Hacker News Reader

Comment by MuffinFlavored | Hacker News Reader

Source? Timestamp?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awM0nrlOZxk at 6:10

found by copy pasting "Tucker Carlson, in his interview with Ben Shapiro while discussing self-driving trucks" into the google and getting lucky

I don’t know whether you meant it this way, but your comment comes across as “let me Google that for you”. Either way, I also wanted a source, and thank you for posting the link here so I also don’t have to go looking for it.

I absolutely did mean to be as snarky as possible. Asking for a source for something is one thing, but when the person you (not referring to you, but the original person I replied to) asked gave the word for word, verbatim search term who's first result is the EXACT thing you asked for, and you type "SOURCE TIMESTAMP" anyway, I can't be charitable.

HN Guidelines for comments:

> Don't be snarky.

It makes for a nicer community if you just post the link and leave out the snark.

This is tedious. It's a time-worn strategy of all politicians and activists to justify their preferred policies pretextually. If you have something to say about the actual policy he's discussing -- industry protectionism -- you should make that comment instead.

But if your comment is just "one time someone from the other team said the quiet part aloud" that's rather naive and unremarkable.

Did you reply to the wrong comment?

Just a tip, you can encode a timestamp in a YouTube URL. Right click at the time you want to point to and choose "Copy video URL at current time". Or just encode the time in seconds as ?t=<seconds_to_jump_to> in the query string.

https://youtu.be/awM0nrlOZxk?t=370

You can also express it as a combination of minutes and seconds (presumably hours are supported too): https://youtu.be/awM0nrlOZxk?t=6m10s

https://youtu.be/awM0nrlOZxk?t=372

At 6:12

Transcribed by me: "I would maybe make up some pretext for public consumption, like 'oh they're dangerous', 'the technology's not there yet'"

Let's not take things out of context guys. His response there is what he would say to the public if he were in charge of making decisions on self-driving trucks. Start at 4:45 for the entire segment. He starts his response by saying, "If I were president, would I say to the DOT..."

Yeah, he sure does gleefully admit that he'd abuse presidential power to lie in under to get what he wants! Good thing there's no other context where Carlson's in control of disseminating information in order to get what he wants!

Yes, let's not take things out of context.

In a world where Tucker Carlson has gained more political power and is legislating some policy which should be very politically popular, he still believes the right way to do things is in an "ends justify the means" fashion, and would therefore be willing to mislead the public - and anyone else that required misleading - in order to enact this policy. Again, this is something that he argues would protect the jobs of millions of Americans.

How can you possibly think that we are taking it "out of context"? This is ironclad evidence for people who argue something like "Tucker Carlson is a lying maniac who puts himself and what he thinks is important before justice and integrity". Even when in idealistic hypotheticals constructed for PR, he still would do what he does best: make up pretext for public consumption.

It's really telling how simply he glosses over saying that like it's a perfectly normal thing for a "journalist" to do. That's pretty depressing.

To be fair, that clip is Carlson imagining a hypothetical scenario in which he’s the Secretary of Transportation or someone similar, and needs to justify keeping self-driving trucks off the road to avoid putting millions of truck drivers out of work. It is not an example of a lack of journalistic integrity or demonstration of his own televised spin.

I disagree. The whole thing is a PR spin - cmon, the guy who intentionally undermines society in order to retain his obscene pay at Fox News is selling a book about stable societies - and even in a PR spin hypothetical scenario where he's the president, he STILL prefers to mislead the public instead of making an honest argument to them.

It's a perfect demonstration of a complete lack of integrity. The ends justify the means whenever he believes in it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com