Writing at The Federalist, Emily Jashinsky explains the absurdity of the calls to boycott Tucker Carlson’s show on Fox News over statements he made in a segment he performed on the migrant caravan and its trashing of Tijuana. Jashinsky writes:
At no point did Carlson describe people as inherently dirty, nor have his critics actually refuted the claim in question, of which I’m not at all qualified to evaluate the veracity. But it hardly seems unreasonable for Carlson to queue up a segment with a guest prepared to discuss the caravan “trashing” the streets of Tijuana by asserting that an effect of their migration is to make a destination “dirtier.” (That’s why this representation from Erik Wemple at the Washington Post, which leaves out information about the interview with Lopez, does not tell the full story of the segment.)
Arguing, implicitly or otherwise, that migrants are inherently “dirtier” people would be reprehensible. But that’s not what Carlson did.
All this is to say his claim was hardly outside the bounds of acceptable speech, which is why calls for a corporate ad boycott are absurd. Over at Politico Magazine, Jack Shafer, who’s no fan of Carlson’s, said it well: “I’m made queasy by crusades that charge corporate advertisers with the power to decide what ideas should be discussed and how they should be discussed. Seriously, I barely trust IHOP to make my breakfast. Why would I expect it to vet my cable news content for me?”
Read more here.
Here’s the segment in question, use your own judgement about what Tucker is saying.