Controversial conservative commentator Candace Owens criticised the Australian Government after being denied a visa to do a speaking tour here. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.
From Sky News cancelling a show for featuring a bacon-clad anti-Islam guest to the Immigration Minister denying American influencer Candace Owens a visa, Australia is trying to starve so-called Far Right extremists of oxygen.
It’s not working.
These voices continue to thrive in an online space that transcends borders and attracts bigger audiences than mainstream media. Attempts to shut them down only pour fuel on their conspiracy theories and expand their tents. We need to accept and challenge alternative views that are now impossible to silence.
Every week, there’s a new controversy about someone deemed too dangerous to speak publicly being given a platform to express their view – the latest being the attack on US podcaster Tucker Carlson for interviewing anti-immigration crusader Nick Fuentes.
Closer to home, AFL personality Sam Newman was roundly criticised for inviting neo-Nazi Thomas Sewell on his podcast and conservative commentator Freya Leach had her new Sky News show cancelled because she interviewed the UK provocateur Ryan Williams while he wore bacon as lapels and made offensive remarks about Muslims.
Mainstream media outlets were outraged by Williams’ stunt, so they kept reporting on it for the next week. This helped ensure a segment seen by a few thousand people on Sky After Dark’s minuscule audience was viewed by well over a million.
TV channels, radio stations and newspapers are now powerless to stop extreme voices like Williams’. In the 1990s, they had a monopoly over the airwaves. Nowadays, their audience is dwarfed by that of podcasters, YouTubers and social media channels.
Nothing much is achieved by Leach refusing to ‘platform’ obnoxious voice to her tiny fan base if that same voice can meet with someone like Joe Rogan and be heard by over 50 million people around the world.
(Rogan is the world’s most popular podcaster and often criticised for hosting guests from both ends of the political spectrum who spout conspiracies).
Likewise, it’s counterproductive for Immigration Minister Tony Burke to prevent Candace Owens from entering this country to embark on a speaking tour, because she fails a “character test” (a decision recently upheld by the High Court).
Owens was able to attack our government as silencing dissent and portray herself as a champion of free speech. Her fans questioned why a Catholic mother of four who says offensive things is banned from entering our shores while ISIS brides and those with violent criminal records have been granted a visa in the past.
Meanwhile, Australians can still listen to her every day on her podcast. Her schtick about cancel culture and global elites trying to control the narrative has been legitimised – at least in the minds of her supporters.
Rather than trying to silence alternative online voices, we should try to understand why they’re growing in popularity, particularly among young men.
Over the past three decades, young men aged 15 to 30 have experienced worsening outcomes in several key indicators, including suicide, substance use disorders, and unemployment. No demographic has deteriorated so rapidly.
But don’t hear much about this on the ABC, which is more likely to focus on the problems they cause through their so-called toxic masculinity. It’s no wonder Joe Rogan’s conversation with Jordan Peterson about the positive aspects of being male might appeal to them. It’s also a reason Rogan has more Australian listeners than our national broadcaster.
Podcaster Tucker Carlson is often criticised for his choice of guests. Photo: Gage Skidmore/Flickr.
Populist podcasters also tap into legitimate concerns, like the impact of high immigration levels on crumbling infrastructure and house prices.
The problem is, they often take illogical leaps into unproven conspiracy theories, like claiming foreigners are deliberately brought into a country to harvest votes for left-wing parties.
This is where criticism of commentators like Carlson, Rogan and Leach is valid – their failure to challenge dangerous mistruths when interviewing the likes of Owens on their platforms.
Revisionist historian Darryl Cooper has the right to express his view about Winston Churchill being the chief villain during World War II. His articulate musings appeal to millions let down by a school system that failed to educate us on important aspects of our past. But anyone who chooses to let him air these theories needs to push back and present him with the exhaustive research of respected scholars.
That’s also how legacy media needs to confront the online manosphere and populist podcasters that have eaten away at their audience.
So-called ‘de-platforming’ has become the digital equivalent of sticking fingers in our ears while shouting ‘I can’t hear you!’ – except millions still do, and now they’re listening more intently.
To compete with the Owens and Coopers of the world, let’s stop behaving like pearl-clutching gatekeepers. Those of us in conventional news outlets should challenge ideas, address our own limitations and confront misinformation with facts. It’s better to engage with uncomfortable voices rather than banish them to the online wilderness where they multiply like conspiracy theory gremlins.
In the attention economy, there’s no such thing as being silenced – there’s only being handed a megaphone labelled martyr.
