Speaker 1: I almost wasn't going to talk about this, but Tucker Carlson's new Twitter show
is really, really, really bad and it is an interesting media story to follow. So we're
going to look at a couple of minutes of this Tucker released episode one, episode one of
Tucker on Twitter. It is ten and a half minutes long. It has been viewed over 70 million times
since posted yesterday at 6 p.m.. What I came away with is that when you strip away the multimillion
dollar production of Fox News, the expensive set, someone controlling the teleprompter for
Tucker. Now he controls it him. Self with a sort of mouse wheel of sorts. A team of
producers and the graphics. When you strip it all away to its bare core, for lack of a better term,
it turns out that Tucker is actually pretty lame, like lamer than the average YouTuber,
I have to say. Let's take a look at episode one. Tell me if you find this compelling.
Hey, it's Tucker Carlson this morning. It looks like somebody blew up the Kharkov Dam
in southern Ukraine. The rushing wall of water wiped out entire villages, destroyed a critical
hydropower plant, and as of tonight, puts. Speaker 3: The largest nuclear reactor in.
Speaker 1: Europe in danger of melting down. So if this was intentional, it was not a military
tactic. It was an act of terrorism. The question is, who did it? Well, let's see. The kickoff
condemn was effectively Russian. It was built by the Russian government. It currently sits
in Russian controlled territory. Speaker 4: The dam's reservoir.
Speaker 1: Supplies, it's sort of like at this point, we're 37 seconds in. It's already obvious,
like, okay, if I watch another couple of minutes, he'll probably just blame Ukraine. You know,
it's due. Do we even really need to watch this? Then we'll skip ahead. This is sort of
like closer to the middle. Just to give you a little more of a sense of this,
Russians are dying. It's the best money. Speaker 4: We've ever spent,
Graham says. A smile spreads across his. Speaker 1: Thin, quivering lips as he forms the
words. He looks like a starving man contemplating a breath. Sounds like he's reading fan fiction
now, just buffet. The aroma of death has. Speaker 4: Aroused Lindsey Graham.
Speaker 1: Thanks so much, replies Zelinski. He feels the same way, right? See, there's.
Speaker 3: Nothing dark here. Speaker 1: Just two middle aged guys
celebrating the killing of a population. They don't seem like the kind of people who'd enjoy
flooding villages or starting a famine. In any case, who cares if they are? It's really not your
business. Your job is to support Ukraine. Watch Nikki Haley, a Republican candidate for president,
explained this principle on CNN. Speaker 2: A win.
Speaker 1: For you. All right. So then he plays a clip of Nikki Haley,
and then we'll look at sort of the end and how he wraps this whole thing.
Or will we? Now it's glitching badly. Let me see if we can get back to the wrap up here.
Here we go. The US government has managed to classify more than a billion so-called
public documents. So at this point, we can't. Speaker 3: Possibly know what our leaders are
doing. We're not allowed to know. Speaker 1: By definition,
that is not a democracy. Yet it's fine with the media. Secrecy is a
powerful tool of control. Speaker 4: Stop asking
how we got so rich. Here's another story. Speaker 1: About racism going at each other.
That's the program. That's how most of us now live here in the United States.
Manipulated by lies, silenced by taboos. It is unhealthy and is dehumanizing.
Speaker 3: And we're tired of it. Speaker 1: As of today, we've come to Twitter,
which we hope will be the shortwave radio under the blankets. Right? We're told there are no
gatekeepers here. If that turns out to be false, will leave. But in the meantime, we are grateful
to be here. We'll be back with. Speaker 3: Much more very soon.
Speaker 1: There you go, folks. And there is a little outro with Tucker, I guess,
fishing or something like that. You know, it is very interesting when you see him stripped
of the accouterments of corporate media. It's extraordinarily mediocre. The pace. If you want
to watch the full 11 minutes, I encourage you to do it. The pacing is very so-so. There's too
much time spent belaboring certain points. It just isn't very good. And that's what's really
interesting when we look, you know, the real media, there's a couple of media stories here.
What happens to Tucker's platform once he's just posting videos to Twitter?
One of the things you know, I am not saying this to pat myself on the back, but one of the things
that is notable about people who slowly build online platforms like we've done on YouTube,
Twitter, Facebook, podcast, etc., is you don't get a big audience you can bring with you. Like
Tucker got 70 million views on this video because of things he has done previously with multimillion
dollar production. And that's great. That's a fantastic thing. And who would turn that down,
Right. That's a that's a beautiful thing. But one of the things that's unclear is would he be able
to build that in the same way if he hadn't been handed those things from these major corporate
media outlets? And we don't know the answer. We'll never know because he was able to bring
this large audience with him. But to all the small YouTubers and podcasters, where we go, you know,
I think back to the start of the show, we got 100 downloads on a podcast and then now we're
approaching a million downloads a month and 75 million views a month on video across all of our
different platforms. When those numbers were built slowly over time, and there's a real question as
to what is this stripped down Tucker, going to be able to retain from that original audience,
I'm as curious as anybody else. I'm also curious as far as a media story, is this a
viable business of some kind? And if so, how is it going to be monetized? We will see. We will see.