You are here

Tucker Carlson Tonight (2021.05.10)

Primary tabs

SizeSeedsPeersCompleted
635.34 MiB10131
This torrent has no flags.


Duration: 40m36s
Resolution: 1280x720
Video Format: AVC
Audio Format: AAC
______________________

On today’s episode of ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’, Tucker inspects COVID origins following report that links Dr. Anthony Fauci to Wuhan lab

Comments

Tucker continues his groundbreaking muckraking. So Anthony Fauci has some serious involvement in the creation of the Coronavirus. WOW!
Tucker quotes an article by Nicholas Wade
Origin of Covid — Following the Clues
https://nicholaswade.medium.com/origin-of-covid-following-the-clues-6f03...

lordnose wrote:

Tucker continues his groundbreaking muckraking.

Carlson is one of very few in corporate media who exposes corruption, but it's not muckraking.

muckraking /ˈməkˌrākiNG/ (noun): the action of searching out and publicizing scandalous information about famous people in an underhanded way

Interesting. Some background:

A "muckrake" is a rake for scraping up dung. Evidently, Theodore Roosevelt used it in a 1906 speech in the modern sensationalist manner alluding to Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress and the man with the muck rake. Speech here: https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/teddyrooseveltmuckrake.htm

That said, the majority of dictionaries I checked don't say that the sensationalism has to be done "in an underhanded way". So far, only Oxford does this (which I presume you are quoting). So I think it is fairer to say that, in contemporary American usage, the term can refer to journalists or others who "dig deep for the facts" or, when used pejoratively, those who seek to cause scandal.

American Heritage Dictionary:
To search for and expose misconduct in public life.
https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=muckraking

Merriam Webster's Dictionary:
To search out and publicly expose real or apparent misconduct of a prominent individual or business
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/muckraking

Macmillan:
the practice of looking for and publishing evidence that a famous person has done something wrong
https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/muckraking

Collins:
If you accuse someone of muckraking, you are criticizing them for finding and spreading unpleasant or embarrassing information about someone, especially a public figure.
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/muckraking

Cambridge Dictionary:
The activity, especially by newspapers and reporters, of trying to find out unpleasant information about people or organizations in order to make it public
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/muckraking

Oxford Dictionary:
The action of searching out and publicizing scandalous information about famous people in an underhanded way.
https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/muckraking

The definitions bear out my point. Muckrakers are journalists who rake muck to find dirt on people who the greeps don't like. A lot of times the stories are greatly exaggerated or just lies. William Randolph Hearst had an army of these creeps who took down anyone who crossed him. Does Carlson cause scandal, or just expose it? It seems to me most muck raking is done by the establishment, destroying the reputations of those who fight them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muckraker

I did not know that some American journalists took on the insulting term with pride, as some on the right refer to themselves as deplorables. According to that Wikipedia article, and using their definition, Carlson would gladly call himself a muckraker. So the answer to this post's question is, the two are not mutually exclusive.

One can suppose muck is muck, whether it is made up lies, disgusting habits of targeted individuals, or the accumulated shit the establishment flings down on us every day.

stiffy wrote:

So the answer to this post's question is, the two are not mutually exclusive.

Or you could just have conceded my point: "... it is fairer to say that, in contemporary American usage, the term can refer to journalists or others who "dig deep for the facts" or, when used pejoratively, those who seek to cause scandal." :>)

The last 4 sentences did exactly that. If that wasn't good enough, what would you like me to say?