I've read that piece, but your wording is still misleading. It suggests a previous ongoing endorsement of, or agreement with, Tucker Carlson's beliefs from The Free Press as a publication, rather than a single article by a contributer documenting their personal disillusionment. The Free Press since it's inception has regularly mocked Tucker Carlson, this article does nothing to undermine that.
Moreover, your article suggests this is recent development- the article itself is over 5 months old and the author makes clear that even in his Fox days he was not an uncritical fan of Tucker Carlson
"Carlson, of course, wasn’t always right. He has always had a conspiratorial side, indulging half-baked theories.."
The way you have represented The Free Press in your article is neither accurate nor fair- there is not previous alligence to Carlson nor any subsequent volte face.
I hugely enjoy your newsletter but I have to correct your claim that The Free Press have ‘edged away’ from Carlson. The glorious thing about the free press is that they skew the orthodoxies of both the right and the left with equal impunity and a raised eyebrow. They have never been enamoured of Tucker Carlson or his ilk. This is to mistake them as a ‘right wing’ publication which they simply are not
The Free Press literally ran a piece about how its lead correspondent had loved Tucker Carlson circa 2020, but was turned off by his “turn” after leaving Fox News. So I’m just going on words the FP itself has published: https://www.thefp.com/p/tucker-carlsons-turn
Before anyone responds, please note that I have family links to both sides of the War of Independence, i.e. those who wanted an independent Ireland and those who fought on the side of the Crown.
Thanks Pascal, my comment certainly wasn’t meant to imply Churchill is an unblemished hero. I wrote in my book Difficult Women about his opposition to female suffrage. I just meant that most mainstream historians have a nuanced view of Churchill, while the Carlsonite right and the hard left are the two groups keen to undermine even the positive side of the ledger.
Hi Helen, many thanks for your response. I had misunderstood your point. Along with every sensible European, I am grateful to Churchill for defeating those Nazi nasties.
Thank you for writing this. Reading a proper teardown of the shitcasting approach to journalism made me feel just slightly better about the world. Yes there will always be people willing to take money to say anything. And that catches up eventually. I also find the concept of so appealing to consider that right-wing, dressed up alternative journalism isn't entirely funded by unhappy grassroots masses but actually by foreign governments. You get what you pay for...
A the mysterious Tenet organisation that we heard so.. little about in the Christopher Nolan film. Maybe the name made all the dupes think they really WERE in a war against the future or something. They seem stupid enough to believe it.
Candace Owens isn't anti-Semitic, she's *anti-Frankist*. Lots of Frankists around, I hear they pal about with the Shakers.
Thanks for doing the newsletter anyway. I’ve spotted an auto correct error: concentration camp commandments- I’m sure you meant commandants?
I've read that piece, but your wording is still misleading. It suggests a previous ongoing endorsement of, or agreement with, Tucker Carlson's beliefs from The Free Press as a publication, rather than a single article by a contributer documenting their personal disillusionment. The Free Press since it's inception has regularly mocked Tucker Carlson, this article does nothing to undermine that.
Moreover, your article suggests this is recent development- the article itself is over 5 months old and the author makes clear that even in his Fox days he was not an uncritical fan of Tucker Carlson
"Carlson, of course, wasn’t always right. He has always had a conspiratorial side, indulging half-baked theories.."
The way you have represented The Free Press in your article is neither accurate nor fair- there is not previous alligence to Carlson nor any subsequent volte face.
I hugely enjoy your newsletter but I have to correct your claim that The Free Press have ‘edged away’ from Carlson. The glorious thing about the free press is that they skew the orthodoxies of both the right and the left with equal impunity and a raised eyebrow. They have never been enamoured of Tucker Carlson or his ilk. This is to mistake them as a ‘right wing’ publication which they simply are not
The Free Press literally ran a piece about how its lead correspondent had loved Tucker Carlson circa 2020, but was turned off by his “turn” after leaving Fox News. So I’m just going on words the FP itself has published: https://www.thefp.com/p/tucker-carlsons-turn
Whatever about Horseshoe theory and the Bengal Famine, Churchill has a few blots on his copybook.
In south Wales, Churchill is remembered for sending the army in during the miners's strike in 1910-11: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonypandy_riots
In Ireland, as Secretary of State for War, he is remembered for creating the Black and Tans in the War of Independence/Anglo-Irish War of 1919-21: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ireland-s-war-of-independence-the-chilling-story-of-the-black-and-tans-5336022.html
Before anyone responds, please note that I have family links to both sides of the War of Independence, i.e. those who wanted an independent Ireland and those who fought on the side of the Crown.
Thanks Pascal, my comment certainly wasn’t meant to imply Churchill is an unblemished hero. I wrote in my book Difficult Women about his opposition to female suffrage. I just meant that most mainstream historians have a nuanced view of Churchill, while the Carlsonite right and the hard left are the two groups keen to undermine even the positive side of the ledger.
Hi Helen, many thanks for your response. I had misunderstood your point. Along with every sensible European, I am grateful to Churchill for defeating those Nazi nasties.
Thank you for writing this. Reading a proper teardown of the shitcasting approach to journalism made me feel just slightly better about the world. Yes there will always be people willing to take money to say anything. And that catches up eventually. I also find the concept of so appealing to consider that right-wing, dressed up alternative journalism isn't entirely funded by unhappy grassroots masses but actually by foreign governments. You get what you pay for...
A the mysterious Tenet organisation that we heard so.. little about in the Christopher Nolan film. Maybe the name made all the dupes think they really WERE in a war against the future or something. They seem stupid enough to believe it.