Firstly let us distinguish between self-censorship and media censorship. I choose not to watch Carlson because I hate/disagree with pretty much everything he says. I would no more wish to waste my time watching him than an evangelical preacher.
The second idea that Carlson was axed because of his views/lies is not that plausible. He has made his name spewing hate and misinformation for quite a number of years to great ratings = bankability without any accountability.
Two more plausible reasons have been put forward;
One he is misogynist by nature and there is an up-and-coming lawsuit against his female former producer. The texts of which have already been disclosed in the Dominion case although redacted.
The second might have more to do with Rupert Murdoch himself. Rumour has it that the Dirty Digger broke off his recent engagement when his fiance expressed the views that "Tucker is the voice of god". There can be only one top dog and Murdock is not about to relinquish that throne. Plus he may have plans to change Faux Gnus and alter its direction, perhaps by giving the actual news side a bit more of a say in content. Add to that, there were Tucker's texts regarding the big lie vis-a-vis Dominion. Where he actively interfered with Faux Gnus' content in favour of the big lie. That cost Murdoch big bucks ($787,500,000) and not many employees get to cost the firm that much and keep their jobs.
No, all this talk of censorship smacks of the usual right-wing snowflake victim claiming that they love to indulge in whenever things do not go their way or they are held in any way accountable. Just once I would like to see any right-whinger accept that they fucked up and got canned. But seeing as their hero is the great orange whinger himself, Im not holding my breath.

@273kelvin I would maintain that your response is both naïve and pretty much a non sequitur. This is shown by how you immediately launch an attack on Tucker Carleson, despite the fact that the whole point of the post is NOT about one particular person be them bad or good actors, it is about censorship overall. Also, naïve, because instead of viewing the post in its entirety, (which clearly you did not do), you responded completely without knowing (or understanding) the full content of the post or the purpose of the post. Sometimes even disgusting actors get things right, even though they are turds. I get loads of responses from people just like this, who think that they know it all, jump in like they know it all, (just like christians do), jumping to conclusions then generalizing without even understanding or critically thinking about the content they are responding to.

That can only mean one thing . . . . . that the person is either in need of self-correcting themselves, or, worst case scenario, they are an old fuck who can't think outside of the box they have placed themselves in, and if that is the case, they are overdue to booted from my thread, and the response will be apportioned accordingly.

@Archeus_Lore Well you chose to put Tucker front and centre and then talk about censorship. I merely pointed out that he was actually crap as well as hateful and maybe that got him canned.
No, I did not watch the video because I self-censor crap out of my life. I am informed enough to know that his views on Ukraine are straight out of RT and he is quoted on there often. Not all views are valid and deserving of consideration. For example, I could hold the view that Heroin is harmless and should be allowed in schools. I could argue for the removal of any age of consent. Would those views be worthy of consideration? Would you need to hear me out before dismissing them? I filter out religious crap along with flat-earthers so Tucker is just one more.
However, what you ask us to do is ignore the fact that Faux Gnus is a known liar and that Tucker was their liar-in-chief but like a broken clock, he might be right this time. Could this just happen to coincide with your own particular views on the Ukraine war? (sorry don't call it a war) So if you know a known thief, do you trust him with your wallet just this once or do you not?

@273kelvin "I am informed enough to know that his views on Ukraine are straight out of RT and he is quoted on there often." I wonder just how much you really know . . . . . . . Being a polyglot, I speak four languages and can read seven, one of those languages happens to be Russian, and in fact, I know a considerable amount about Russian culture, history, and events. Since you are so stuck on Tucker Carlson, and claim that his views are straight out of RT . . . . . No one needs RT or Tucker Carlson to prove a thing about what happened, they only need to explore something beyond what the government, the president, and the main stream media is telling them. In true fact, most Americans are literally CLUELESS because they have the belief that they can trust their government and the media to tell them the full story, so they go on like children like many of us were, when we were told to say the Pledge of Allegiance, and the "under God", that came along with it. As a true agnostic also, I find plenty of reasons to doubt the government's bull shit . . . . has it not ever occurred to you that a nation that is truly defending itself does not spend the vast length of its existence waging wars? However, the USA has been at war almost constantly since its founding, and even more so since World War II. That is the footprint of a nation that is "defending itself"? Dropping nuclear weapons on two Japanese cities, that was a "defensive action"? Invading a sovereign country, upon the pretense that it has WMD, when in fact it had no WMD, AND the trumped up charges against it were fabricated . . . that is the footprint of a nation "defending itself"?

Take your time and review the evidence, then once you have, come back and tell me I am wrong. Accept that challenge, review the evidence, then prove to me I am wrong. As we tell the christians . . . . Prove it!

And most of the real evidence comes out of their own mouths . . .
The 2014 coup in Ukraine was backed by the USA, remember the recording of Victoria Nuland, selecting who would become the leaders, and saying "F**k the EU"?

From Der Spiegel, November 26, 2009 :
NATO's Eastward Expansion: Did the West Break Its Promise to Moscow?
What the US secretary of state said on Feb. 9, 1990 in the magnificent St. Catherine's Hall at the Kremlin is beyond dispute. There would be, in Baker's words, "no extension of NATO's jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east," provided the Soviets agreed to the NATO membership of a unified Germany. Moscow would think about it, Gorbachev said, but added: "any extension of the zone of NATO is unacceptable."
[spiegel.de]

Obama admitted his role in the US-supported in the 2014 coup in Ukraine. (First video link below).
Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs at the United States Department of State, admits in the second video that the USA supported the Ukrainian coup with 5 billion dollars. Note the Chevron symbol in the background of the video. John McCain (Senator Lovewar himself) and Victoria Nuland were in Ukraine in December 2013 amid the mass anti-government protests. (The third video is of John McCain in Ukraine addressing protesters.) During the visit, McCain met with Ukrainian opposition leaders in the country’s capital of Kiev, voicing his support for the protests, adding that he saw Ukraine’s future with Europe.
Obama admits the US-sponsored coup:

Donbass after the US-sponsored coup: Anne-Laure Bonnel

German ex-Chancellor Angela Merkel admits that they were lying about the Minsk Agreements.
[english.almayadeen.net]

Three major corporations bought millions of acres of land in Ukraine immediately after the 2014 US-sponsored coup . . . . no planning there at all, right?
[oaklandinstitute.org]
This is the butt naked clown the USA government has such a hard on for, that they are sending Billions of our tax dollars to. .

@273kelvin And THIS is one of the posts I made on Facebook, note the date that it was posted and the location where it happened . . . . Donbass . . . . then tell me Russia was the "aggressor" . . . .

@Archeus_Lore Four languages and crap in all of them. So because of your immense intellect and special knowledge, I now should take a racist cunt like Tucker fucking Carlson seriously? Who is trying to dictate their ideology to someone else now?
Oh and btw I have looked at all of the pro-Russia arguments regarding invasion and considered the same criteria to justify England retaking control of Ireland. The 1920 referendum was bogus and American influences have unduly swayed the population into believing they are actually a country. Which historically they never were. Oh and what is a little genocidal famine that kills a few million or so between friends, just water under the bridge hey? GIGO

The user I was conversing with was blocked due to being a pig-headed troll. With regard to this:
"That can only mean one thing . . . . . that the person is either in need of self-correcting themselves, or, worst case scenario, they are an old fuck who can't think outside of the box they have placed themselves in, and if that is the case, they are overdue to booted from my thread, and the response will be apportioned accordingly." It was the latter case.