We Watched Tucker So You Don’t Have To. Is It Time To Worry?

After the Murdochs fired Tucker Carlson from Fox News in April 2023 amid the emergence of a racist text, removing their highest-profile commentator with another presidential election on the horizon, there was some thought that the right-wing star’s ouster would damage him professionally, potentially reducing his then-sizable influence.

It was a completely valid argument, but one that potentially underestimated the increasing power of online spaces as a conduit for independent, anti-establishment perspectives.

What we’re seeing now, with a spate of comments from Carlson on Israel (including its slaughter in Gaza), economic inequality and the MAGA crash out over the Jeffrey Epstein case, suggests Carlson may actually be gaining influence among younger Americans across the political aisle. That may not sound that outlandish when you consider he once attracted a greater proportion of Democratic viewers to his Fox News show than even MSNBC and CNN.

And that’s when he was widely regarded by the mainstream media as a racist who espoused nationalist “great replacement” theory beliefs—a position he made publicly—all under the guise of libertarianism, or really a version of it married with his religious beliefs.

On the surface, the latter may better reflect Carlson’s worldview, as he often cites “God-given” rights at any mention of liberties enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, and references the degradation of society to suggest morality is the key to a better economy as opposed to tighter regulations and government intervention. The way he sees it: If business leaders simply cared more about all of us, we’d all be better off—forget about what government can do for you. This, of course, is all capitalism cope—as if an inherently extractive economic framework is compatible with morality.

We’ve Seen This Before

Still, millions of Democrats watched Carlson when he was on Fox News. Now think about the digital natives who may have no preconceived notion of the former Fox News star and see his recent statements as validation of their political expression, including those who identify as progressives.

Remember, Carlson’s removal from the most-watched cable news outlet in America also came amid Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter, now X, which has become the venue for right-wing discourse, including during the 2024 presidential election.

Just two months after his Fox News exit, Carlson announced a new show directly on X. With the growing right-wing influence on the social media platform, especially among the MAGA base, it was reasonable to conclude a groundswell of support would be waiting for him.

Carlson’s Serendipitous Exit?

In a sense, his serendipitous excision from the mainstream came as a burgeoning right-wing podcast movement was taking shape, which the Trump-J.D. Vance ticket used to its advantage during the election.

By contrast, the Harris campaign never fully invested in pod-to-voter outreach, famously deciding against a sit-down with the most popular podcaster in the country, Joe Rogan, who years earlier expressed support for Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Elections are complicated, and drawing irrefutable conclusions from voter data is unrealistic, with our biases possibly showing us things that aren’t really there. However, it has become increasingly clear that Trump made inroads in 2024 among certain demographics, specifically Black Americans, Hispanics, and some younger Americans, helping propel him to the White House for a second time.

We don’t know for sure, but it stands to reason that the podcast discourse, especially among young males, typically low-propensity voters, worked in his favor.

Enter Carlson, who, whether you detest him or not, was made for the new media environment, which appears to favor informal settings and conversations that seemingly go on forever.

Is His Anti-Establishment Appeal Real?

Even during his time at Fox News, Carlson was viewed as a leading anti-establishment voice, even if such a characterization seems contradictory—after all, he has President Trump’s ear and has acknowledged that he respects various lawmakers and officials in Washington, once unsparingly referred to by MAGA as the “swamp.”

But in recent weeks, Carlson has been on something of an algorithmically boosted run. It’s anecdotal, but I can’t tell you how many X posts I’ve seen from presumed liberals or people on the left who’ve offered a similar version of the “I can’t believe I agree with this guy” refrain.

That sentiment was seemingly everywhere after Carlson’s widely viewed interview with Sen. Ted Cruz. What was remarkable—and yes, I’ve been watching some of Carlson’s shows to get a better understanding of what’s happening at the intersection of politics and anti-establishment discourse—was the way Carlson’s disgust and the offense he took at some of Cruz’s remarks, including when the senator suggested Carlson was being anti-semitic, felt relatable.

It happened multiple times in that interview. Take, for instance, when they sparred over AIPAC, with Cruz insulting everyone’s intelligence by arguing that it doesn’t lobby on behalf of Israel, a foreign country. I tried to imagine how a pro-Palestine viewer with little to no understanding of Carlson’s past was reacting to the exchange—were they becoming a fan? (The corporate media, in part, is to blame for people’s enthusiasm for the Carlson-Cruz interview because it refuses to be adversarial toward those they interview, preferring “decorum.”)

A similar thought came to mind when Carlson interviewed Scott Horton, an anti-war libertarian, who took his time dissecting how the United States performed regime change in Iran—a plot that Carlson, who was denied employment at the CIA, agreed was bad.

In yet another episode, Carlson interviewed Saagar Enjeti, who already has a significant left-wing following as Krystal Ball’s co-host on “Breaking Points,” yet another independent outlet that also features star progressive journalist Ryan Grim. Even for those who disagree with Enjeti on various policies, most notably immigration, the personal connection, built up over the years, provides an entry point for those skeptical of Carlson to at least swallow their distaste and watch out of curiosity. While their impassioned objections to the handling of the Epstein case took center stage, the pair criticized Israel on moral grounds—with Carlson referencing the slaughter of thousands of children—and even agreed that Zohran Mamdani’s messaging during the New York City mayoral primary was compelling, a stark contrast to establishment Democrats’ weeks-long meltdown over his victory and the right’s unhinged Islamophobic reaction.

‘He’s Correct Here’

The growing discourse over Carlson grew louder this past weekend during his speech at Turning Points USA, which typically attracts young conservatives, when he went on a tear about inequality. The Lever News’ David Sirota, a progressive, shared a clip from Carlson’s speech, with the caption, “he’s correct here,” inviting outrage from those who hold the position that agreeing with a single viewpoint of someone like Carlson normalizes and legitimizes a figure they consider beyond the pale.

Sirota wasn’t alone. Dan Osborn, a union leader and political independent who ran ahead of Kamala Harris in Nebraska last year but lost against his Republican opponent, also shared the clip and said he agreed with Carlson. Why does Osborn matter? Well, he’s back for another Senate run and was recently profiled by the respected political journalist Ross Barkan, who began his piece saying, “The return of Nebraska Senate candidate Dan Osborn is the best news Democrats have received in a while.”

Carlson Is Much Harder to Ignore in the New Media Space

For all the hand-wringing in recent years about Joe Rogan, Carlson, much more of a political force, may end up being the most influential podcaster in the United States. The signs are there—just look at the podcast charts, with Carlson rising to No. 2 behind Rogan on Spotify and in the top 12 on Apple Podcasts (No. 2 when filtered for “News”).

There was a time when Carlson was easy to ignore. He was the biggest name on Fox News, a widely discredited cable news outlet. There were plenty of articles about him being a racist on corporate outlets, partly attributed to the fact Fox News is catnip for institutional media journalists, who to this day regard independent media with skepticism. And simply put: He was easy to avoid—you just didn’t channel surf to Fox News. That’s increasingly difficult now with algorithms playing God with our social feeds.

Consider this a PSA: Carlson may become even more influential than before. For all we know, with his episodes on X being viewed by millions, he may already be.

Image Source

• Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons. Changes were made.