Tucker Carlson's Tough Year Since Fox News Firing

It has officially been one year since Tucker Carlson's dismissal from Fox News, and a full 12 months since he embarked on a decidedly unpredictable ride that has seen him plant roots in nontraditional media.

On April 24, 2023, it was announced that Carlson, 54, had departed the network effective immediately, with his final show already having been broadcast three days earlier. His exit ended his six-year reign as Fox News' ratings juggernaut; he was elevated to primetime in 2017 following the inauguration of former President Donald Trump.

"Fox News Media and Tucker Carlson have agreed to part ways," Fox News vaguely stated of the freshly departed Tucker Carlson Tonight host. "We thank him for his service to the network as a host and prior to that as a contributor."

Jim Naureckas, editor and social media editor of FAIR, a national progressive media watchdog group, told Newsweek "there's a school of thought that Rupert Murdoch fired Tucker Carlson, like Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly before him, because he doesn't like employees who think they are bigger than the company. And Carlson's subsequent career suggests that Murdoch was right—that Carlson was not, in fact, bigger than Fox News."

The circumstances surrounding Carlson's exit quickly became a talking point as the host said he was informed of his exit from the network some 10 minutes before the official announcement. It came days after Fox News settled a defamation lawsuit, brought by Dominion Voting Systems, for $787.5 million. The lawsuit was filed over false claims that Fox News anchors and guests made, accusing Dominion of being involved in election fraud during the 2020 presidential ballot battle.

Carlson's unexpected departure from Fox News was said to have been triggered, at least in part, by a text he sent to a producer about footage of an "Antifa [antifascist] kid" being attacked by a group of "Trump guys."

The TV personality allegedly said the violence is "not how white men fight", then added he found himself "rooting for the mob" and hoping they'd "kill him" before being dismayed by his own reaction. The text message was reportedly discovered amid the broadcaster's showdown with Dominion.

His ousting saw Fox News lose half of the timeslot's viewers as ratings plunged from more than 3 million to an audience of as low as 1.3 million the following week. Carlson had previously been feted by the station which saw his primetime show become the highest-rated cable news program in the key demographic of those aged 25 to 54.

A faction of Carlson's supporters and allies vowed never to tune into Fox News again, while many called for a boycott of the network. In their eyes, the highest-profile proponent of Trumpism had been mistreated and betrayed.

Citing Nielsen ratings figures, a representative of Fox News told Newsweek that audience numbers have bounced back since Jesse Watters stepped in to fill the slot Carlson vacated, averaging 3 million viewers year to date.

New Venture

Weeks after his departure, Carlson announced in May that he would be moving his show online by broadcasting on X, formerly Twitter. The broadcaster shared a video outlining his intention to pivot to social media.

"Amazingly, as of tonight, there aren't many platforms left that allow free speech," Carlson stated in the almost three-minute-long clip, months after it was acquired by Elon Musk. "The last big one remaining in the world, the only one, is Twitter where we are now.

"Twitter has long served as the place where our national conversation incubates and develops. Twitter is not a partisan site. Everybody is allowed here. And we think that's a good thing.

"And yet for the most part, the news that you see analyzed on Twitter comes from media organizations that are themselves thinly disguised propaganda outlets. You see it on cable news; you talk about it on Twitter... Starting soon, we'll be bringing a new version of the show we've been doing for the last six and a half years to Twitter. We'll be bringing some other things too, which we'll tell you about. But for now, we're just grateful to be here."

And so came the June 6 birth of Tucker on Twitter (later rebranded as Tucker on X to align with Musk's renaming of the micro-logging platform. The show, which also appears on Carlson's website, is now known as Tucker Carlson Uncensored). Former President Trump sat down for an interview on the online show in August. Things, it would seem, were going swimmingly for Carlson in his new home.

Without the constraints of network TV, Carlson embraced his newfound freedom with aplomb, seemingly shaking off the old guard after his ties to traditional media were severed.

"Tucker Carlson briefly appeared to be in freefall after leaving Fox News, but he landed safely on his feet in the end," Evan Nierman, CEO of global PR firm Red Banyan, told Newsweek. "Tucker managed to execute a successful pivot by doubling down on his established brand and capitalizing on his massive audience of followers. Rather than stepping away and disappearing from view, he kept pressing forward. Even though his show was canceled by Fox, Tucker himself refused to be canceled, which is the cardinal rule when it comes to maintaining your career in the face of a crisis."

Echoing this sentiment, Ryan McCormick, media relations specialist at Goldman McCormick PR, told Newsweek that Carlson's "departure from Fox News hasn't diminished his popularity. If anything, it's made his visibility increase substantially and pulled a very loyal audience. Carlson has become a media-entity unto himself and he will continue to rise so long as the content of his programs emotionally connect (and provoke) the masses."

Big Interview

As proof of his prowess, Carlson in February traveled to Moscow for an interview with Vladimir Putin—the Russian president's first with an American journalist since his country embarked on its full-scale invasion of neighboring Ukraine.

From the start of the interview, Carlson was made to listen to Putin talk for 30 minutes about Russian history, including an inaccurate and unchallenged retelling of Germany's invasion of Poland in World War II.

The interview garnered a lukewarm reaction not just from viewers, but Putin himself. Days after the conversation went live, Putin complained that Carlson failed to ask him "tough questions" during their high-profile encounter.

Talking to Russian journalist Pavel Aleksandrovich Zarubin on state television Rossiya-1, Putin said: "To be honest, I thought that he would behave aggressively and ask so-called sharp questions. I was not just prepared for this, I wanted it, because it would give me the opportunity to respond in the same way."

Putin added that he did not "feel full satisfaction from this interview," delivering yet another blow to Carlson after he humiliated the broadcaster during the almost two-hour interview by ignoring almost all of his questions and barely letting him speak.

Dmitry Peskov, Putin's spokesperson, told reporters that the Russian leader gave an interview to Carlson because "he has a position which differs" from other Western media. Before his departure from the network, Carlson used his platform on Fox News to question American support for Kyiv.

Newsweek has contacted a representative of Carlson via email for comment.

Red Banyan's Nierman, author of The Cancel Culture Curse: From Rage to Redemption in a World Gone Mad, said that such a high-profile interview stands as proof that Carlson "absolutely remains a political and media force on a global scale. His first independent show on X in June 2023 was viewed approximately 120 million times. Even though his viewership has dropped since then, it is still higher than that of any prime-time cable news channel, which shows that he wield a staggering amount of clout and commands a massive audience."

"Tucker Carlson's exit from Fox has allowed him the opportunity to reach beyond the traditional cable news audience," Nierman added. "A substantial portion of the media-consuming public gravitates towards content that mainstream networks do not provide. If Carlson continues to successfully capitalize on this niche, then he will continue to expand his following.

"So far, he is demonstrating the ability to remain relevant and very much in demand. With the 2024 presidential election kicking into high gear, Carlson will have plenty of opportunities to capitalize on some of the key polarizing issues dominating this presidential race and insert his own analysis and observations."

Do Carlson's X numbers actually outstrip his Fox News viewership? Not necessarily. While each of Carlson's videos on X showcases an impressive tally of millions of views, they're not a true indication of the number of people who took time out of their schedules to tune in.

"It's very tempting and very misleading to point to the numbers on Carlson's X videos and claim that he's reaching an even bigger audience," FAIR's Naureckas told Newsweek. "Twitter views and TV ratings are entirely different things—a view on the social media platform is counted when 'a user watches a video for at least two seconds and sees at least 50 percent of the video player in-view.' Nielsen numbers, on the other hand, are the average number of viewers for the whole show (an hour long, when Carlson was on Fox).

"But more importantly, when Carlson was on Fox, he was embedded in a right-wing media ecosystem. His program was part of a sequence of shows that Murdoch would use to create issues, fire up the culture war around them, and turn them into political juggernauts. It plays a vital role in modern Republican politics, in no small part because it provides real-time stroking of Donald Trump's ego—resulting in Fox pundits seeming to have more input into national policy during the Trump administration than cabinet members.

"Elon Musk would love for X to have that kind of sway, but it doesn't—and it doesn't seem to be heading in the right direction, in part thanks to Musk's mismanagement and in part for structural reasons. (Musk doesn't get a cut of every cable bill, for one thing.)"

Conservative Criticism

In what could be seen as a further chipping away at Carlson's armor, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell this week blamed the broadcaster for Republican opposition to aid for Ukraine amid its ongoing war against Russia.

The Senate voted 80-19 on Tuesday to break a filibuster on the $95 billion aid package recently passed by the House. It was passed that night.

However, in a press conference after the Senate vote, McConnell pointed to conservative commentator Carlson's February interview with Putin as a turning point in the GOP debate on the issue.

"I think the demonization of Ukraine began by Tucker Carlson, who in my opinion ended up where he should've been all along, which is interviewing Vladimir Putin," McConnell said in response to a question about Republican opposition to aid to Ukraine. "He had an enormous audience, which convinced a lot of rank-and-file Republicans that maybe this was a mistake."

Weeks earlier, Carlson had faced an uproar relating to a different conflict, after he interviewed a Palestinian pastor who discussed how the ongoing Israel-Hamas war has affected Christians in the region.

"A consistent but almost never noted theme of American foreign policy is that it is always the Christians who suffer," the broadcaster said at the start of the clip. "When there's a war abroad that the United States is funding, it is Christians who tend to die disproportionately."

He then introduced Reverend Dr. Munther Isaac, who serves as the pastor of the Evangelical Lutheran Christian Church in Bethlehem. During the interview, Isaac criticized the "so-called religious right," from whom "we receive nothing, no sympathy whatsoever. Sometimes we just plea to be heard and have our perspective taken seriously. And one of the things I'm often stuck with, whether when I speak to diplomats, politicians, Congress staff or even influential pastors is how little they know about the reality on the ground."

"Their knowledge of the situation here seems to be very, very shallow," he added. "Yet they hold very strong opinions. And oftentimes, these opinions are shaped by political parties' positions, the United States' position."

Carlson's interview with the pastor sparked outrage among a number of figures on the right, garnering accusations of antisemitism.

The polarizing reactions to Carlson on X stand as proof that his unshackling from corporate constraints has been something of a double-edged sword.

"I think Carlson is freed to some extent by the change of medium," Naureckas said. "I think the Musk agenda is less thought-through and all-encompassing than the Murdoch agenda, so he has less worry about saying whatever he thinks. Whether that's a good thing for him—forget the country—I don't know. The other day he was on Joe Rogan ranting about UFOs being piloted by spiritual entities, and declaring evolution 'kind of not true.' This is the same guy who used to wear the bow tie?"

Taking an alternative point of view, Goldman McCormick PR's McCormick told Newsweek that "without having the constraints of self-censorship in order to appease advertisers or the owners of the networks that once employed him, Tucker has free reign to cover anything he wishes.

"Because of the volatility of the times we're living in, the line between factual news and conspiracy theories is becoming more blurred. It was only a very short time ago that if a person believed in UFO's they were considered fringe. In 2021, the Department of Defense admitted unidentified flying objects were real and showed videos no less. What's anomalous today, could be mainstream tomorrow. While Tucker does seem to have a history of exploring controversial topics, I think he will remain in the same lane of reporting that people are accustomed to."

Whether his talking points are seen as fringe or ahead of the curve, Nierman told Newsweek that Carlson has unlocked a brand of loyalty among his viewers that is unlikely to waver despite the viral critiques populating the social media landscape.

"Tucker Carlson has long been criticized by detractors, who charge him with employing exaggeration and hyperbole and playing fast and loose with facts," he said. "Whether people believe that it or not, everyone should agree that he is insanely effective at building and maintaining loyalty from his followers. After so many years of tuning in to his programming, his audience expects a certain degree of outlandishness from his rhetoric, which is why his continuing success has not been hampered by the end of his tenure at Fox."

No Longer in Lockstep

While the Carlson-bashing could be seen as evidence that the right-wing's golden boy is losing his luster, what it may truly represent is the fact that conservatives are no longer in lockstep on issues that would have united them in the past.

Candace Owens, a fellow conservative firebrand who has recently gone it alone after she was dropped by The Daily Wire in March, has also faced her fair share of detractors after speaking out against Israel's military campaign in Gaza. It has also been reported that her stance led to her Daily Wire dismissal.

Owens counted herself among those defending Carlson after he last week sparked controversy away from his own show. In an interview with Joe Rogan released on April 19, Carlson disagreed with the views of many on the right that the U.S.'s use of atomic bombs in Japan during World War II was justified.

"I love, by the way, that people on my side—I'll just admit it, on the right—have spent the last 80 years defending dropping nuclear weapons on civilians," Carlson said. "It's like, are you joking? That's just like prima facie evil."

Dismissing the oft-employed argument that the bombings saved lives and brought a swift end to the war, the TV personality added: "No, it's wrong to drop nuclear weapons on people. And if you find yourself arguing that it's a good thing to drop nuclear weapons on people, then you are evil. It's not a tough one. It's not a hard call."

After defending Carlson's position on social media—and being accused of spreading propaganda as a result—Owens told Newsweek on Thursday: "My position is that it's never acceptable in any war to bomb civilians where there are no military targets—least of all when the war had effectively ended. You target military assets—not women, children, and churches."

As Owens and Carlson each branch out into unchartered—and more independent—waters, they're likely to continue to make waves as Trump and President Joe Biden each vie for a second term in the White House.

McCormick said that, in the end, the audiences will continue to flock as long as they connect with their host of choice—regardless of whether they're seen as credible.

"I think when a host is able to establish a strong emotional connection with their audience, it supersedes any questions or doubts of credibility," McCormick said. "The host also has to remain true to the beliefs and values that piqued people's interests when they first started watching.

"For individuals who engage in critical thinking, who don't have an attachment, and who are more logic-minded; they are likely to question the credentials of the host. Emotional connection always tops credibility."

Nierman said that he does not see Carlson's popularity significantly waning in the near future, "so long as [he] continues to resonate with his audience of rabidly loyal fans."

"Tucker Carlson is like a very famous cat who always lands on his feet," Nierman added. "Despite his contentious Fox News exit, he managed to keep himself in the mix, land absurdly large interviews, and still commands major media attention. He is as popular as ever and a force to be reckoned with when it comes to shaping the modern political landscape on the right and beyond."

Update 4/26/24, 5:10 a.m. ET: This article was updated to include statements from Fox News, Nierman, Naureckas, and McCormick.