One of the real temptations in the Great Awakening process is to reject old icons and idols, but then simply establish new 'sanctified' ones, and replace one object of projection with another.

I don't really know much about Carlson, as I never paid much attention to him. I wasn't aware that he actually denied the election steal or came out as saying Sleepy Joe won legitimately.

What I AM interested in is the role he is currently playing and the impact of his current reportings. I'm not so interested in evaluating the person as I am in evaluating and understanding the impact.

The need to evaluate personalities seems to me to be tied to the impulse towards (or a reaction against) idolization of figures.

None of the people on the stage are infallible or perfect. if we assign idol status, (This can be done consciously or unconsciously), we end up in a situation where "Oh, I trust this person so I can just believe what they say" or "I distrust this person, so I cannot believe what they say", when any and all actors in the information and narrative war are liable to put out both truth and false things at any time. IMO.

So, focus on the information being shared, look to its net effect. It's almost impossible to know directly whether someone like Carlson, for example, has been a long-term plant, being controlled opposition and playing a role UNTIL the right time, to begin spilling the beans, etc. or whether he has been 'flipped' aka was somehow a DS asset, or whether he's been 'persuaded' to start focusing on truth, etc. IMO.

So, any thinking about this aspect of things, unless tied to examination of the overall impact of the role the person is playing on the greater narrative and information war (aka the war for the minds and hearts of the people), is likely to slide down into establishing either idols or devils in one's own mind, and then settling on one's own thinking with a prejudice.

If you know what I mean.... (erg) /s