Re:Kanye West is buying Parler
by soupfordummies on Monday October 17, 2022 @11:55AM
(#33235356)
It's Fox News. I don't think they have any ethical care whatsoever.
Oh, I'm sort of aware of that reputation (of Fox News), but I just read 'Carlson', not a name I know.
He's a guy who Murdoch pays to say offensive things to drive engagement on Fox News :)
Tucker Carlson. He is pretty much the face of Fox News and conservative media in general right now.
Re:Kanye West is buying Parler
by ZeroGravitas on Monday October 17, 2022 @01:47PM
(#33237222)
There's some interesting footage of Tucker Carlson exposing the way Fox operates, from a decade before he became the main guy doing it for them. Very weird to watch:
Why Tucker Carlson Pretends to Hate Elites
Re:Kanye West is buying Parler
by profstasiak on Monday October 17, 2022 @02:52PM
(#33237971)
this vice guy is known for manipulation in his videos. I guess choose your bias type of battle
Re:Kanye West is buying Parler
by MockObject on Monday October 17, 2022 @12:21PM
(#33235781)
A celebrity says some things that make sense, and some things that don't, and it's nasty profiteering to report on the former? That really seems a bit extreme to me.
I didn't watch it or anything, so I'm definitely biased by only having read an article about 'even more unhinged bits leaked' as it were, but wasn't it all a bit sensational? Depends what you call 'makes sense' I suppose, I think one perhaps needs a higher bar when it's in the context of such a conversation, where other things are clearly paranoia; if he's clearly not 'himself', why should someone else get to judge which bits 'make sense' 'enough'?
Re:Kanye West is buying Parler
by MockObject on Monday October 17, 2022 @01:20PM
(#33236749)
I watched it, and it was an engaging mix of lucidity, nonsense, insight, and delusion. Intended to be a 30 minute interview, Kanye had much on his mind, and they went for two hours. He wasn't clearly not himself; he's always like this during his public, manic phases. (He goes dark during his depressive phases.)
I think our society has gotten so used to pop stars who are safe, sanitized, vapid graduates of Disney kids, and "transgressive" high artists bravely fighting the against dead horses slain generations ago, that we've lost the capacity to handle artists who can be disturbing and awkward at times, and creatively redeeming at others, but can't easily be categorized as perfectly good or purely evil.
Bizarre. In a way, good on them for editing the weirdest stuff out... But really probably shouldn't have used any of it when someone's so clearly in such a bad state?
I mean it really is just driving clicks/views/profit from someone's poor health, in a nasty sort of way (i.e. not to say news or obituaries etc. are bad).