997, when CNN reporter Peter Arnett interviewed Osama bin Laden? Or in 2003, when CBS interviewed Saddam Hussein?
In 2015, Hollywood actor Sean Penn interviewed "the most wanted man in the world," Mexican drug lord El Chapo, and received little of the condemnation Carlson currently faces.
And Putin, it should be noted, has been interviewed by the likes of George Stephanopoulos, Charlie Rose, Barbara Walters, Megyn Kelly, and Oliver Stone, to name a few. In 2013, Putin even published an op-ed in the New York Times.
Are they traitors? Some, maybe, but not because they platformed Putin.
It's difficult to imagine that had Carlson's interview gone forward on Fox News, we'd see the same greasy, insincere outrage. Despite Fox being the mainstream Republican mouthpiece, it's still a part of the legacy media club. They trust one another to stay within approved boundaries. More importantly, that club is sick and tired of being scooped by people on the Internet.
Putin isn't the problem; the newly untethered Carlson is. He's long been despised for his contrarian and populist megaphone. Now that he's taking subscribers away and is a truly free agent, they have more reason to pounce.
This article originally appeared in Newsweek on February 8, 2024.