openpolitics.com

09:07
people there’s only a small small group
09:11
of people who can travel every day for
09:13
weeks and weeks and weeks and months and
09:14
months on end so it’s only that specific
09:17
small subset of sort of corporate funded
09:22
media that’s on on the plane of those
09:26
people the schedule for reporters has
09:30
gotten drastically different in the last
09:32
twelve to sixteen years back in the 70s
09:36
and 80s newspaper reporters who traveled
09:39
on the plane the toughest schedule they
09:41
usually had was to file maybe at most
09:44
once a day you had to write one article
09:45
a day if you’re on the plane when the
09:48
internet came along that changed people
09:52
who work for the major dailies suddenly
09:55
had to not only write stories for the
09:58
print edition but they had to do two
10:01
three four five website updates a day
10:04
and the people who worked for the cable
10:07
news stations instead of doing one
10:09
report for the 6 o’clock news broadcast
10:11
or the 11 o’clock broadcast they were
10:13
doing 5 6 7 8 9 hits a day and they were
10:18
constantly constantly working and if
10:20
anybody’s ever read about cults like
10:21
ouch in Rico or anything like that one
10:24
of the things that they tell you is that
10:26
the working people constantly and
10:29
keeping them sleep-deprived is a way of
10:32
sapping their will and and reducing
10:35
their ability to think critically and
10:37
this is something that happens
10:38
absolutely on the campaign trail a
10:40
typical schedule for a reporter and also
10:45
for the politicians interestingly enough
10:46
especially when you get into the second
10:48
half of a presidential campaign is you
10:52
leave a hotel at 5:30 or 6:00 in the
10:54
morning you will follow the candidate
10:57
you’ll be writing constantly as soon as
11:00
the candidates
11:00
as anything you start writing your story
11:02
at the end of every event they heard you
11:05
into a little room called the filing
11:07
room you do your work you go from you go
11:10
back to a bus you go onto a plane you
11:13
repeat the process three or four times
11:14
and you don’t get to your hotel until 11
11:19
or 12 o’clock that night and then you
11:20
repeat it all over again and for most
11:22
people their writing or reporting pretty
11:26
much constantly from the time they wake
11:27
up in the morning till the time they go
11:29
to sleep and then they’re waking up
11:31
again the next day at 6 o’clock and that
11:34
was pretty much everybody in the plane
11:36
who covers who covered presidential
11:39
elections except me because as a
11:42
magazine writer and there are very few
11:44
magazine writers who regularly cover
11:46
presidential campaigns my deadline was
11:49
once every six weeks every two months
11:52
and so they would heard all the
11:56
reporters into these filing rooms and
11:58
while everybody else sitting there
11:59
furiously clacking away I would be doing
12:03
nothing in fact the first time I went on
12:06
the on these trips I actually got in
12:08
trouble with some of the other reporters
12:11
because I was too loudly flipping the
12:12
pages of a Sports Illustrated at another
12:17
stop in Houston they busted me for using
12:20
or having a Rubik’s Cube which they
12:23
found annoying so for actually two or
12:28
three election cycles

 

 

26:32

and years um I noticed that the campaign

26:37

marketing process is a very strange

26:38

thing it’s it’s extremely sophisticated

26:42

in some ways and extremely simple-minded

26:45

in other ways if you listen to the

26:47

speeches in the in the pre Trump era

26:50

they were basically just strings of

26:53

meaningless cliches piled on top of one

26:55

another and it didn’t almost didn’t

26:58

matter which candidate was speaking if

27:01

you took out certain words from each

27:03

speech you wouldn’t be able to tell

27:05

which party the person represented or

27:07

what of what policies he or she

27:10

supported they just they were just sort

27:12

of anodyne meaningless phrases strung

27:15

together one after the other and just to

27:17

give you a couple of examples of actual

27:19

campaign rhetoric that was very common

27:22

here’s one for millions and millions of

27:24

American the-dream millions and millions

27:26

of Americans the dream with which I grew

27:28

up has been shattered the choice is

27:31

between the right change in the wrong

27:32

change between going forward and going

27:34

backward this is totally meaningless of

27:37

course but within these meaningless

27:41

phrases there was actually you know as

27:43

we found as I found out an incredibly

27:46

sophisticated marketing phenomenon and

27:48

what we now know and in fact they

27:51

actually introduced this to to consumers

27:55

that they were they were using

27:57

incredibly sophisticated technology to

27:59

find out which words people liked more

28:01

than other words I’m sure everybody

28:04

who’s watched debates now and they

28:05

you’ll sometimes see there’s a crawl on

28:07

the bottom with a little graph and when

28:10

a candidate is talking you’ll see it go

28:12

up or down and this is what they call

28:15

dial survey technology and basically

28:18

what they’ll do is they’ll get a group a

28:21

control group into a room and they’ll

28:23

have a bunch of people sit there and

28:25

you’ll have a candidate read off a

28:26

speech and if the people like the word

28:29

they’re supposed to turn the dial

28:30

this way and if they don’t like the word

28:31

they turn they turn it that way and what

28:34

people the people who are running these

28:36

campaigns found out is that certain

28:39

kinds of voters just like it they like

28:41

hearing certain kinds of words and what

28:43

they would do is they would write these

28:45

speeches which were essentially

28:46

collections of words that had

28:48

meaningless sentences connecting them

28:50

together and so for progressive voters

28:54

if you listen to speeches that are

28:57

directed towards that kind of voter

28:58

you’ll find that they are very often

29:00

contain words like futuresmart and

29:03

compassion but for a right-wing voter

29:07

you’ll often see words like family tough

29:10

work obligation and so what these

29:15

candidates were doing they were using

29:17

this very very advanced technology to

29:19

basically lay this incredibly idiotic

29:22

kind of politics on millions and

29:24

millions of people and the way I like to

29:26

think of it is they were building like

29:29

the most advanced rocket in history to

29:31

deliver the world’s worst cheeseburger

29:33

to the moon basically it’s just it was

29:36

very very sophisticated marketing very

29:38

very dumb politics and so why is one

29:41

part of the process done in one part of

29:43

its smart well the politics part when

29:45

you think about it doesn’t need to be

29:46

smart really most people only have one

29:51

of three choices when it comes to

29:53

politics they can either vote Democratic

29:56

they can vote Republican or they can not

29:58

vote at all of course interestingly not

30:01

voting at all it continues to be the

30:03

overwhelmingly most popular choice among

30:06

the three but the level of marketing

30:11

sophistication that you need to get

30:13

people to make one of three choices is

30:16

relatively simpler than it is to get

30:20

people to watch a political show at all

30:23

compared to everything else that’s on

30:25

television right so in other words it’s

30:27

easier to get somebody to vote

30:29

Democratic or republican than it is to

30:33

get a person to watch a political speech

30:35

instead of Monday Night Football or

30:36

Keeping Up with the Kardashians or or

30:39

porn or whatever it is they’re you they

30:41

watch

30:42

so as time went on the sort of reality

30:47

show aspects of campaigning this all the

30:51

trappings of campaigns the the lighting

30:55

the the production values the the back

31:00

the backdrops the scenery all of that

31:03

became more and more sophisticated over

31:04

time while the actual politics became

31:09

more and more simplistic over time so

31:11

what you ended up getting was an

31:14

incredibly sophisticated television show

31:17

about very very unsophisticated politics

31:20

and Donald Trump’s insight and a lot of

31:24

this had to do with the fact that he was

31:26

a reality television star was that not

31:30

only had our politics devolved into a TV

31:34

show but it was basically a bad TV show

31:38

any TV show that planned to have its

31:42

leading characters be people like Jeb

31:44

Bush Scott Walker and Lindsey Graham you

31:48

know probably needed new producers and

31:52

Donald Trump turned he took what was you

31:56

know a television show that was constant

31:59

had drama every single day something

32:02

happens in the campaign every day so

32:03

it’s great for reality TV format from

32:06

that’s perspective there’s always some

32:07

kind of thing going on there was a

32:09

back-and-forth between the candidates

32:11

but the content tended to be relatively

32:15

a non sensational compared to Survivor

32:21

or you know Tila Tequila show or a you

32:27

know whatever flava flav Flavor of Love

32:33

Donald Trump wasn’t competing with other

32:35

Republican candidates he was repeating

32:37

competing with Flavor Flav and Tila

32:40

Tequila and he turned the

32:43

the presidential campaign add to this

32:45

this crazy can’t-miss wild reality

32:51

television show and for the news media

32:55

that makes its money by getting people

32:57

to watch their program this was like

33:00

manna and heaven for them um so so

33:06

that’s one thing that he understood that

33:08

other candidates didn’t he also

33:11

understood how to how to make the

33:14

process more intimate and how to bring

33:15

people into the process one of the

33:18

things that have happened over the years

33:19

is that people actual people became

33:22

irrelevant to this television show that

33:23

we were making the way the campaign is

33:27

structured as you fly around with with

33:29

the with the press corps you don’t have

33:31

enough time when you’re in each city to

33:33

actually talk to people and the

33:35

campaign’s increasingly didn’t talk to

33:38

them either they just needed people as

33:39

sort of stylized backdrops they were

33:41

there to be props basically in a

33:44

television show they were there to you

33:46

know if he needed somebody to to show

33:49

that he was sort of down with

33:51

construction workers or with the working

33:53

person they would have a bunch of people

33:55

in hard hats up on stage or the you know

33:57

they wanted to appeal the farmers they

33:59

would visit a farming town and you know

34:01

be photographed you know hugging a

34:03

farmer but they didn’t actually talk to

34:04

these people and the people in the press

34:09

started to fall into the trap also of

34:12

just using people for quotes we would

34:14

descend on mass into these towns we

34:17

would not really spend a whole lot of

34:18

time with them and then we would just

34:22

hustle them for quotes do you like this

34:24

/ Canada do you like that candidate

34:25

oftentimes we were looking for the

34:28

people in the crowd to say a certain

34:30

thing and we would search people out and

34:34

until they actually said the quote that

34:36

they were looking for – another very bad

34:38

practice that journalists do and people

34:40

of course they resented it and what

34:45

ended up happening was is that both

34:47

politicians and the media started to

34:50

lose touch with actual people and they

34:53

increasingly relied upon each other

34:56

especially upon pollsters to sort of

34:58

take the temperature of the people out

35:00

there and if you’ve ever traveled in in

35:03

a campaign it’s actually like it’s

35:05

literally a prison once the Secret

35:07

Service gets involved you can’t leave

35:10

the group after the general election

35:13

campaign starts because security is so

35:16

tight I would bet back in my first

35:18

campaigns I was a pretty heavy smoker

35:20

back that I’m not anymore but you

35:22

actually had to get what they called

35:24

Sherpas to leave there were like people

35:27

who carried bags for the campaign’s they

35:29

would leave the group to go to stores

35:31

and get cigarettes and other supplies

35:33

for people because you’re so cut off

35:35

from the actual voters that you can’t

35:39

leave the group and so you lose touch

35:42

with what’s going on you and what

35:43

happened is over over in decades not

35:47

only do you do you lose touch with what

35:50

people are thinking but you lose touch

35:51

with the ability to talk to people and

35:53

to understand the cues that they’re

35:55

saying and to learn for instance people

36:00

would would start to rely on polls to

36:02

tell them whether or not

36:04

voters liked or disliked this or that

36:06

candidate what polls can’t tell you the

36:08

difference between say you know rage and

36:10

mere disapproval they’re they’re able to

36:14

tell you that people are drifting them

36:16

one way or the other but until you get

36:17

that qualitative experience of sitting

36:19

down with people and really

36:20

understanding what their frustrations

36:22

are you’re just going to miss what’s

36:24

actually going on um and so Trump he

36:28

took advantage of all this he took

36:30

advantage of the fact that we were out

36:31

of touch and he used that again to help

36:36

solve his own problems what he started

36:38

to do was he started to incorporate the

36:40

press into his act I remember being in

36:44

at Plymouth State University in New

36:46

Hampshire and Trump you as it usually

36:49

happens is there’s like a Arizer in the

36:52

middle of the hall and there’s a bunch

36:54

of reporters and camera people and we’re

36:57

stuck behind ropes like zoo animals in

37:00

the middle of the crowd and Trump he

37:03

started to experiment with mentioning us

37:05

in the middle of his speeches and he

37:07

would say things like look at these

37:08

people look at these

37:09

suckers they hate me they never thought

37:13

I would make it this far they’ve never

37:15

traveled so far for an event look at

37:17

them they hate you you know and what

37:20

would happen over time was his rhetoric

37:22

became more and more aggressive and

37:25

crowds would start to physically turn

37:27

towards the the media during his

37:30

presentations and it would hiss and Boo

37:33

and sometimes even throw stuff and you

37:34

know occasionally like you little

37:36

scuffles broke out and it got a little

37:39

bit dangerous in there and you know on

37:42

one level it was horrible and terrifying

37:44

because it evokes images of a lot of

37:46

sort of fascistic techniques from other

37:51

sort of strongman type politicians but

37:54

on the other hand he was also using a

37:57

sort of a WWE style method of turning

38:03

what had been a sort of supernaturally

38:05

boring phenomenon which is the

38:08

presidential stump speech to just you

38:10

know if anybody has ever been to one if

38:12

you can survive one that’s amazing but

38:15

you know for the press corps to be able

38:16

to listen to the same speech 50 or 60

38:19

times like we do I used to have a

38:22

numbered cliche system I heard one

38:26

candidate’s cliches so often that I knew

38:28

the top 20 by heart and instead of

38:32

writing down notes from his speeches I

38:34

would just have collections of numbers

38:36

it would be like 3 8 15 11 you know and

38:42

so Trump took this this terrible boring

38:45

format and he turned it into this

38:47

intimate menacing real physical

38:53

experience where the representative of

38:57

the hated establishment was literally in

38:59

the room and that was us and again a lot

39:04

of this this was this was years of the

39:08

press gradually losing its ability to

39:10

talk to ordinary people had turned

39:12

around and allowed this fatuous New York

39:15

billionaire to sell himself as closer to

39:18

the common man

39:19

and then reporters and and when I talked

39:23

to people who were at Trump crowds I

39:25

would ask them you know why do you what

39:29

do you feel this way or that way why do

39:30

you like this guy and they would say

39:32

well he’s real he’s not reading from a

39:34

script’ which was true you know unlike

39:36

the other you know the numbered cliches

39:38

Trump literally couldn’t keep it would

39:41

pass out his speeches but the text of

39:45

what was supposed to be his speech and

39:47

he would deviate from it in the second

39:49

word because he is the attention span

39:51

and so it’s so short that he couldn’t he

39:54

couldn’t read actual prepared remarks

39:56

people would say things to me like he’s

39:59

real and you people aren’t you know I

40:02

remember one guy in Washington Wisconsin

40:03

saying to me you know I’m going to clean

40:07

up his his speech here a little bit but

40:09

he says basically you jerks were always

40:12

trying to tell us how to live our lives

40:14

but you can’t change a goddamn oil

40:15

filter and you know he was right you’re

40:19

sort of right you know the the people

40:21

who represent the press corps tend to be

40:24

the suit of a feat again rich for the

40:27

most part because we’re you know the

40:29

people who are there they have to be in

40:31

order to in order to afford the trip

40:32

they have to come from a certain class

40:34

they’re almost all from New York

40:37

Washington and LA they went to the best

40:40

schools and they have a certain attitude

40:42

towards life and and Trump used that and

40:47

he used that to sort of bridge the gap

40:48

between himself and ordinary people and

40:51

so the last thing I want to talk about

40:52

is is sort of the appropriation of

40:56

bogeymen Trump did something that was

40:58

really strange but interesting the

41:01

traditional method of winning elections

41:02

in this country is you get up in front

41:05

of a group of people you say to them you

41:07

know I know you’ve had it hard in the

41:09

last four or five years and I’m going to

41:11

tell you who to blame and then X Y Z and

41:15

then a B and C they’re all there they’re

41:17

to blame for your troubles and you know

41:19

don’t don’t we hate them and that was

41:22

that’s sort of the traditional format of

41:24

a campaign speech the only difference is

41:26

that they’re a different bogeyman on the

41:29

Republican side and on the Democratic

41:30

side on the Republican side

41:33

the the villains tend to be immigrants

41:36

you know welfare moms liberal professors

41:39

terrorists they actually have a very

41:41

long list of villains on the other side

41:43

you know on the Democratic side it’s

41:46

it’s a little bit smarter and a little

41:48

bit more sophisticated it’s it’s

41:50

corporations it’s it’s health insurance

41:52

companies etc etc and what’s interesting

41:56

is that the traditional candidate never

41:57

crossed lines that you you know if you

42:00

were either used one group of villains

42:01

or another group of villains Trump just

42:03

gobbled up all of them he’s just he’s so

42:07

omnivorous in in his sort of the way he

42:12

approaches life in every way that he

42:15

used both lists you know he would go to

42:17

every crowd and he was all things to all

42:19

people at all times I’m against the

42:21

corporations I’m against Goldman Sachs

42:23

I’m against immigrants and against this

42:24

and that and the other and whatever you

42:27

hated Trump would eventually get around

42:30

to it in his speech and again the reason

42:33

that people didn’t do this in the past

42:34

traditionally is because the media would

42:36

say well look this is a contradiction

42:38

you can’t be this and that because those

42:41

two things don’t really go together but

42:43

Trump was tuned into the fact that the

42:48

people had tuned us out they had stopped

42:50

listening to us and that you know all of

42:52

us sort of News reporters who love to

42:56

correct people spelling on Twitter and

42:58

you know or just didn’t know how to fix

43:00

cars that what we thought about what we

43:03

know his his politics didn’t really

43:04

matter anymore

43:05

and his ability to sort of continue to

43:09

continually survive the negative

43:14

editorializing of the press and our

43:16

attempts to sort of bounce him out of

43:17

the race through this or seal of death

43:19

episodes which increased in frequency as

43:22

the campaign went along and as as

43:25

reporters became more and more aware of

43:27

their role their financial role in

43:29

helping Trump win but we we became more

43:31

cognizant of it you heard of things like

43:33

les Moonves with CBS everybody here this

43:36

you know these famously said Trump is

43:38

bad for America but good for business

43:41

you know as as that kind of spread in

43:45

press we became more and more aggressive

43:49

in our in our editorial stance towards

43:51

Trump and that just worked to his

43:54

advantage the the meaner we got Trump

43:57

has this uncanny ability to turn

43:59

everybody in his orbit into another

44:01

pro-wrestling character and when he gets

44:05

up there and he says that where we were

44:06

the opposition after a while it actually

44:09

turned out to be a little bit true we

44:11

you know he he cartoon eyes his own

44:13

opposition he eventually gets everybody

44:16

to sort of lower themselves you think

44:19

about you know Rubio making sort of dong

44:24

jokes during the middle of the debates

44:27

or you know people throwing water at

44:29

each other and Ted Ted Cruz started

44:32

acting like a ham during debate doing

44:35

impersonations from The Princess Bride

44:37

and and Ron Paul was chained selling

44:40

things in half and shooting the tax code

44:42

and everybody starts acting like a

44:45

reality star when they’re around Trump

44:47

long enough and and we were like that

44:50

too in the news media and what ends up

44:53

happening was that the symbiotic

44:57

relationship started occurring where we

45:01

paid more and more attention to them

45:02

even even though even though the things

45:05

we were saying about them were negative

45:06

we never took the cameras off of him

45:07

fret for a second and we still haven’t

45:09

and what is the end result of that

45:12

here’s some striking statistics sense

45:15

the since the election in November cable

45:21

news ratings are up 50% at CNN they’re

45:27

up 50% at Fox they’re up over 35% at

45:30

MSNBC and some programs are up higher

45:32

than that on that channel CNN expects to

45:36

make over a billion dollars this year in

45:38

profits and again what what starts to

45:42

happen after a while is that

45:45

unconsciously this the fact that he’s

45:48

making everybody so much money and make

45:50

no mistake about it it’s the fact that

45:52

that politics has begun to eat into the

45:55

entertainment world

45:57

and the the profitability of

45:59

entertainment and we’re taking some of

46:01

Hollywood’s market share by creating

46:04

politics as this giant reality show

46:09

unconsciously the people who are

46:10

covering Donald Trump whether they know

46:12

it or not they legitimize it the whole

46:14

thing and that’s why you’ll see periodic

46:16

episodes like you know he gives that

46:18

speech after the joint speech to

46:20

Congress and and there’s a you know CNN

46:24

will say you know he became president in

46:26

the United States tonight or that

46:28

happens after he lobs missiles you know

46:30

Tomahawk missiles that Syria you know

46:33

Fareed Zakaria will get up and say

46:34

exactly the same thing you know Donald

46:36

Trump became President of the United

46:37

States tonight and this is a company

46:39

that’s making a billion dollars this

46:41

year because of Donald Trump and so it’s

46:43

just a symbiotic relationship this had

46:49

been going on for a long time

46:50

it with this sort of synthesis of all

46:53

these different things the the the

46:55

collapse and Trust in news media the

46:56

declining profitability of news media

46:58

which was suddenly turned around by this

47:01

candidate who suddenly made money for

47:03

everybody nobody could make money for

47:05

for a longest time and then suddenly

47:07

everybody’s making money you have to

47:09

think about this when you think about

47:11

how politics is covered in this country

47:12

and it’s not just Trump that’s that’s

47:17

you know so my final word of caution

47:20

would be that the network’s have learned

47:23

and a lot of us in the business started

47:26

to talk about this last year that that

47:29

you know what Trump does his total

47:32

indifference to whether a thing is true

47:34

or not and the fact that he knows that

47:37

his his core supporters don’t really

47:39

care all that much the network’s have

47:41

also learned that lesson two in the last

47:44

year or so they knows we sort of by

47:48

custom and because of the libel laws

47:50

which don’t you know are incredibly weak

47:52

in this country and and really don’t

47:54

apply all that much the public figures

47:57

you know by custom we we we we try very

48:01

very hard to get things right and to not

48:03

be careless about citing sources that

48:05

aren’t reliable

48:05

that sort of thing but in the age of

48:07

Trump that’s really it’s starting to go

48:09

out the window everywhere and you know

48:13

it just as a sort of general warning I

48:14

would say again this whole phenomenon of

48:19

Trump and how he sort of unlocked he’s

48:23

converted politics into a show that has

48:28

implications that go beyond Donald Trump

48:30

as well I think everybody should just be

48:31

aware that this is a phenomenon that has

48:34

negatively impacted the entire business

48:37

and everything that was bad about

48:40

for-profit media in the past has gotten

48:44

exponentially worse in the last year and

48:47

you can expect you know going forward

48:51

that we’ll see we’ll see less and less

48:52

coverage of you know actual things that

48:55

matter you know environmental issues you

48:58

know if corruption and contracting in

49:01

the military disasters like flint you

49:06

know those things will get less and less

49:07

airtime and what will we get instead is

49:09

a very heavily polarized media landscape

49:15

where there’s one set of viewers that

49:17

hates this politician and one set of

49:19

viewers that hates another politician

49:20

and they’re all going to they’re all

49:22

going to tune in and watch and the

49:24

standards are going to go out the window

49:26

so it’s just in some I would just say

49:28

just be careful you know not without

49:31

commenting on any particular story that

49:34

the arc of the sort of failure of our

49:37

business has has really steepen in the

49:40

last year or so and I think as news

49:42

consumers people should pay more and

49:44

more attention to independent media and

49:46

alternative media and worry more and

49:49

more about the commercial media going

49:50

forward and thank you very much and I

49:52

would love to talk

49:53

[Music]

49:59

[Applause]

49:59

[Music]

50:02

[Applause]

50:07

so if you have questions please come

50:11

this way and we’ll do a line back that

50:13

way thank you I mean amazing talk I was

50:16

wondering if you could talk about some

50:18

of the unseen kind of new levels of

50:22

thought control such as Cambridge

50:26

analytical and how Trump used data

50:29

mining how that’s even a bigger climate

50:33

that were it right now and how that’s

50:35

affecting us jump using data might mean

50:37

all the candidates use data mining I

50:38

mean I I think that’s you know without

50:43

knowing exactly that exact thing but I

50:48

know that that was a phenomenon that

50:50

dated back to the Kerry the first Kerry

50:54

Bush campaign that was when that first

50:55

really started and I think it’s

51:00

worrisome I think the whole idea of

51:04

targeting shaping a candidate’s policies

51:09

based on the on your on the research

51:12

that you do into people searching habits

51:14

I think that’s going to be something

51:14

that’s more and more true going forward

51:16

they’re going to be able to target

51:17

political advertising the people based

51:19

on what they search for and on the web

51:22

and all that’s incredibly disturbing I

51:25

you know in the same way that they’re

51:27

they’re selling that data to to

51:30

prospective employers so they get

51:31

they’re going to be able to tell what

51:32

you what websites you look at the idea

51:36

of politicians being able to look at is

51:37

just horrifying

51:39

and I think yeah that’s definitely

51:41

something to worry about

51:46

so I was just going to see if you agree

51:48

at this opinion and I think it presents

51:50

a problem and I’m wondering if you know

51:52

of a possible solution to it

51:55

but I like that you compared it to him

51:58

not competing with the other politicians

51:59

but the reality stars because when he

52:02

got primary to actually said that the

52:03

only way that Clinton could win is if

52:05

she changed her name to Hillary booboo

52:06

right and but the problem is I feel like

52:11

because it is so entertainment

52:13

centric that’s almost kind of like a lot

52:16

people like to compare like the Empire

52:18

of America

52:19

Rome but then it’s kind of glad it’s

52:20

gladiator kind of asked where I feel

52:23

like it’s it’s good that you we do have

52:26

these critiques and that you are

52:27

addressing this and I love it is

52:29

actually directed at the press even

52:30

though it says president on your book

52:32

but I think a lot people hook get on

52:34

Trump and try to analyze him as a person

52:36

instead of looking at the system that

52:38

created them because I feel like for him

52:39

it’s self-fulfilling he doesn’t have a

52:41

clue like he’s not right and essentially

52:43

doing this but as long as we’re giving

52:45

attention to it it’s like a growing

52:47

beast and and where’s where’s it going

52:49

to end like how do you stop that how do

52:51

you it’s a great question there’s a

52:52

couple things that are really

52:53

interesting you know that I’d love to

52:55

talk about here first though is that one

52:58

of the things that one of the huge

52:59

weaknesses of the political press in

53:01

this country is that we we always think

53:04

when we see a political phenomenon we

53:06

always imagine that it originates with

53:10

the politician right like just to give

53:12

you a classic example the Bernie Sanders

53:15

phenomenon wasn’t was all about Bernie

53:18

Sanders to Washington reporters right it

53:20

wasn’t it wasn’t 13 million people

53:22

expressing themselves and being upset

53:24

about you know the their feelings about

53:27

the Democratic Party it wasn’t this

53:29

organic thing that rose up from the

53:31

population it was because some you know

53:34

independent socialist backbencher jumped

53:38

the line and got you know and so they

53:40

that’s the way they like they always

53:41

look at the Washington character first

53:42

and they don’t look outward at the at

53:46

the actual people and then the larger

53:48

thing that’s going on

53:50

Trump is is horrible for for that

53:54

instinct because he he concentrates so

53:57

much attention on him and his person and

54:02

he deflects so much attention not only

54:04

from the system but from the larger

54:06

forces that are going on in the

54:08

population that everybody imagines that

54:10

Donald Trump is the only problem and not

54:12

that there have been you know growing

54:15

trend towards nativism and racism in

54:18

this in the population cetera et cetera

54:20

et cetera so the what the solution is I

54:24

think we just have to focus out more as

54:27

in the media we got to focus on systemic

54:29

problems more we got to talk to people

54:32

more and and make it less about the the

54:35

fairy tale soap opera which is the easy

54:39

way to do the story you know that and

54:41

that’s that’s why we do it because

54:42

that’s easy you know and so yeah I think

54:46

the what the solution is we just got to

54:48

do our jobs better and I don’t know how

54:50

that’s going to happen so if we assume

54:56

that the Trump’s the nominee in 2020

54:58

which he most likely will be barring

55:00

something serious like impeachment or

55:04

something like that if he is the nominee

55:05

and based on your experience what you’ve

55:08

seen

55:09

if this dynamic is still present where

55:11

he’s he’s he he is who he is he’s

55:14

gladiatorial what will be the formula

55:16

for the Democrats the counter that

55:17

should they have someone who’s also like

55:19

him or should they have someone who’s

55:22

who’s somehow a foil to him I mean based

55:25

on what you’ve seen what’s the answer

55:26

for the left in 2020

55:32

it’s a great question um see how what I

55:38

worry about is that is the I already

55:41

hear people in Washington talking about

55:43

this and saying that we have to get our

55:45

own version of Trump all right and we

55:48

have to get a media figure we got to get

55:51

you know whether it’s Dwayne the rock

55:54

Johnson or Mark Zuckerberg or whoever it

55:57

is right like we we need to go that

55:59

route and what’s interesting to me is

56:01

that they’ve already forgotten the

56:03

lessons I think of Barack Obama Barack

56:05

Obama is a diametrically opposite

56:07

character to Donald Trump he is someone

56:10

who prefers you know he’s reserved

56:13

polite he doesn’t act like a real

56:15

reality star he comports him even though

56:18

you know for me personally politically I

56:20

don’t agree with Obama life he’s been a

56:22

disappointment to me a lot of ways

56:23

style-wise he won by appealing I think

56:29

to people’s better imagination right and

56:33

what I see in Washington is a lot of

56:36

pessimism they don’t believe that that

56:39

you know finding a better way to

56:42

communicate with people that get it you

56:44

know telling people that they understand

56:47

what their problems are making a sincere

56:48

effort to find out why people are

56:50

disaffected I think that’s the easiest

56:52

route to winning you know is going out

56:54

and actually finding out what’s wrong

56:58

and coming up with solutions that people

56:59

can connect with you know and but you

57:03

won’t they won’t do that you know I

57:05

think they what they’re going to do is

57:07

they’re going to look at a lot of polls

57:08

and they’re going to they’re going to

57:09

look at the media media centric version

57:13

of how to win elections and they’re

57:15

going to try to do their own version I

57:16

think

57:22

hi so I started thinking about this a

57:25

couple days ago in terms of you know the

57:29

backlash if Trump continues to try and

57:32

dig his own grave and put his foot in

57:36

his mouth and all that other stuff

57:37

eventually things will start to roll

57:40

against him but there’s going to be a

57:43

backlash from that in terms of all the

57:45

people who support him and it’ll be like

57:46

you know why are you taking away my toy

57:48

and you know the that could be the media

57:52

that could be the Democratic Party that

57:53

could be the Republican Party and so you

57:55

might have a phenomenon where

57:56

everybody’s trying to be like no you and

57:59

Peacham I don’t want to impeach um you

58:00

impeach him you know so that they don’t

58:02

deal with that backlash and I’m

58:03

wondering if you see any signs of that

58:05

and how that would play out yeah I think

58:11

actually I would say that there’s not a

58:14

lot of hesitation about taking on Donald

58:17

Trump in Washington now anything I would

58:20

say that there’s sort of an opposite

58:21

problem which is that being against

58:24

Trump has become whatever the only thing

58:27

that a lot of politicians are about now

58:29

and I I think that the key to succeeding

58:34

going forward is they have to have some

58:35

other kind of messages in addition to

58:37

that politically going after Donald

58:39

Trump doesn’t seem to be anybody’s

58:40

problem and they’re the the knives are

58:42

out in full force right now for for

58:44

Trump and they’re gunning for

58:47

impeachment there’s no question about

58:48

that except for people like Mitch

58:49

McConnell well he’s a Republican first

58:51

well he is but but but in terms of like

58:54

I was kind of surprised about uh not

58:56

completely but you know cuz he’s trying

58:58

to control this thing

58:59

you know whoa look impeachment is a it’s

59:06

a very extreme step and and think think

59:11

about approving it for a member of your

59:13

own party and think about think about

59:16

doing it in this situation you know um

59:20

there’s a lot of political will to try

59:23

to end Donald Trump’s presidency right

59:24

now and it’s far harder than it’s been

59:26

for anybody since since Bill Clinton so

59:29

I wouldn’t say that that’s a problem I

59:31

think there going to be plenty of

59:32

candidates we’re going to want to play

59:33

that role of the person who took on

59:35

Donald Trump I mean they’re practically

59:37

stepping over each other to do it Warner

59:40

Schiff all these people that these

59:42

committee chairs are anxious to be that

59:45

person in front of the cameras oh

59:46

there’s political opportunity there the

59:49

the problem the problem that I see you

59:54

know I just I just worry that the palace

59:57

intrigue aspect of it is has occupied so

60:00

much of the Democrats time that they’re

60:02

they’re not paying attention to other

60:03

things Thanks hi thanks for great talk

60:11

the thing that I noticed about the two

60:15

sides of the bus the politicians in the

60:18

front and the reporters in back is that

60:21

there is a kind of underlying logic

60:23

which is a profit incentive in both

60:25

cases and to me that bespeaks the fact

60:30

that capitalism is something that feeds

60:32

off the systemic pathologies of

60:34

societies and right now it seems like

60:37

it’s gotten the point where it’s just

60:39

reached a level of death Drive and like

60:41

there something about the Trump

60:43

phenomenon that feels like it could

60:45

really just unleash some really

60:47

pathological forces in our society to

60:50

the point where the situation you’re

60:52

describing with the media is just one

60:53

component of a kind of embrace of sheer

60:55

irrationality and I feel or my question

60:59

for you is that whether you think some

61:01

kind of like deep and systemic

61:04

paradigmatic changes is called for as

61:07

part of what were yeah no I totally

61:10

agree I I I think one of the things that

61:15

I believe that one of the reasons that

61:18

Trump happened is because people are on

61:22

some level they’re screaming out for

61:24

something drastically different you know

61:26

and it’s it’s for a lot of people it’s

61:29

an inarticulate longing you know for a

61:32

new way to experience life and and I

61:34

think the sort of this is relentless

61:37

heartlessness of modern American you

61:40

know industrial capitalism and it’s it’s

61:43

a sort of really casual immorality and

61:47

and I think it’s tough for people you

61:49

know even if they don’t understand it

61:50

you know it and we need I think we need

61:54

something we need to at least have

61:55

somebody who’s capable of opening a

61:58

discussion of can we live another way in

62:01

this country you know and that question

62:04

has been suppressed at the at the

62:06

presidential level you know it’s not

62:08

really it hasn’t really been possible to

62:10

have that dialogue because words like

62:13

you know socialism is of course a taboo

62:15

bernie has made it less so but even you

62:17

know other ideas you know like you know

62:20

there’s a European you know guaranteed

62:22

income movement you know like these

62:24

really interesting thoughts they’re not

62:26

did we can entertain them because our

62:29

politics are so narrow and yeah I agree

62:32

with you and and and just to talk about

62:35

one thing about the media in terms of

62:37

capitalism for ages we insulated

62:41

ourselves from the profit motive problem

62:44

in media by having this sort of unspoken

62:48

understanding you know the FCC they

62:50

licensed out the airwaves to the PUC to

62:51

these private companies and there was a

62:54

there was an understanding that that

62:56

they would get to make all this money by

62:59

having these TV stations and radio

63:01

stations but in return they would have

63:03

to do something in the public interest

63:04

in terms of news so traditionally news

63:08

was a lost leader for four television

63:11

stations radio stations and they made

63:13

their money covering sports and

63:14

entertainment other stuff and they

63:16

didn’t worry about making money off the

63:17

news well that changed started changing

63:19

in the 80s and now you know this is what

63:23

you get when one news is all about

63:25

profits it just becomes insane you know

63:28

unfactual unobjective and you know it’s

63:31

I think it’s really disturbing Thanks

63:35

[Applause]

63:39

hi Matt I’m today on Netflix the

63:43

Rogerses movie debuted and up until

63:47

Trump who are justö was more or less a

63:50

husband how influential was he in the

63:54

2016 election sorry who the one

63:58

Rajasthan Rajasthan how influential is

64:01

he um my understanding of Roger stone is

64:07

that he’s a big talker who uh who has

64:13

less access to powerful people than he

64:16

has always claimed so I don’t know you

64:19

know Roger stone he was an advisor to

64:22

the Trump campaign he’s um

64:26

really not in position to really answer

64:29

that question very well you know

64:30

obviously he figures a lot in this this

64:32

Russia drama depending on who you talk

64:35

to but that’s just you know I I couldn’t

64:39

speak to it because I never haven’t

64:41

uncovered that story okay I have a part

64:43

to it this question if the media did not

64:48

cover Trump like they did because they

64:52

would concern with the ratings do you

64:55

think he would have gotten as far as you

64:57

did so that’s a great question but I

65:01

think it goes hand in hand with a couple

65:03

of things so if if we as had as a habit

65:07

did not have a for-profit media we would

65:11

have a different kind of audience

65:13

leading into 2016 we would have a more

65:15

thinking audience we would have a more

65:17

discerning audience you know Trump isn’t

65:20

something that happens overnight it

65:21

happens after decades of watching the

65:24

dumbest possible television and lowering

65:28

your attention span to half a second

65:34

and I think you know the fact that

65:37

nobody reads anymore and I mean the

65:41

ability to think critically about what

65:43

people are looking at is a phenomenon

65:45

that’s been that’s been degraded for

65:47

decades and if we if we had a different

65:50

kind of media dating back decades

65:52

there’s no way Donald Trump would win

65:54

because he was so plainly unsuited for

65:57

the job but he was perfectly suited for

66:00

what this actually was which is a

66:03

television show I mean and and and so if

66:06

we didn’t have that format he would

66:08

never have been successful thank you hi

66:16

hi so um what the person said earlier

66:20

about uh the Democrats opening their own

66:22

Trump I was thinking that too like he

66:25

maybe he’s gonna open his own franchises

66:26

like his University or something so

66:29

we’ll teach you

66:29

political hacking but um you were saying

66:34

stuff about being in the bullpen and

66:36

that he got the crowd to turn on you and

66:39

like all this up for the press in

66:40

general but despite all that I’ve

66:43

noticed you’re really objective about

66:46

this guy still like you’re able to look

66:48

at it from many sites like you don’t I

66:49

get the sense you don’t like Trump but

66:51

you know you can you can like kinda you

66:55

can kind of see through like his tactics

66:57

and like oh he’s like he’s like flipped

66:59

it around he’s like he figured out a

67:00

deal for these politics so if Paul if

67:04

politicians are actors is a Donald Trump

67:07

the greatest actor and can you respect

67:08

his hustle as an actor well that’s a

67:13

tough question I mean I find Trump

67:15

fascinating on a lot of levels and um

67:17

and and there’s a huge question

67:22

philosophical question with Trump which

67:24

is is it did you do this on purpose did

67:27

he did he intend to have all these

67:29

tactics work this way

67:31

or was it just a total accident of his

67:33

insane narcissistic personality that

67:35

just happened to fit like a glove into

67:38

the equally insane format of our

67:40

presidential system when and that’s the

67:43

form that’s the thing I leaned toward

67:44

but

67:46

you know I remember another New

67:48

Hampshire incident you probably all

67:51

remember it in Manchester when Trump

67:55

said there was a woman who stood up in

67:58

the crowd and said can I swear here she

68:02

sees he says Ted Cruz is a right

68:05

and and Trump looked at the woman and he

68:09

said oh that’s terrible what she said

68:10

that’s terrible and you shouldn’t you

68:12

shouldn’t have said that say it again

68:13

all right so so she says it again and

68:17

you know all of us in the media we’re

68:20

watching him and you could see him

68:21

thinking he’s he’s thinking if she says

68:25

it’s a six-hour story if I say it it’s a

68:27

four days story you know what I mean and

68:29

he he paused and he thought and then he

68:33

goes she just said Ted Cruz ooh

68:35

right and now there’s video right and it

68:39

Rockets around the internet and

68:40

obliterates everything else you know the

68:42

involved with the New Hampshire election

68:44

so Trump I think on some level he just

68:47

he can’t help himself like you know he

68:49

watches his tweeting habits and

68:50

everything there’s no way that this guy

68:52

is sitting there and calculating it’s a

68:54

good idea to tweet about Meryl Streep

68:56

and stuff like you know like no way but

68:58

he part of it you know he does have some

69:02

instincts that some of it is conscious

69:03

so I think it’s a mix of things like you

69:06

know you know as a reporter you have to

69:08

resist the easy interpretation that X Y

69:11

or Z I think it can be all things you

69:13

know I think he’s crazy and an actor and

69:15

you know and a manipulator and all that

69:17

stuff so the bypassing disgusts you

69:19

or as fascinates you well it’s

69:23

disgusting clearly I mean no the the

69:25

it’s everything you wouldn’t want in a

69:28

politician but the you know on some

69:30

level if you read the book clearly early

69:34

in the campaign when I I thought I saw

69:36

Trump I thought his historical role was

69:40

going to be that he was going to destroy

69:41

the Republican Party because it seemed

69:44

pretty clear early and early on that he

69:47

was he was sort of steam rolling through

69:49

the whole process almost like a like a

69:52

classic farcical parody of everything

69:55

right and he made everybody who was on

69:56

stage with him

69:58

look more ridiculous than he was and on

70:01

some of them on a literary level it was

70:03

kind of perfect right it was a perfect

70:06

story and the fact that it was people

70:07

like Rubio and Jeb Bush and all those

70:11

people who were the victims of it kind

70:13

of didn’t make you feel so bad about it

70:14

I mean to me it made it a much funnier

70:17

story and then and then after the

70:19

nomination it took this incredibly dark

70:22

turn where it’s like this is actually

70:24

going to happen and he’s going to get

70:26

elected and when that started to happen

70:30

you know that it stopped being funny and

70:32

then it started to be like insane and

70:34

crazy and terrifying and and you know I

70:37

think that’s where we are right now so I

70:40

had I had different feelings about it

70:43

the whole way through I thought I would

70:45

imagine everybody did great did you uh

70:48

I thought the longer he was in the race

70:50

more likely he was going to win and that

70:53

was even when he was with Hillary right

70:56

so it’s like okay it’s like one week so

70:59

he’s probably gonna win right at this

71:00

point right right excellent

71:02

excellent well you it was a good good

71:04

job thanks Matt I really thought I was

71:10

excellent I might take a different kind

71:12

of direction on this uh when I hear you

71:14

discussing this issue first of all the

71:17

idea of focusing not on the incident but

71:18

the context but I guess the context of

71:21

your profession in particular like the

71:22

fact that you’re a magazine writer and

71:24

at a news writer enables you to engage

71:28

more of your critical thinking

71:29

facilities than other people might be

71:31

able to I think we all have recognized

71:33

that we make poor decisions when we’re

71:34

rushed but given that like I mean like

71:37

right now I’m a professor and I have

71:38

many students who want their papers

71:41

immediately more they’d rather their

71:44

papers be done quickly than accurately

71:46

right given that we’re all rushed for

71:48

time what is the hope for your

71:50

profession is there hope because it

71:52

seemed like there’s a positive feedback

71:53

loop that you point to being a problem

71:55

is there a point where that just the

71:57

human body cannot take any longer or do

72:00

we you know stand in the ruins of

72:01

democracy before then

72:03

Wow that’s a great question and a scary

72:07

one no I I’m really worried about it

72:10

because um you know it’s this is this

72:13

has been a problem going back in our

72:15

business for decades and it started off

72:18

really I would say in the mid 80s and

72:21

early 90s and what started off with

72:24

seemingly small problems like the

72:26

appearance of free alternative

72:29

newspapers right and we started to give

72:32

give gift papers away then the internet

72:35

came along and people got their ads from

72:38

you know they didn’t have to go to buy

72:40

the Village Voice anymore to find to get

72:43

an apartment or put up a want ad they

72:45

could just go on the internet so that

72:46

depleted massively depleted the income

72:50

streams of alternative media and what

72:53

was the first thing that newspapers cut

72:55

when they stopped making a lot of money

72:57

they stopped they cut the people who

72:59

only spent who worked five or six weeks

73:03

on one story right the first thing they

73:05

cut was investigative reporting the

73:07

second thing they cut was fact-checking

73:09

right and so you know in the old days

73:13

you would have things like the

73:14

Cincinnati Enquirer doing a ten-part

73:16

series on the Chiquita banana company

73:18

right and they would send these two

73:19

reporters down to South America and they

73:22

would they would you know they would be

73:24

very well funded to do these long

73:26

investigations and and people were were

73:30

psyched for that kind of stuff they had

73:31

an app but the public had an appetite

73:32

for that kind of reporting well now you

73:35

two things would happen number one the

73:37

audience’s don’t have the attention span

73:38

to devour four and five thousand more

73:41

piece articles about things they’re

73:44

consuming tweets right and the other

73:47

thing is that the companies have found

73:49

out that they don’t need to do that to

73:50

make money you know so they they’re

73:52

they’ve invested all their money in

73:54

graphics and presentation and and the

73:58

content gets smaller and smaller and and

74:01

less weighty all the time and so there’s

74:04

no investigations there’s no critical

74:06

thinking there’s no reflection

74:08

it’s just reactive and it’s become like

74:10

this animalistic thing almost right and

74:13

I really worry about that because not

74:15

not only are you not getting good

74:16

reporting but you’re also training your

74:18

audience right to be rushed like that

74:22

right and and and you sure you see it

74:25

kids come up now they just they just

74:28

don’t have the the stomach to read

74:31

through long things anymore and I think

74:34

it’s a serious problem and I don’t know

74:36

how to fix it do you have an idea I mean

74:38

I you know I I mean I guess in general

74:40

it just seems like like speed is kind of

74:42

the enemy of democracy although we seem

74:44

to love speed so much I don’t know

74:46

myself except I just refuse to acquiesce

74:48

sometimes and right right throw sand in

74:51

the gears I think is a common popular

74:53

way to scribe it yeah no I mean I I wish

74:56

there was some way to do it but yeah I

74:59

think it’s you’re absolutely right speed

75:00

is a huge problem with us in Trump with

75:02

Trump again Trump was perfect for this

75:04

because you had to check Twitter every

75:06

ten seconds to see what he was up to he

75:09

was that he’s the perfect futuristic

75:11

speed candidate right like you know you

75:13

could be high on something at 4:00 in

75:14

the morning and he’d be changing doing

75:16

something you know he’s yeah it’s it’s

75:20

it’s very bad thank you good evening

75:26

Matt thanks for the talk tonight a

75:29

couple of observations maybe from you

75:32

can we agree that probably we don’t this

75:36

des gentleman before me the only one who

75:38

use the word all night but a democracy

75:42

and can we agree that we it’s a myth

75:45

probably in the United States it

75:47

probably more closer we live in a

75:48

corporate fascist state the way you win

75:52

elections also it seems to me is whether

75:54

it’s Republican or Democrat you want the

75:56

fewest people to turn out right and in

75:59

the end result was that maybe there was

76:00

52 or 54 percent of people that voted

76:03

for president which means that the man

76:05

at one got probably 25% of the total

76:08

vote yeah no it’s it’s ridiculous

76:12

yeah I know I agree with the quite

76:14

otally agree the wait the way we elect

76:17

presidents in this country has nothing

76:18

to do with democracy it has nothing to

76:20

do with it’s you know it’s a very

76:23

strange process then and

76:28

in the degree to which people are not

76:31

concerned with the lack of turnout you

76:34

know and and aren’t horrified that that

76:38

that neither you know beats both of the

76:41

candidates you know by factor of two to

76:43

one other than Russia for a long time

76:46

and they used to use to be able to vote

76:47

for none of the above in elections and

76:50

in a couple of races that it actually

76:52

won and and you know that it’s this is

76:58

really the crazy thing is the Trump what

77:02

what Trump did last year was almost more

77:05

democratic than the other system which

77:06

is just we’re going to give two sort of

77:08

preordained sort of corporate-funded

77:10

parties the ability to choose between

77:14

you know to spend a billion dollars

77:16

apiece on on a couple of marketing

77:19

campaigns and people will get to choose

77:20

between one of those two things you know

77:22

that’s not terribly democratic either

77:24

and and yeah I worry about it sure hi my

77:30

question is that you said that Trump

77:32

brought out the polarization that’s been

77:35

happening do we have time to unify or is

77:40

it too far for that and Trump being

77:44

someone that I don’t I didn’t vote for

77:46

but if he were baby impeached behind him

77:49

is pence and then behind him is Ryan so

77:52

and I’m hard pressed to find a

77:54

politician that I can really believe in

77:56

regardless right right I mean it’s a

77:59

great question the one thing I would

78:03

worry about with the whole idea of

78:05

unifying is that these the campaigns in

78:07

general have just become so become so

78:10

aggressive that the idea of you know

78:15

Democrats and Republicans ever coming

78:18

together again on any you know or people

78:20

or the whole country feeling good about

78:22

anyone who could be President I just

78:24

don’t I don’t see that happening going

78:26

forward I think you’re going to have one

78:27

half of the country that’s just furious

78:28

and you know that the template of you

78:32

know started with Obama you know the

78:34

people were hysterical on the other side

78:36

and now and now we have this with Trump

78:38

and um you know

78:40

both both sides are in this militaristic

78:43

mode and hate each other hating each

78:45

other mode and I don’t know I don’t

78:46

think that’s good either

78:47

first I’ve just been asked to announce

78:49

that there’s there’s a couple people in

78:50

line but that’s the last couple

78:51

questions and then my question is that

78:53

as a big believer that government and

78:57

policy should be deeply engaging to the

78:58

broader public is there any opportunity

79:00

to pivot here when we have sort of what

79:02

seems like unprecedented public

79:04

attention to is there a way to keep that

79:06

without continuing to appeal to the

79:08

basest interest it’s a great question um

79:11

I

79:14

I thought the Sanders movement was

79:16

really amazing in a lot of ways because

79:19

Sanders also you know he was again kind

79:23

of opposite to all the things I was

79:24

talking about he he’s exactly what

79:28

reporters mean when they talk about

79:29

someone being unelectable right

79:31

he doesn’t look good on TV he’s got a

79:35

funny speaking style he’s a socialist

79:38

right and yet there was an outpouring of

79:43

support for him and when you when he

79:45

gave speeches he what did he talk about

79:47

he talked about inequality and you know

79:50

all these actual problems it was a you

79:52

know it was amazing to see America

79:55

actually tuned into this for a while um

79:58

and I thought that that was proof that

80:02

you know there there is the ability of

80:04

politicians to engage people on

80:05

something other than stupidity in this

80:08

country but you know you right now you

80:13

know it’s it’s hard to say I hope people

80:16

get the lessons from the Sanders thing

80:19

and say that you know being just sort of

80:23

an honest politician who makes an effort

80:26

to try to reach out to people that that

80:28

can be successful to you know is there

80:30

an opportunity for the media in

80:31

particular there to entertain more of

80:36

those discussions well if you look at

80:37

what happened with Bernie Sanders you’ll

80:38

see that even though you he and Trump

80:41

were very equivalent stories actually in

80:44

a lot of ways they were they were both

80:46

rebels within their own party who were

80:48

taking on the

80:49

or at their own party structure but

80:51

Trump got 23 times the amount of

80:53

television coverage of Bernie Sanders

80:55

you had phenomena like you know an empty

80:58

mic stand whoop you know cable even

81:01

MSNBC publishing you know showing people

81:06

waiting for Trump to speak whereas when

81:08

Sanders spoke he would they wouldn’t

81:10

keep the cameras on it for very long and

81:12

I think you know he was still considered

81:18

taboo in a lot of ways and I don’t think

81:20

they’re really past that yet so you know

81:23

I mm-hmm yeah yeah yeah exactly yeah

81:28

Trump’s I met you had some negative any

81:34

deservedly negative comments about the

81:37

mainstream media I’m most concerned

81:38

about the control of information what

81:41

people can get now I’m retired I’m kind

81:44

of in the position that you were in when

81:45

you were writing and you had weeks and

81:46

weeks and weeks to do I’m I can spend

81:48

hours right looking for things and I

81:51

know how to sift through things I’m a

81:53

scientist to begin with but I’m most

81:55

concerned huh what kind of science

81:57

environmental science excellent

82:05

so I’ve come across things on the

82:08

internet that like for instance not not

82:11

that I agree with everything he says

82:12

Lord Monckton

82:13

is a tremendous speaker it’s got

82:16

completely contrary information to what

82:19

everybody gets on the mainstream media

82:21

about climate change hmm and you don’t

82:24

get any debate about that you don’t see

82:26

any of that how do you what’s your

82:27

advice on the people on how to sift

82:30

through what’s on the Internet and to

82:33

find the good stuff so it’s really

82:35

really hard these days because because

82:39

the standards really aren’t good

82:41

anywhere anymore again as the business

82:45

because because we’ve had this huge

82:48

decline in profitability and then in the

82:49

news media for years fact-checking you

82:53

know have

82:54

it used to be in order to get anything

82:56

into print you had to go through this

82:58

whole very long process now that’s

83:00

completely gone for daily Daily News

83:03

writing for magazine writing it’s mostly

83:06

all gone you know it still exists in a

83:08

few places our magazine still has a

83:10

little bit of it but nowadays when

83:13

you’re trying to decide whether

83:15

somebody’s reputable news source or not

83:16

you’re mostly relying on whether or not

83:19

that person has a track record of caring

83:23

about whether or not they’re factual you

83:26

know the institutions themselves don’t

83:27

really have time anymore to try to catch

83:31

everything and they don’t they don’t

83:32

worry about it anymore as much as they

83:34

used to so um you know I I don’t I don’t

83:37

know what to advise you except to say

83:39

that academic journals are tend to be

83:42

more respectable people who will link to

83:46

a primary source you know that that’s

83:49

always a good sign but even things like

83:52

can be you know it’s I was talking about

83:54

this with the reporter the other day in

83:55

the old days when when a member of

83:59

Congress would cite something a fact in

84:01

a prepared remark we always felt good

84:03

about using that as a fact in a story

84:06

nowadays even even members of Congress

84:09

have no problem using unsourced material

84:11

when they when they give speeches and

84:13

and so there’s this epidemic of kind of

84:16

unverified stuff flying around and it’s

84:19

just become really really hard so that I

84:22

think the main piece of advice is just

84:23

to read a lot on every subject and just

84:26

try to see what the most common story is

84:28

you know just one more thing on on the

84:31

published books are the publishers still

84:34

doing the fact-checking publishers do do

84:37

fact-checking but um it’s not it’s not

84:42

it depends on the project let’s put it

84:44

that way there’s there’s a legal vet for

84:48

pretty much every book but the kind of

84:51

line by line thing that used to be

84:53

standard in this business and it like

84:58

you know I used to write these six and

84:59

seven thousand word features for Rolling

85:00

Stone and literally every line you know

85:03

the sky was blue this day they would

85:05

check you know was it blue that day

85:07

that doesn’t happen anymore in books

85:09

they’re mostly concerned about what can

85:10

we be sued for and you know what are the

85:15

major factual issues in this book and

85:17

let’s just check those out but they

85:18

don’t you know the little things you

85:20

know really depends on the publisher and

85:23

you know you can’t you can’t depend on

85:25

somebody being everything being vetted

85:28

anymore I really appreciate your

85:37

analysis of the corporate media and also

85:40

how it’s not actually just about Trump

85:43

about their these systemic problems of

85:45

anti-immigration

85:46

anti-immigrant and nationalism and so

85:50

I’m wondering is there a practical way

85:52

to look at is our profitability to

85:58

talking about immigrants and say Middle

86:00

Easterners who have had traditionally in

86:03

the media kind of like a one-dimensional

86:05

perspective is there a way to reap or

86:08

tray them in part because it can help

86:10

maybe go against that tie that has been

86:13

actually set by the media historically

86:15

that and is there a way to do that in a

86:19

profitable way to entice the corporate

86:22

corporate entities to be interested in

86:24

that um it’s a great question

86:27

unfortunately I would say that you know

86:30

clearly the model is hate sells and you

86:35

know discernment doesn’t and if you look

86:38

back at our recent history advertisers

86:42

are terrified of being seen as for

86:46

instance you know back in 2003 2004

86:50

the cable networks made enormous

86:51

enormous sums of money promoting the

86:54

Iraq war and there was literally zero

86:58

incentive for those companies to put a

87:01

halt to the you know Islamophobia to any

87:04

any of that that’s that’s never going to

87:07

be a moneymaker for the network’s you

87:09

know being being discerning you know I

87:12

would even say right now there’s a thing

87:15

about being anti Russian that that

87:18

you know you’re not going to find

87:20

anybody who is going to be willing to

87:24

kind of stand up and say hey you know

87:25

I’m pro-russian like that that’s that

87:27

there’s not going to be an incentive for

87:28

that I think some of the networks have

87:31

tried to do a better job of that in

87:34

their news coverage but that you know in

87:36

terms of a financial incentive you just

87:37

won’t find it unfortunately so a few

87:43

final words please support us this is

87:46

this place is dedicated independent

87:48

media and it is really fulfilling to us

87:51

to see all of you in this room and we

87:53

have sanctuary resist t-shirts everyone

87:56

needs one and we just really want to

87:58

thank Matt because you’re really a hero

88:00

in the movement right now and it’s so

88:02

important that you’re here

88:12

thank you soon