On 10 February, offGuardian’s Kit Knightly wrote a lucid analysis on What NO ONE is saying about Tucker Carlson’s Putin Interview. Among many incisive points, consider the dynamic flip-flopping of the evil empire transmorgrified into its present-day re-branding as being worthy of note:
It’s 2024 & the world is being hurried fast toward the Brave New (“multipolar”) Normal. Russia is on board with Agenda 2030 & very powerful western establishment voices are now promoting Putin & his once-sidelined views.
Compare Carlson’s Bread and Circuses theatrics with Oliver Stone’s 2017 interviews with Vladimir Putin (parts [1], [2], [3], & [4]). Stone’s films were met with blackout silence by plutocratic controlled and directed media. Seven years on, we are seeing the one percent agenda’s 180-degree reset of “what’s important”.
On 25 December 2022 Edward Curtin wrote about Tucker Carlson and the JFK Allegations. Among other observations, he pointed out how people can be taken in by what they wish to hear:
If one asks a dedicated believer in the truthfulness of The New York Times Corporation or NPR, for example, what they think of Tucker Carlson, they will generally dismiss him with disdain as a right-wing charlatan. This, of course, works in reverse if you ask Carlson’s followers what they think of the Times or NPR. Yet for those who think outside the frame – and they are all non-mainstream – a different picture emerges. But sometimes they are taken in by those whose equivocations are extremely lawyerly but appeal to what they wish to hear. This is exactly what a “limited hangout” is. Snagged by some actual truths, they bite on the bait of nuances that don’t mean what they think they do.
Left vs. right, Fox TV vs. The New York Times, NPR, etc.: Just as Carlson’s father Dick Carlson ran the CIA-created U.S. overseas radio propaganda under Reagan and George H. W. Bush, so too the present head of National Public Radio, John Lansing, did the same under Barack Obama. See my piece, Will NPR Now Change its Name to National Propaganda Radio. Birds of a feather disguised as hawks and sparrows in a game meant to confuse and create scrambled brains.
Kit Knightly’s focus on Carlson’s “reborn” dazzling visibility pinpoints how the “approved alternative” messaging is more standard fare programming by fat cat interests and players.
The fact is, legacy media is dying. Which is a good thing. But do you think the establishment doesn’t see this? Do you think it hadn’t occurred to them to get out in front of it by seizing control of the new media platforms and planting “leaders” in supposedly independent media movements?
As we keep having to remind our readers lately the people and institutions that run the world are not wed to any single platform, method, nation or flag.
Or media.
They bought up all the newspapers because they were useful, they “syndicated” all the television networks because that’s what people were watching… so now as legacy media dies – what do you think they’re gonna do?
Like a hermit crab swapping out shells – they will simply slide themselves from their old home to a nice shiny new “indy” one.
Goodbye old fashioned corporate CNN, hello honestly completely organic guerilla news reporting livestreaming on X and getting totally accidentally promoted by the algorithm.
Goodbye long form editorials in newspapers, hello ten-second tiktoks from fake influencers in a government-run opinion factory.
Goodbye Tucker Carlson, paid disinfo promoter, hello Tucker Carlson voice of the new media who somehow still gets promoted by the very forces he’s supposed to be opposing….
The selling point of new-media was that everyone had access to it instantly, with that came realness marked by rawness. The establishment quickly seized on these markers of authenticity & tried to make them their own. Now that rawness is being manufactured and realness is being faked on a production line.
And by seeding the rising new-media with establishment voices allegedly “gone rogue” , the establishment takes control of it.
On top of that, the transition from old to new media can also be used to co-opt independent outlets and construct agenda-controlling fake binary narratives. With the old media selling one “side”, and new media the other.
That’s how you end up with crazy scenarios where billionaires like Elon Musk are cast as some kind of outsider, no matter how many Great Reset talking points he promotes, or podcasters like Joe Rogan apparently get $250 million from the system to attack the system, or the “intellectual dark web” shilling vaccines and Israel in equal measure.
The old establishment voices (Guardian, CNN, New York Times or whoever) noisily attack these new “anti-establishment” voices (who are always selling the same agenda in a slightly altered form), knowing that the “enemy of my enemy is my friend” mindset will give them cred in genuine alternate media circles.
I mean it’s pretty cool to get a big old “ex”-mainstreamer on your side and agreeing to be on your podcast, right? Instant kudos, excitement. “See, even Big Name X admits we’re right about this”. It’s too easy to be seduced by the lure of “celebrity rebel” narratives. We all want to believe them don’t we.
And thus, by putting “former” establishment insiders in leadership positions of “the alternative”, the ‘elite’ control the direction of their supposed opposition.
Tucker Carlson is the first really big voice to make the swap in a major way, but he won’t be the last. And his interview with Putin is yet another sign of the “approved alternative” messaging.
According to Twitter, the interview has been viewed 140 million times in 24 hours. Tucker and Putin have been trending ever since, promoted by the all powerful algorithm on a site owned by the richest man in the world, whilst simultaneously appearing on the front pages of every paper.
Wow, cool, right. The new media is just so right about this the establishment has no choice but to promote it!
Too easy to fail to notice there’s nothing really “new” about this media at all. It’s just a very old hermit crab in a very new shell.
