The Difference between News and Propaganda, illuminated from watching 5 minutes of Tucker Carlson

I went to high school with Tucker.  He was an aggressive conservative debater even then.  I specifically remember him attacking me for wearing a "Mutants for Nuclear Power" button when I was a lowly freshman and he was an upperclassman.  Since then I have taken classes in logic, and logical fallacies, studied History in college and taught just about every social studies class at the high school level.  He is very smart, and a good rhetorician, but is still using the same tired fallacies to make his arguments.  While the "illicit transference" fallacy (drawing general conclusion from specific cases) is pretty common, and just because an argument is a fallacy doesn't mean it is not sound, in Tucker's case, he uses them as a tool of propaganda.  See the list of propaganda principles here.

Let's start with the problematic argument he made against my button in 1985.  He asked what California would do for electricity if it immediately shut down all nuclear power plants.  First the assumption is that I would favor immediately shutting down all nuclear power plants without having an alternative source ready to go.  Untrue.  Second, he made the "illicit transference" fallacy of composition by drawing a generalization from a specific case, ie, if California needs nuclear power right now, then nuclear power is good.  

Fast forward to the night of January 14, 2021.  Same script, different events.

First, Tucker, and Fox News, were spending a lot of time on the story of a leftist videographer, John Sullivan, who evidence shows was egging on the insurrectionists at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.  To see the full picture, we have to go back to the 24 hours immediately after the attempted insurrection.  On Fox News, the idea was floated over a half a dozen times by hosts and guests that the insurrection was not Trump supporters, but was in fact anti-fascists, or antifa.  This is when the "Big Lie" was planted, ie that the violence was really the fault of antifa.  While never claiming that Sullivan was a member of antifa specifically, the Fox News story did connect him to an organization that claims to be anti-fascist.  Not quite sure why we are not all anti-fascist, but I digress.

Unpacking this, we see the fallacy at work,  If there was ONE person who was there egging on the thousands of criminals on January 6, then the false claim of antifa being responsible could gain traction.  "Illicit Transference/Fallacy of Composition".  And if you go to right wing media, you will find that the supporters, in the comment sections on articles, spouting that the violence was really caused by antifa, not the peaceful Trump protestors.  See the article posted today on Redstate entitled "Antifa Member Who Filmed Shooting of Ashli Babbitt Charged With Rioting in Capitol -- Who was He "Inciting"?  And here is one of the readers comments: 

"So... remember...just a week ago, according to all the msm...antifa was not involved in the riots. Even the gop and many conservatives who were so called Trump supporters in the media co signed on to that narrative. Do they really think that Sullivan is the ONLY antifa / blm there? He is just the most visible... and got caught on camera and IDd. $hit... faux news even had him on ...portraying him as the big police helper. Sure there were Trump supporters there... and some rioted and committed offenses...but guaranteed there were a lot more left wing radicals who were inciting and rioting also"

So from one case of what I would call a lack of journalistic integrity at best, but likely criminal on the part of Sullivan, you have the "Big Lie" being amplified by Tucker and Fox News, repeated in the more radical right mediasphere, and bought by the followers.  This is classic propaganda.  The truth, backed by an plethora of evidence is that the insurrection was a prep-planned, well organized attempt to pressure Congress to overturn a free and fair election by supporters of Trump.  The right wing media is trying to downplay not only the severity of this event, but also plant doubt that it was in fact the Trump supporters who were clearly acting as terrorists.

But it doesn't stop there.  His final segment was him reading a letter from a high school student about how his teachers and school were silencing him.  The implication, again via the "illicit transference" fallacy is that this is what good young patriots all over the country face.  This is also an appeal to emotion fallacy as the letter mentioned a 7 year old student as well.  This also promoted the "Big Lie" that the "leftists" are intolerant radical communists who are trying to brainwash your children.  Only a few minutes reading comments on redstate will show how effective this has been.

It's really hard to decipher this level of expert propaganda, and use of fallacies.  As the above link shows, propaganda is extremely effective.  No one wants to believe that they have been hoodwinked into believing things that are simply untrue.  But this is what is happening in the right wing mediasphere, every day, every night, every show.  And so despite an overwhelming amount of evidence from unbiased sources, including Republican state office holders and Trump appointed judges, some 50-75% of Republicans believe that this election was rampant with fraud, when, IN FACT, it was so obviously free and fair.