The new right, the new Qanon? 

Rian Johnson’s Knife’s out third instalment has found an unlikely competitor in Candace Owens’ podcast. Since the death of Charlie Kirk, American political commentator and CEO and Founder of Turning Point USA, his close friend and contemporary Candance Owen has begun what can only be qualified as a crusade for the ‘real’ truth behind his assassination. She has rejected and continues to reject the official police findings that identify the killer as Tyler Robinison and instead sees it as a grand cover-up.

The rise of Candance Owens comes with a subsequent rise of a “new-right”, fraught with fringe conspiracy theories, increasing anti-semticism and a general dissatisfaction with the current Trump administration. This new concoction has found its perfect victim in Charlie Kirk’s killing. Before tackling her coverage of Charlie Kirk, it is first important to establish her position on Israel. Whilst Owens has made valid criticisms against the state of Israel and its actions in Gaza, we must note her history of anti-semitic statements, including mentions of repeating Blood Libel conspiracies on her podcast, elite Jewish cabal running media, and even playing defence for the Nazi’s by downplaying their actions at an event in London in December 2018.  Owen’s criticisms are not of Zionism but stem from her skewed beliefs about Jewish identity, with her commentary often conflating the two. With this understanding established, it should come as no surprise that her first suspect is indeed the state of Israel. 

Despite Charlie Kirk’s outward and public support of Israel and Netanyahu, Owens insists that he was going to turn against the regime, and hence his killing was a planned murder carried out by Israeli agents. Since the person of interest list has been expanded to France, Egypt and even members of his own association, Turning Point USA. The narrative spun by Owens includes private jets, insider betrayal and even an assassination plot against her. The hook of this tale is not truth but rather the telenovela-esque entertainment. 

Owens is no stranger to combining politics and entertainment, while right-wing commentary has always touched upon pop culture and the like, Owens ups her appeal by performing her commentary as gossip. Her coverage of Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, rather than outright pushing right-wing rhetoric through factual or theoretical analysis, instead reads more as a tabloid magazine scoop full of subtle shaming of women, character assassination of Blake Lively and exaggerated caricaturization of everyone involved. This method does allow her to channel already internalised and normalised misogyny embedded in a patriarchal society and thus subtly incorporate more conservative and right-wing views about women. Owens, by using gossip, sheds herself of the shackles of journalistic standards and instead can prioritise entertainment above all. 

Owen,s rather than mimicking the earlier intellectual diaspora of right-wing commentators like Ben Shapiro or Jordan Peterson, instead takes the more parasocial approach of treating her audience like friends. With the rise of anti-intellectualism in America, right-wing pundits like Jordan Peterson have lost favour with the public, and commentators like Owens have capitalised on this change. Her persona makes her a far more approachable and relatable figure, paired with her conspiratorial approach, which makes her audience part of the show. Her use of first-person plural pronouns as well as conspiracy crafting gives her audience not only the feeling of being part of a movement but also the feeling of having access to exclusive knowledge. This exclusivity was one of the main staples of any conspiracy theory, and I would say the main appeal, to have exclusive knowledge means to be superior in some form or another, in some cases to be right before anyone else. Owens’ use of conspiracies is yet another tool to form parasocial relations with her audience. 

Owen’s use of pop culture and laid-back commentary is a growing trend amongst the new generation of right-wing media influencers. Misha Petrov, another Right-wing influencer, uses her platform to discuss ‘cultural’ issues. These are often new trends or even people gaining popularity on TikTok. Whilst Petrov never advertises her channel or herself as a right-wing political commentator, her videos always have an underpinning right-wing rhetoric. Her coverage on the ‘failings’ of modern feminism, which often reduces to shaming sex workers and single mothers, weaponising ‘choice-feminism’ to shelter conservative trad-wife movement and transmedicalism to invalidate non-binary identity, is all mainstays of the right-wing dog whistles. Petrov, by both hiding her political leanings under the ‘common sense’ logical fallacy and making ‘political’ into ‘cultural’, is able to attract a mass audience of  Gen Z viewers. 

This new wing of covert right-leaning influencers disarms the average, at times even apolitical, viewer and exposes them to reactionary content. The world we inhabit at large is still inherently patriarchal, capitalist and heteronormative; hence, any progressive movement is a deviation from the norm. To understand why such deviation is important and resists a pre-existing oppressive system is the cornerstone of any critical thinking theory. This critical thinking is exactly what pundits like Owens and Petrov target and demonise. The ‘common sense’ used here is inherently anti-intellectual and encourages people already biased towards these oppressive institutions to normalise the familiar regardless of how harmful it can be. 

This was the environment Owens had been operating in prior to Kirk’s assassination; it is no wonder that despite tonally shifting to a more professional and serious style, the structure and draw of her arguments remain very much the same. Whilst previously her coverage mixed politics into entertainment, this is the polar opposite. By making a political situation into a whodunnit mystery, Owens is once again able to attract her audience through conspiracies and entertainment. Owens isn’t doing commentary; she is selling a story. Her audience, already primed to be conspiratorial, can easily be sold the image of Candance Owens fighting against the Big Bad foreign governments to seek the truth for her friend’s death. 

But has this approach backfired on Owens? The latest development in the saga has been the meeting between Erika Kirk, Charlie Kirk’s widow and the new CEO of Turning Point USA, and Owens. After Owens accused Turning Point USA of being an accomplice to Kirk’s death, the meeting was essentially to stop the conspiratorial rhetoric. Yet the peaceful outcome seems to have been thoroughly rejected by Owens’ fanbase, accusing her of conceding and being silenced. Now the question remains how will Owens will react to this backlash? Owens has become a core part of the right-wing media apparatus, indeed, more staggering than her conspiracies are her view counts. Yet she also needs allies and opportunities with her contemporaries that give her access to Trump’s administration and the republican elite circle. 

Regardless of her choice, the coming effects will surely be an important factor in how right-wing media discourse will shape up in the future.

Disclaimer: This article was entirely human-written without the use of Artificial Intelligence.