Tucker Carlson Promotes a Mass Shooter Apologist - Part 2 - The Interview on Tucker Carlson Today
Last week Tucker Carlson featured a guest who intrigued me. I decided to do a deep dive to find out more about her and what I found disturbed me.
This is the second installment of an investigation into Katherine Dee, a woman Tucker Carlson tried to pass off as just a brilliant young voice he discovered on the internet.
Within a few hours of research I had connected Dee and her work to some fairly sinister ideologies. I cannot see into the mind of someone like Tucker Carlson or anyone on his staff. I do find it troubling though that he would give someone like Dee a platform on the most popular cable news program.
One of the segments I feature in my newsletter about Fox News is the network’s habit of using what I call “bogus experts.” A bogus expert is someone with a lot of strong opinions about any given topic but no training or expertise in the subject.
In this case Dee presented herself as an expert on the subject of mass shooters and internet subcultures. She’s entitled to her opinion of course but she isn’t a licensed therapist, psychologist, or data scientist.
After researching whatever I could find about her I stumbled on this quote from a podcast she had created about a mass shooter.
“When these subcultures are acknowledged they get the Neo Nazi label or whatever kind of immediately but that’s not really the move. We never get a full picture of what’s exactly is going on there and what are the mechanisms and what’s the average person like. It’s always who’s the ‘edgecase” that does something very horrific and what can we learn from them.”
This quote is from the end of the podcast where this idea that white nationalists, Neo Nazis and misogynists were just people expressing their dissident thoughts.
Why would Tucker Carlson have a woman with this viewpoint on his show? Why did he present her as an expert on mass shooters when she had no training in the subject?
She also hadn’t seemed to put any real effort into researching mass shooters. Dee never cited a single study or book. She would talk about interviewing subjects but there were never any details. How many people has she talked to? Did she interview actual mass shooters? What kind of research has she done?
In Part 1 of this series she admitted openly that she had done no research on the person she interviewed for her podcast “The Ghost of Adam Lanza.” before she had him on air. She just went in blindly.
I discovered after a rudimentary search that this man had extremely problematic political views on race and homosexuality.
Expert - Katherine Dee
Katherine Dee - In an interview with Coindesk she gave her legal name simply as Katya. The name Katherine Dee is an alias she uses online along with the handle Default Friend.
Education - G.E.D. and “film school”
Occupation - Currently a writer. She was vague about her background stating only that she had a TV job in media when she lived in New York City and had worked for a tech startup.
Twitter - “I am a journalist and I cover internet history and culture.”
After listening to her entire podcast “The Ghost of Adam Lanza part 1” I decided to go back and find the original hour long interview from “Tucker Carlson Today” an interview show Carlson produces for the streaming service Fox Nation. He had pulled clips from this longer interview for the brief segment he featured last week.
This is how Carlson introduced her,
“Since we've developed a little niche on this show for smart people who write interesting things, not necessarily people who are famous, but people who we think probably should be famous,” said Carlson.
After a brief introduction about Dee’s writing ability Carlson continued his praise,
“There's so much garbage and propaganda and stupidity, but it's also forcing people to think a little bit more deeply and the smart, open minded ones are. And I just I'd love the chance to hold them up to public attention. And you're definitely category,” said Carlson.
It was clear just a few minutes into this interview that Carlson was overjoyed to have Dee on as a guest. Carlson is normally effusive towards his interview subjects but this seem like a special treat for him.
As Carlson asked basic questions about Dee’s background she didn’t give him much. She said she had a “television job” for a media company in New York City and then a tech company but she gave no details about what kind of work she did. She wouldn’t even hint at her age.
Dee also wouldn’t even answer rudimentary questions about her educational background.
“What year you graduated high school?” said Carlson.
“I actually didn't graduate high school. I dropped out,” said Dee.
“Oh, bless you,” said Carlson.
Yeah. I'm so,” said Dee.
“Glad you did,” said Carlson.
“The GED holder,” said Dee.
“Good for you. The smartest people are, I've noticed, but I guess what is another way? Sorry for the first question, but it's just another way of asking. Like you grew up in a world that was fully saturated by social media,” said Carlson.
That entire exchange just seemed like some anti-intellectualism from a man who went to an expensive prep-school and university. Carlson has bashed advanced education repeatedly on his show since I started covering him.
I suspect he wants his followers uneducated because they are easier to manipulate. Anti-intellectualism is frequently promoted in far-right circles.
She also said she went to “film school” but gave no other details. That could have been a few night classes or a full-blown program.
Since she was cagey about nearly every aspect of her life I suspected there had to have been some reason she wasn’t being transparent. Most people don’t avoid basic questions like, “Where did you go to school?”
Adam Lanza - The Fascination with a Mass Shooter
Dee revealed that she developed a fascination with Adam Lanza, the man who shot and killed his mother, then six educators and 20 children at Sandy Hook Elementary School before killing himself.
At some point she found videos Lanza posted of himself for YouTube that were a type of diary. She took these media clips along with samples of Lanza’s writings and eventually produced a podcast series that basically launched her career.
In a very telling moment in her interview with Carlson, Dee couldn’t recall the number of Lanza’s victims.
“He the was a perpetrator of the Sandy Hook school shooting in Connecticut. I believe 27 children were shot. He went into a first grade classroom,” said Dee.
This is a woman as far as I could tell had spent a lot of time with Lanza’s musings. It was a tell of sorts that although she knew a lot about about the killer she didn’t know basic information about his victims.
Lanza murdered his mother before going on a killing spree at the elementary school. Once at Sandy Hook he slaughtered 20 children aged six and seven along with six employees of the school - three teachers, a school psychologist, a behavior specialist and the principal.
Police arrived four minutes after Lanza first entered the school. Approximately a minute after police arrived on the scene Lanza committed suicide. All told 28 people died during his rampage.
I point out the timeframe here to really drive the point home that Lanza was able to murder that many people in such a short time. Obviously the type of gun he used played a huge role in how much damage he caused.
Dee was focused on Lanza’s worldview more than anything.
“He (Lanza) had a very coherent personal philosophy. He wasn't just a random act of terror. It wasn't hate fueled. He wasn't like radicalized by any extremist group. He was fundamentally against life. He was against his. His main gripe was against values inculturation. And just like that deeply nihilistic worldview that he held,”said Dee.
“That’s fascinating,” said Carlson.
That quote made my blood go a bit cold. To someone like Dee, Lanza might be a fascinating subject. She’s so detached from him emotionally and physically that he just becomes this interesting voice from the grave, a misunderstood genius. That’s at least how she came across in her podcast “The Ghost of Adam Lanza Part 1.”
The problem arises of course when another disturbed young man might pick up on her podcast and revere Lanza as some type of hero.
Carlson’s response to her comment was even more puzzling.
“That's fascinating. There is a taboo. There's a powerful taboo against exploring the motives of monsters. Right. You saw this after 911 where there was an absolute boycott on any discussion about why the 19 murderers, hijackers did this. And I always felt that we lost something. And not having that conversation is hardly ratifying their crime, endorsing their crime, to ask why they committed it right and why they died while committing it. But clearly they meant it's like why they do this and no one ever talked about it,” said Carlson.
I could write several pages in response to Carlson’s remark but I don’t want to completely sidetrack this article. Every single aspect of the 9/11 attack was explored exhaustively. The American public knew the names of the attackers, where they were from, how long they lived in the United States, what flight school they went to, the ideology they were obsessed with and the leader who funded their terrorist attack.
I have no idea what Carlson meant by that statement except maybe he was disappointed that there wasn’t enough venom towards the Islamic faith. I don’t know but Carlson has a habit of rewriting history.
Dee then goes into the philosophy that she and her co-host for the podcast spent entirely too much time and focus on.
And you know, if we remove the speech, it's not going to remove the unhappiness. It's going to come out in other ways. And that's what I think the big mistake is for Lanza in particular, his. So he starts sort of off like an anarcho-primitivist, right? So basically he was, you know, against civilization, against society. And then he drifts towards like being against life.
And then he makes sort of another kind of confusing, difficult to articulate, pivot against values. So to him, like being against life is a value. Right. So he's against even that. And the only solution, you know, is solution by extermination. Right. The only the only thing you should and can do by this like oppressive force, you know, in the face of this oppressive force of culture of life is to die.
And it's a it's a very dark and it's not you know, it's not necessary. And it's you can't justify it at all. Right,” said Dee.
As I discussed in the first installment of this series, exploring Lanza’s worldview is largely meaningless. It could have just as easily been based on “Batman: The Dark Knight Rises”, or any number of subjects. A mass shooter can fixate on just about anything.
Exploring Lanza’s history of any known mental health problems, any treatment he received or medication, any abuse or trauma he might have experienced or his family dynamics would be far more helpful in finding the source that led him to do something this horrific.
Focusing on his self-indulgent musings into an audio recorder could just fuel another mass shooter.
For the rest of the interview Dee made a number of assumptions about Lanza’s mental state, various possible diagnoses and even made a few broad sweeping statements about how mental illness correlates with mass shootings.
This was wildly irresponsible as Dee has no training as a therapist, psychologist, criminologist and never cited any specific studies or data sets. Like any other wannabe expert she cited studies and books without ever giving a single title or pulling any specific data. She also lacks the years of experience of working with patients or case studies.
The best hard data she could offer was “98% of shooters are male, I think 52% of them are white.”
When I looked into this myself I found some debate on both numbers she cited. Violent crime has always been overwhelmingly committed by young men in every culture across the planet, so the fact that mass shootings are committed by males is hardly surprising.
She seemed instead to be fascinated with the various philosophies Lanza held as if understanding them would crack the code of his motive. Dee also took a very sympathetic view towards Lanza and other troubled young men like him.
It’s not wrong to research mass shooters. More needs to be done if we are ever going to prevent another event like the massacre at Sandy Hook.
Dee’s approach of studying the YouTube ramblings of a lone mass shooter is haphazard at best. She’s also using a sample of one. Dissecting the one event doesn’t really accomplish much of anything when events like the one Lanza committed happen with alarming frequency.
“I mean, you know, a lot of research has been done to that. You know, mental illness really doesn't explain these kinds of violent crimes. I feel like people are really catching up and there's been a lot of studies and even books published. And, you know, in the last couple of months, people really catching up to this idea that people who commit these mass casualty events are deeply, deeply nihilistic.
They're deeply anti-life. But but the problem is the explanation is usually very uncharitable. And it really it seems to like neglects that people are products of their environment,” said Dee.
Where do I even start with this one? Her overall conclusion is nihilism leads to mass shootings. That’s not exactly ground-breaking.
Now let me breakdown her language.
“I mean, you know, a lot of research has been done.”
What research? Name a study. Give us specifics.
“You know, mental illness really doesn't explain these kinds of violent crimes.” -
The problem with what she said is she’s speaking incredibly broadly when she’s really only examined Adam Lanza. She uses the term violent crimes (plural) so now she’s studied hundreds of mass shootings?
If she has explored multiple other mass shootings this would be a good time to share what she’s found. The correlation with mental illness and mass shootings is murky but she hasn’t given the viewer much evidence by what she said.
“I feel like people are really catching up and there's been a lot of studies and even books published.”
What books? What studies? This is also vague. You’d think if she read these studies she might mention at least one.
“They're deeply anti-life. But but the problem is the explanation is usually very uncharitable. And it really it seems to like neglects that people are products of their environment.”
Is she talking about abuse? She never mentions child abuse or domestic violence in this interview. I searched the entire transcript for the word abuse and could find no examples. Also uncharitable? Her sympathy throughout this interview and the podcast is always with Lanza.
Throughout the rest of the interview she made a number of broad sweeping statements and assumptions about psychology, religion, human interaction, body modification, cultural changes, porn, sex work, feminism and the internet without anything to reinforce her opinions.
We all have opinions but an expert should be able to offer some proof or evidence to strengthen whatever arguments they’re making. Blithely using the term “studies, books and research” is similar to the phrase “Sources say” or “People are saying,” is purposefully obtuse.
In this brief segment she destroys her own argument. The point of having her on “Tucker Carlson Today” was to explore how the internet relates to mass shooters.
A meaningless, meaningless problem. People don't know why they're living, why they're doing anything. We live in a society of people who want to anesthetize themselves. I mean, this is an argument that I think is upsetting to a lot of people. But I think if you think of it like a spectrum, people who aren't evil or aren't disturbed might, you know, show this through binging Netflix or, you know, being workaholics and then drinking a bottle of wine and then falling asleep,” said Dee.
She just mentioned Netflix, which more like watching a movie or television series. Working a lot has nothing to do with the internet and finally humans abusing alcohol (drinking a bottle of wine) has absolutely nothing to do with internet usage.
I could find a novel from a 100 years ago that would explore the exact same themes she just espoused. Human beings feeling lost and detached from the world is not new. The internet might have exacerbated it but she’s offering no proof that it has.
Dee also never acknowledges why mass shootings are a problem unique to the United States. People are filled with despair and a feeling of meaningless all over the world. The United States is nowhere near the the top of the list in terms of suicide.
The country with the highest rate of suicide, according to worldpopulationreivew.com, is Lesotho, a tiny country surrounded by South Africa. The country has an alarmingly high rate of HIV/AIDS which probably contributes to the high rate of suicide. South Korea and Russia are also in the top ten countries in terms of suicide rates.
It would be difficult to argue that the three countries of Lesotho, South Korea and Russia all have high rates of suicide due to excessive internet use.
I would compare countries based on the amount of mass shootings but the United States is so above any other country it’s in a league by itself. What the U.S. does have a lot more of than any other nation is easy access to powerful firearms.
Dee could make the argument as many have that our obsession with guns is not tied to mass shootings. Instead she focuses on broad ideals like nihilism, something that is not unique to the 21st century or the United States.
Then in a unexpected twist Dee made a correlation that the microblogging site Tumblr had somehow sparked an increase in people wanting to seek a gender transition.
“And of course, most famously, there's the trans craze driven really by the Internet.,” said Carlson.
“Right. I mean, yeah, though I would argue that that was popularized by Tumblr. But, you know, that's another rabbit hole that I won't get into,” said Dee
“But you've just thrown it out there, so I'm going to have to ask for a few more sentences. Do you think that the trans mania was popularized by Tumblr? What's Tumblr and how did it start?” said Carlson.
“This Tumblr was a microblogging site and I guess like this, the simplest way to explain it. So it was one of the most popular websites was not that so much. Once they banned porn, there is a sort of a mass exodus. It was one of the most popular websites among…,” said Dee.
“You're making me sorry. I'm not online more often. Katherine Dee,” said Carlson.
“Yeah. But, you know, I interviewed a lot of people and their first exposure to even learning about trans identity was through Tumblr. So, you know, if if nothing else, it it introduced the idea that this was a possibility to people,” said Dee.
What you don’t hear her say in that clip is the word research. She interviewed some people. Dee strikes me as someone who has a conclusion first and then finds other people who agree with her.
If she’d spent even an afternoon looking into the history of trans people she would have discovered there’s evidence of trans people that goes back as far as recorded human history. Trans people also have existed in every culture, even parts of the world that are extremely divergent from each other.
To make the leap that Tumblr has led to a “trans craze” is absolutely absurd.
So to review this a bit.
Most of Dee’s ideas about a detached mechanized world without meaning are not new. Over a hundred years ago after the First World War many philosophers, artists and writers promoted the same ideas and themes.
Mass shootings occurred before the internet existed and angry and alienated youth is not exactly a new problem. The University of Texas tower massacre in 1966, is considered by many to be the start of this horrific trend. In an haunting parallel with Lanza the shooter killed his mother and wife the night before.
At one point Carlson put Dee on the spot and asked her point blank if any mass shooters were married men with children. She responded no.
How would either Carlson or Dee instantly know the marital status of hundreds of mass shooters? They wouldn’t.
In a cursory search on the same subject I found multiple sources and large studies that actually pointed to a strong connection between domestic violence, misogny and mass shootings.
It was so strong that one study by the Educational Fund To Stop Gun Violence at Johns Hopkins found that in 68.2% of mass shootings analyzed, the perpetrator either killed family members or an intimate partner or the shooter had a history of domestic violence.
Another study by Everytown Research, conducted in conjunction with the FBI, that looked at mass shootings from 2009 to 2022 also showed a strong correlation between domestic violence and mass shootings.
How Actual Experts Study Mass Shooters
Two college professors, Jillian Peterson, an associate professor of criminology at Hamline University, and James Densley, a professor of criminal justice at Metro State University, funded by the National Institute of Justice, the research division of the Department of Justice constructed a database of every mass shooting event ( four or more victims) from 1966 in a public space and every shooting incident at schools, workplaces and places of worship since 1999.
From this they compiled detailed biographies of 180 shooters. They conducted interviews with family members, spouses, friends from childhood, co-workers, teachers, and neighbors. They also spoke to people who had planned mass shootings but never carried them out. Although most mass shooters don’t survive their rampages they were able to speako five who were serving life sentences.
The duo published a book titled, The Violence Project: How to Stop a Mass Shooting Epidemic. They found patterns and commonalities among the group they analyzed and suggested a data-backed and mental-health approach could help doctors, teachers, parents and law enforcement identify the next mass shooter before he acts out.
Katherine Dee may be earnest in her search for the source of mass shootings the problem is she seems to come up with a conclusion first and then find what she thinks is evidence to back her theory. She would rather explore nihilism than look into any physical abuse or trauma that might have caused someone like Lanza to retreat from the world.
Dee assumes the symptom (nihilism) is the cause.
At no point during her extended interview with Carlson did she really show any concrete evidence that excessive internet use leads to mass shootings. She didn’t even explore the amount of time Lanza himself spent on the internet.
My biggest issue with her as a source for Carlson however is her tacit support of white nationalism. No one is truly apolitical. When the guest on her podcast frequently brought up white nationalism and white supremacy as just another worldview she expressed no objection.
From “The Ghost of Adam Lanza Part 1”
“Let's say you just say I don't want whites to disappear as a race. Well, now that's the epitome of evil. And it's not just because it's, you know, biased or whatever. It's because that view is in opposition to humanist values. Whereas ephalism and anti-fatalism are kind of aligned with those values. So they're not really perceived. They're kind of perceived as an extreme version of the left.
Well, I guess that's generally true of all extreme left wing movements, is that they're not really perceived as very threatening, whereas extreme right wing movements are perceived as threatening because they're sort of they're attacking something at the root. You know, like they're not just they're directly rejecting the core values on which the kind of institutional worldview of the modern West is based,” said her guest a man who went by the alias Blithering Genius.
White nationalism is not just another worldview. White supremacy has a long and bloody history of violence, death and destruction. The white supremacist movement is well organized and in some cases well armed.
Dee’s seeming neutrality towards such a hateful ideology is in a form an endorsement. I can’t prove why Carlson would want to elevate someone like Dee but it’s incredibly troubling that he introduced her to his audience of nearly four million people.
Coming up…
My regular weekly podcast/newsletter should drop as expected on Monday. I’ve also done a deep dive on the images used in Carlson’s documentary “The End of Men.” There’s a strong white supremacist streak throughout the entire piece. I’m planning a podcast/newsletter and a short video about what I found. The film really needs a video element as the images really tell the story.