The number of myriad theories about Tucker Carlson’s ouster is increasing daily. On the surface, it appears that firing Carlson was because of the Dominion voting machine lawsuit. That might cost the company over $700 million. Then there was emergence of the sexual harassment/toxic workplace charge against Tucker's show. Neither rationale makes any real sense, so we have to look at the alternatives.
First of all, how does a voting machine company get this far with a libel lawsuit that has tons of hurdles to jump over to prove malice? Nobody was “out to get Dominion” and the lawsuit settlement seemed more like a creative cash infusion orchestrated by an unknown investor.
In fact, big media companies fend off libel suits with teams of expensive lawyers who go after the litigant.
The crux of the whole lawsuit is various Sydney Powell appearances on certain shows, along with Trump's never-ending complaining about the election. The whole suit seems sketchy and looks like an excuse to clean house.
Then comes the irked booker, Abby Grossberg, who was suing Carlson and Fox for grievances that involved an alleged toxic workplace. This, too, seems contrived.
So let's look at alternatives that make more sense than any office-related simple explanations.
The first is the “Tucker as religious nut” thesis promoted in Vanity Fair. This is a beauty and the timeline is decent insofar as the events are concerned. Tucker’s downfall began with a Friday night speech (the day of his last show) to the Heritage Foundation where he discussed “evil” and the need for prayer. Word of this speech got back to Murdoch over the weekend. Here's the nut of the Vanity Fair piece:
“Rupert Murdoch was perhaps unnerved by Carlson’s messianism because it echoed the end-times worldview of Murdoch’s ex-fiancée Ann Lesley Smith, the source said...I reported that Murdoch and Smith called off their two-week engagement because Smith had told people Carlson was “a messenger from God.” Murdoch had seen Carlson and Smith discuss religion firsthand. In late March, Carlson had dinner at Murdoch’s Bel Air vineyard with Murdoch and Smith, according to the source. During dinner, Smith pulled out a bible and started reading passages from the Book of Exodus, the source said. “Rupert just sat there and stared,” the source said. A few days after the dinner, Murdoch and Smith called off the wedding. By taking Carlson off the air, Murdoch was also taking away his ex’s favorite show.”
While this is a wild analysis, it indicates the incredible pettiness of a very powerful man. This strikes one as wishful thinking on the part of the left-leaning media that hates Murdoch.
A second theory involves Robert Kennedy, Jr., who appeared on one of Tucker’s last shows. Kennedy, who is running for President as a Democrat, discussed the politics of Big Pharma and Tucker's anti-Covid vax stance, which was thematic on his show.
Bringing Kennedy on to slam Pharma – the biggest source of media advertising in the USA – was the last straw. Attacking advertising sources is verboten on any network, period.
A few days later, Tucker was out. Kennedy cited other reasons why Tucker had to go, including that Tucker was the only anti-war voice amongst the pundit class.
This brings us to the third theory. Tucker's anti-war rhetoric was intolerable once the recently-leaked documents entered the public domain. Fox execs--all war supporters--could only imagine the blowback if Tucker started digging into the classified docs that indicated that the Ukraine War was not going well and was costing too much.
Thus, in a move that was unlike the firings of Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly, you have to harken back to the MSNBC firing of Phil Donohue in 2003. According to NBC memos it was because of Donohue’s anti-Iraq war commentaries. And, like Tucker, he also had the top-rated show on that network.
Also, if you haven’t noticed, there is not one consistent anti-war voice from the left or the right on network TV or big cable (Fox, CNN, MSNBC). Tucker was the last one, a genuine outlier.
And while there is some tolerance for end-times prophecies and complaining about vaccine mandates, the United States has never tolerated anti-war sentiments on any scale. A few tolerated brand-name peaceniks will write an op-ed once in a while. That's it.
This mass media war push began in earnest during the WWI recruitment campaign and has continued to this day with a few moments of contemplation in-between. Those moments were short-lived. It's telling that only Donald Trump, within recent memory, did not get the USA into some new conflict. He had to go, too.
It's funny how this joy over Tucker's ouster often incorporates the war-mongering mentality. Even during their “Tucker is out” celebration on the ABC show The View, someone quipped, “It was a good day for the Ukraine War.”
It's surprising that they left Tucker on for as long as they did. - JCD