.
Posted on 02/06/2024 2:41:54 PM PST by Kazan
In September, 1934, William Randolph Hearst, the most famous journalist and publisher in the world, visited Berlin and interviewed Adolf Hitler. At the time, Hearst admired Hitler, and was rather taken aback when the Fuhrer asked why he was so ‘misunderstood’ in the English-language press. Hearst replied that Americans love democracy and distrusted dictatorships, to which Hitler answered that he had been democratically elected by a vast majority of Germans.
Hearst then said that Americans were concerned about the treatment of a certain unnamed minority. Hitler duly pointed out that Americans had mistreated Native Indian tribes and assured Hearst that Nazi discrimination was being curtailed. Hearst told Hitler that his public would be pleased. He was then surprised to be photographed with various Nazi leaders as part of what was obviously a press stunt for the Third Reich. ‘Visiting Hitler is like calling on the President of the United States,’ he grumbled. ‘One doesn’t talk about it for publication.’
Journalism has changed a lot since in the 1930s, but that Hearst story is worth bearing in mind as self-righteous pundits queue up to denounce the former Fox News host Tucker Carlson for visiting Moscow, apparently to interview Vladimir Putin.
Bill Kristol, the director of Defending Democracy Together, said, kidding on the square: ‘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.’
Bill Browder, the CEO of Hermitage Capital who writes books about the awfulness of the Kremlin, said that Carlson is ‘either remarkably stupid or consciously evil.’ ‘He’s not stupid,’ replied John Harwood the former Wall Street Journal and CNN man.
Hearst has been rightly criticised for his favourable and gullible view of Nazism. But almost nobody at the time would have suggested that interviewing or speaking to Hitler was somehow in itself ‘evil’ – back then people understood that journalism was not about good guys vs bad guys; rather it was about giving readers information and context.
Unlike Hearst, Carlson does not think that his job is to talk to world leaders away from the cameras in order to decide what’s best for democracy. He wants to interview Putin because that would be a scoop in and of itself — and since we have no shortage of pundits calling Putin Hitler, he’s interested in how the Russian leader thinks. He’s curious about the truth, in other words, which is what journalism is meant to be about, even if that makes him anathema to most important people.
Ah, say Carlson’s critics, but he’s a ‘Russia sympathiser’ who will slobber all over Putin. Well, let’s wait and see on that. No doubt, unless Carlson calls Putin a murderer to his face and storms out of the interview in disgust, he will be widely branded as a ‘useful idiot.’
But that’s another point on which traditional journalism has become unhealthily detached from its purpose. Broadcast journalists, in particular, believe they must ‘push back’ — which today means reacting negatively and emotionally — when dealing with controversial politicians, else they will be vilified for being soft or sycophantic. Interviewers feel unless they have skewered their subject they have somehow failed. Declining to challenge someone is seen as an endorsement.
That’s idiotic, of course, and makes news journalism ever more tedious — as pompous presenters insist on talking over their subjects and making themselves the centre of attention.
Carlson tends not to do that. He is highly critical of Washington’s foreign-policy establishment — and far less hawkish on Russia and Iran than most of the successful current-affairs hosts, party-line hacks and dubiously funded think-tank-affiliated pundits who dominate the airwaves whenever war is in the news. But that doesn’t make him, as many people are desperate to claim, a Russian asset. It makes him a proper journalist. There’s not many of them around.
Nothing about the attacks on Tucker, attempts to stop him from interviewing Putin and suggestion that he shouldn't be allow to re-enter the country resemble actions of those with deep hatred of freedom of speech and free country. Ironically, it's what one would expect from communists in the Soviet Union.
Muslim Boy.
Which mosque do you attend?
Its definitely un-American, at least the American ideal they used to teach.
The overreaction speaks volumes, and moreso from whom it is coming.
Carlson does an interview, people can digest it and decide for themselves. Its that simple.
Hey Speedy. I see that you are delighting us again with your wit and charm.
Someone posted a collage photo of Stepanoplous and other deep state journalists interviewing Putin.
Exactly, why would Carlson interviewing Putin, or anyone, be objectionable.
It’s not.
All the other deep state journalists did it.
The MSM interviewed Saddam during Desert Storm. Nobody complained about that.
Funny, nobody lost their mind when Barbara Walters interviewed Putin.
L
Or Castro, or Arafat.
I haven’t seen anyone attacking him. Where is all this happening?
Oh, he can interview all he wants. Just don’t call it “journalism”. Or “objective”. AFAIC he can come home, too. Wouldn’t want him to take on the mantle of “martyr”.
Putin just has inconvenient journalists murdered and then calls it a day.
L
Much ado about nothing from the left.
There is a history of our press interviewing world leaders. Baba Walters interviewed Castro. Robert McNeill interviewing Ayatollah Khomenei. The list goes on.
.
"Reacting to the photos, Bill Kristol, former chief of staff to the vice president of the United States during the Reagan administration, suggested a temporary ban for Carlson re-entering his home country.
He said: “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.”
Adam Kinzinger, the former Republican Illinois representative, chimed in on the rumours, stating on social media that Carlson was a “traitor”."
Thete's plenty more, but I'm not going to search for every single one.
Because Trump?
“... and far less hawkish on Russia and Iran than most of the successful current-affairs hosts...”
The whole of the BiXiden regime apparently loves to rub up on Iran’s mullahs.
Yeah. Here’s the post I was referencing.
Putin interviewed by Stephanapolous, Baba Wawa, Charlie Rose.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4215373/posts?page=27#27
I haven’t seen anyone attacking him. Where is all this happening?
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4215463/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.