It's funny, and frankly scary, to see so many people get mad about #TuckerCarlson interviewing #Putin. Every single person has a responsibility to listen, decode and make up their own mind. We don't cancel journalists for interviewing people we don't like. Most states in the world have professionals working to push their propaganda to both their own people and to other parts of the world, so don't listen to everything these egocentric state cucks say. Stay curious but don't accept everything you hear or see as a fact.
Discussion
so many "brainwashed americans" u mean lol
Brainwashed americans, brainwashed russians, brainwashed europeans, brainwashed chinese people, and the list goes on
🤝
I don't consider Tucker a journalist. But of course he's free to talk to Putin.
I also agree that people should make up their own minds.
I suggest however that they start by reading work from people who were assassinated by Putin, rather than people who Putin believes are so gullible he'll accept an interview request from them.
In other words, if in the next few months Tucker falls out of a high window, finds himself in a suspicious plane crash or loses his hair, I'll go an watch the video podcast he did.
Just curious, what do you consider a journalist?
For what it's worth, I think this is one of the worst interviews I've seen from Tucker. He didn't dare ask the hard questions (surprise, surprise), he probably wasn't allowed to either which makes the entire interview mostly worthless to me. Putin had his own history lesson and Tucker shot in with some "borderline" edgy questions.
A journalist is someone who looks for truth by means of investigation. They're more closely related to cops than to politicians.
I think he's mostly a political pundit. Even just asking hard questions doesn't necessarily make you a journalist. It can be a form of grandstanding, just like politicians do all the time during expert hearings. The point of a question should be that you're genuinely interested in the answer. A journalist would typically ask a question after they've done a bunch of research, as a way for the subject of their article to provide a response to these findings.
Most podcasters are not journalists, because typically their only source is what the subject tells them, or maybe the book the subject wrote. From your description it sounds like he was acting mostly as a podcaster. But I suspect his motive for the interview was political grandstanding.