WEBVTT - Bob Woodward & Tina Brown: Affirmation vs. Information 0:00:05.600 --> 0:00:09.600 This has been one of the strangest political campaigns, certainly 0:00:09.680 --> 0:00:13.600 in my lifetime, I would say in many lifetimes. And 0:00:13.640 --> 0:00:17.720 I think the media has really been doing recently a 0:00:17.720 --> 0:00:21.760 lot of naval gazing in the best possible way, looking 0:00:22.200 --> 0:00:26.120 at themselves and trying to figure out what they've done right, 0:00:26.280 --> 0:00:29.480 what they've done wrong, and how they've covered this campaign, 0:00:30.080 --> 0:00:35.280 this very unusual campaign, And both as a journalist and 0:00:35.360 --> 0:00:39.040 someone who consumes the news and information, I've been thinking 0:00:39.080 --> 0:00:42.400 about that a lot as well. Recently, I read an 0:00:42.479 --> 0:00:45.240 article in New York Magazine where one d and thirteen 0:00:45.320 --> 0:00:50.720 journalists were interviewed about all these issues, and the title 0:00:50.760 --> 0:00:54.480 of the article was the case against the Media by 0:00:54.560 --> 0:00:57.960 the media. So I'm not the only one asking all 0:00:58.000 --> 0:01:02.680 these questions. It seems as if journalists everywhere are doing 0:01:02.760 --> 0:01:08.520 some self examination about how the media has comported itself 0:01:09.040 --> 0:01:11.760 during the course of this election. And who better to 0:01:11.800 --> 0:01:16.319 talk about these issues than two veteran reporters, I would argue, 0:01:16.360 --> 0:01:19.920 and I think Brian Goldsmith might agree, my sidekick Brian, 0:01:20.880 --> 0:01:24.759 with two of the finest journalists of our generation, Bob 0:01:24.800 --> 0:01:28.679 Woodward and Tina brown Well, I definitely agree. These are 0:01:28.720 --> 0:01:32.880 two of the heroic characters in the history of journalism, 0:01:32.920 --> 0:01:36.080 not just journalism right now. Bob Woodward, of course, I 0:01:36.120 --> 0:01:39.520 think people have heard of half of the famous Woodward 0:01:39.520 --> 0:01:42.400 and Bernstein duo that helped to bring down Richard Nixon. 0:01:42.440 --> 0:01:46.360 He's written or co written eighteen best selling books, most famously, 0:01:46.400 --> 0:01:50.040 of course, all the presidents men. Tina Brown is probably 0:01:50.040 --> 0:01:53.880 a little less well known, but she's had just a 0:01:53.920 --> 0:01:58.080 story to a career. She was the editor of Tatler, 0:01:58.160 --> 0:02:02.400 the great British gossip rag. She then became, at the 0:02:02.440 --> 0:02:05.600 age of thirty, the editor of Vanity Fair and transformed 0:02:05.920 --> 0:02:08.760 that magazine into what you see today, and then became 0:02:08.840 --> 0:02:12.600 the first female editor of The New Yorker. She's founded 0:02:12.600 --> 0:02:15.280 The Daily Beast, she hosted a talk show, she wrote 0:02:15.280 --> 0:02:18.399 a best selling book on Princess Diana. She edited Newsweek. 0:02:18.480 --> 0:02:21.880 So we're really lucky to be joined today by these 0:02:21.880 --> 0:02:24.800 two great journalists to discuss the state of media in 0:02:24.840 --> 0:02:33.440 this crazy campaign. Bob and Tina. There has been so 0:02:33.520 --> 0:02:37.800 much handwringing over the way the media has been handling 0:02:38.120 --> 0:02:42.480 have been handling this election season, and I've often wondered, 0:02:43.080 --> 0:02:46.760 twenty years from now, how will journalism schools if in 0:02:46.840 --> 0:02:53.200 fact they still exist. Review the performance by journalists covering 0:02:53.240 --> 0:02:57.080 this campaign. Let me ask you straight out, Bob, what 0:02:57.120 --> 0:03:01.560 do you think have have we embarrassed ourselves or is 0:03:01.600 --> 0:03:07.400 it still a relatively noble profession. Well, I'll take a 0:03:07.480 --> 0:03:10.200 middle ground at first. I think there's been a lot 0:03:10.240 --> 0:03:13.800 of great campaign coverage at the Washington Post. We've done 0:03:13.800 --> 0:03:18.120 this book on Donald Trump at twenty people work on it. 0:03:18.720 --> 0:03:21.040 If if you read it, you will see I think 0:03:21.080 --> 0:03:25.919 it's the best exposition of who he is. He spent 0:03:26.000 --> 0:03:31.160 twenty hours with the reporters. It's it's tough, but it 0:03:31.240 --> 0:03:35.840 lets him have his say. We're working on Hillary Clinton 0:03:35.920 --> 0:03:38.560 in the same way. I think there's no book planned 0:03:38.640 --> 0:03:44.400 at this point. But for instance, today there was a 0:03:44.560 --> 0:03:48.800 terrific story that the Post did about how Bill Clinton 0:03:48.880 --> 0:03:55.840 got seventeen million dollars from this private for profit college 0:03:56.520 --> 0:04:02.520 while serving for five years is honorary chancellor. That's a 0:04:02.560 --> 0:04:06.880 lot of money he helped, There's no question about it. 0:04:07.080 --> 0:04:14.480 His name probably assisted in the recruitment of students and donors. 0:04:14.520 --> 0:04:18.520 But you see the convergence here of all of the 0:04:18.520 --> 0:04:25.919 Clinton enterprises, the personal fundraising, the speeches, the Clinton Foundation, 0:04:26.040 --> 0:04:32.120 the Global Initiative, and and now this for seventeen million 0:04:32.160 --> 0:04:35.960 dollars is not bad paved for five years work, which 0:04:37.040 --> 0:04:40.039 in no way was full time. Tina, what is your 0:04:40.120 --> 0:04:45.600 overall view of media coverage this go around. I do 0:04:45.680 --> 0:04:48.840 not think it has been a you know, a stellar 0:04:49.080 --> 0:04:51.840 journalism election in any sense. I do actually happen to 0:04:51.880 --> 0:04:55.000 agree with Bob that I think that the Washington Post 0:04:55.000 --> 0:04:57.360 coverage has been by far the best it has eating 0:04:57.360 --> 0:05:00.919 everyone's lunch on this particular cycle. The piece you mentioned 0:05:00.920 --> 0:05:03.640 today was was terrific. I will actually say, though, I 0:05:03.680 --> 0:05:06.240 think most of this coverage just seems very late to me. 0:05:06.320 --> 0:05:08.599 I mean, it seems to me that it's almost like 0:05:08.680 --> 0:05:11.880 journalists have have come so late to the stories that 0:05:11.920 --> 0:05:14.200 are obviously I mean, they shout in holler about the 0:05:14.240 --> 0:05:17.520 big sort of the big issues of dishonest demon darcy, 0:05:17.760 --> 0:05:19.480 but where the details in the rigor that sort of 0:05:19.560 --> 0:05:21.960 drills down. I mean, what was to me a gratifying 0:05:22.000 --> 0:05:24.479 thing about today's story in the Post was that actually 0:05:24.839 --> 0:05:27.320 there was drilling down into one thing that was a 0:05:27.320 --> 0:05:30.720 really very interesting thing, a new thing that people didn't know. 0:05:31.240 --> 0:05:33.400 I would argue that all these other stories about the 0:05:33.400 --> 0:05:35.560 Clinton most of them are so many of them are 0:05:35.560 --> 0:05:38.800 sort of innuendo and like massive drum rolling, and that 0:05:38.880 --> 0:05:42.239 turns out, I mean, nothing really there. That's what I resent, 0:05:42.400 --> 0:05:44.360 is the huge drum rolls for things that aren't really there. 0:05:44.360 --> 0:05:47.680 And on the other side, Trump just for so long 0:05:47.880 --> 0:05:50.080 just seemed to get away with absolute murder to the 0:05:50.120 --> 0:05:54.000 point that these uh sort of stereotypes were fixed very 0:05:54.080 --> 0:05:56.160 very early in people's minds. So it's, you know, it's 0:05:56.279 --> 0:06:00.560 the stereotype of of of Hillary being the narrative of 0:06:00.560 --> 0:06:03.680 her being dishonest was fixed so early in people's minds 0:06:03.720 --> 0:06:07.120 it doesn't seem to be shiftable. The other hand, Donald Trump, 0:06:07.360 --> 0:06:09.719 all the revelations about Trump have come so late in 0:06:09.760 --> 0:06:12.920 the day that he's got away with murder all his time. 0:06:13.040 --> 0:06:15.240 So it feels to me as if you know that 0:06:15.320 --> 0:06:18.320 the journalists are just not sometimes making more noise than 0:06:18.360 --> 0:06:22.880 they are forensic searching time. Okay, first of all, can 0:06:22.960 --> 0:06:28.960 I disagree Tina with that. The problem is so many 0:06:29.080 --> 0:06:32.360 of these stories I went back and looked at the 0:06:32.400 --> 0:06:36.880 stories the Post wrote about both Trump and Hillary. In 0:06:37.279 --> 0:06:41.560 the case of Hillary, going back toteen about the foundation 0:06:42.240 --> 0:06:46.679 about all of these things in one form or another. 0:06:47.480 --> 0:06:52.840 The difficulty is there's so much out there, a good story, uh, 0:06:52.920 --> 0:06:57.280 an important piece of the puzzle on either of these candidates. 0:06:57.560 --> 0:07:01.640 I mean, all about Trump University. We wrote about it, 0:07:01.760 --> 0:07:05.799 Steve Brill wrote about it in Time magazine. I remember 0:07:06.400 --> 0:07:10.119 last year being on one of the cable news shows saying, 0:07:10.160 --> 0:07:13.880 what about Trump University? And people just laughed, Oh, we 0:07:14.000 --> 0:07:16.920 know all about that. That's been in the New York Times. 0:07:16.920 --> 0:07:22.200 But it hasn't. And there has to be incremental coverage 0:07:22.280 --> 0:07:26.560 on these things to dig into them. But when you look, 0:07:27.280 --> 0:07:29.559 and I'm not going to borrow you with a list 0:07:29.640 --> 0:07:34.000 of the stories that ran, but when you really look, 0:07:34.280 --> 0:07:40.160 there was vast coverage about Hillary Clinton. You're right. Some 0:07:40.360 --> 0:07:44.640 of it is unfair, some of it contains innuendos that 0:07:44.800 --> 0:07:49.360 are not supported. At the same time, there is just 0:07:49.520 --> 0:07:55.120 a lot there on both of these candidates, and uh, 0:07:55.160 --> 0:07:59.960 I think it's not just overwhelmed journalists, it's overwhelmed the public. 0:08:00.440 --> 0:08:03.960 Well that that brings me to a question. It seems 0:08:04.040 --> 0:08:08.040 that a lot of these stories don't matter. Um. I 0:08:08.080 --> 0:08:11.840 think this sort of overarching narrative about dishonesty. I think 0:08:11.920 --> 0:08:15.120 that's what Tina was saying about innuendo, sort of a 0:08:15.200 --> 0:08:19.400 feeling about candidates. Is this thing that seems to have 0:08:19.640 --> 0:08:25.080 a residual impact, But these sort of detailed stories, I 0:08:25.080 --> 0:08:28.320 don't know. Is it the sheer volume of material that's 0:08:28.360 --> 0:08:31.880 being written about this campaign, or is it that people 0:08:31.960 --> 0:08:35.240 just don't really respect or trust the press anymore? Bob, 0:08:35.280 --> 0:08:38.880 I was looking at this number. Gallup reported that in 0:08:39.040 --> 0:08:42.680 nine seene seventy four, the year you helped bring down 0:08:42.679 --> 0:08:46.880 a president, sixty of the public trusted the media. Today 0:08:46.920 --> 0:08:51.240 that number is twenty percent. So is it volume? Is 0:08:51.280 --> 0:08:55.280 it trust? Why don't these stories seem to have a 0:08:55.480 --> 0:08:58.240 bigger impact. Well, one thing I feel strongly is it 0:08:58.559 --> 0:09:00.240 is the volume. That's one of the problems. I was 0:09:00.280 --> 0:09:03.040 just thinking the other day when you Katie interviewed Sarah 0:09:03.080 --> 0:09:06.600 Palin and she said she couldn't say a newspaper that 0:09:06.679 --> 0:09:11.200 she read. Her ignorance became such a kind of defining 0:09:11.280 --> 0:09:13.520 feature that it helped to bury her. It was one 0:09:13.559 --> 0:09:15.880 of the major things that helped to bury Sarah Palin 0:09:16.320 --> 0:09:18.320 when you compare it to the amount of ignorance that 0:09:18.360 --> 0:09:20.640 Donald Trump has shown in this election again and again 0:09:20.640 --> 0:09:24.040 and again in so many different venues. That hasn't stuck, 0:09:24.080 --> 0:09:26.920 and that hasn't defined him. Why is that? Is it? Because, 0:09:27.280 --> 0:09:30.000 as as Bob was saying, the volume, the very volume 0:09:30.040 --> 0:09:32.360 of the amount of stuff means that it's just not landing. 0:09:32.720 --> 0:09:36.520 Whereas when Sarah Palin went on that major news broadcast 0:09:36.559 --> 0:09:41.560 and said that thing, everybody saw it and everybody knew, well, 0:09:41.679 --> 0:09:45.120 what wasn't just that that Sarah Palin said? What? It 0:09:45.360 --> 0:09:48.560 was an important part of it. She said many other 0:09:48.720 --> 0:09:51.760 things too. I think, But so is Donald Trump, Bob, 0:09:51.800 --> 0:09:54.920 and it doesn't seem to be hurting him. Well, but 0:09:55.480 --> 0:10:01.400 the idea is there are let's face the facts here, 0:10:01.920 --> 0:10:04.720 and that is there are a lot of people who 0:10:04.800 --> 0:10:10.000 support Trump. Remember he's got forty percent of the people 0:10:10.080 --> 0:10:14.000 in the polls one way or another don't really care. 0:10:14.160 --> 0:10:16.960 I've talked to some of these people. They say, I 0:10:17.000 --> 0:10:21.200 don't really care that he doesn't understand this, or that 0:10:21.760 --> 0:10:25.160 he's going to be tough, he's a leader, they like 0:10:25.360 --> 0:10:28.680 his background and so forth. So it's not and you're 0:10:28.760 --> 0:10:34.400 you're posing it. Why doesn't that hurt him? Uh? Because 0:10:35.120 --> 0:10:38.840 many many you know, I don't know obviously the number, 0:10:38.920 --> 0:10:43.240 but I think the polling shows on this people uh 0:10:43.800 --> 0:10:51.800 really think this is Washington establishment. It's Democrats and Republicans 0:10:51.880 --> 0:10:57.840 who have alive themselves together in this kind of shadow establishment, 0:10:58.400 --> 0:11:01.800 and Trump is outside of it, and he's saying We're 0:11:01.840 --> 0:11:05.400 going to kick the hell out of it and people 0:11:05.480 --> 0:11:12.400 like that. So the details of what he knows are irrelevant. Now. 0:11:12.480 --> 0:11:16.800 The big question that's got to be addressed what would 0:11:16.840 --> 0:11:20.920 he do as president if he became president. My answer 0:11:21.000 --> 0:11:25.240 to that question is that I think we don't know, 0:11:26.040 --> 0:11:29.160 and in many ways I think he doesn't know himself. 0:11:30.000 --> 0:11:34.880 How scary is that fair point? But you know, people say, okay, 0:11:34.920 --> 0:11:38.880 well you can be practical you get in Uh. We know, 0:11:39.000 --> 0:11:43.240 politicians get in office and they've said all kinds of 0:11:43.280 --> 0:11:48.679 things and then they do something, Uh, the opposite most prominent. 0:11:48.760 --> 0:11:52.440 I hate to go back to Nixon in he said 0:11:52.559 --> 0:11:56.360 he had a secret plan to end the Vietnam War. 0:11:57.480 --> 0:12:01.040 Probably lots of people voted for him on the basis 0:12:01.080 --> 0:12:04.600 of that. I was in the US Navy then, and 0:12:04.840 --> 0:12:08.000 I voted for Nixon in sixty eight because I thought 0:12:08.480 --> 0:12:12.920 he had the best chance of getting us out of Vietnam. 0:12:13.000 --> 0:12:16.600 We look at the record, which is very clear now, Uh, 0:12:16.640 --> 0:12:20.120 he didn't get us out of Vietnam. He withdrew troops 0:12:20.160 --> 0:12:24.679 but he increased the bombing and certainly did not end 0:12:24.800 --> 0:12:28.160 the war. But Bob, to your point, it's striking to 0:12:28.240 --> 0:12:33.280 me that it isn't just about Trump not knowing particular details, 0:12:33.920 --> 0:12:37.280 like when you interviewed him and he seemed not to 0:12:37.320 --> 0:12:40.520 be clear about what Abraham Lincoln did, which was a 0:12:40.600 --> 0:12:44.640 very striking thing to me. Right, and if we should say, 0:12:44.679 --> 0:12:48.760 I mean what when we interviewed Trump a number of 0:12:48.760 --> 0:12:53.400 months ago and asked why was Lincoln successful? His answer 0:12:53.600 --> 0:12:58.240 was because he did some things that needed to be done. Well, uh, 0:13:00.480 --> 0:13:05.440 it was. It was baffling and jaw dropping. So so, 0:13:05.520 --> 0:13:07.320 but you know, if if Sarah Payton had said that, 0:13:07.360 --> 0:13:10.000 you know, my point is that, you know, why did 0:13:10.160 --> 0:13:12.280 why did it hurt Sarah Palin when she said she's 0:13:12.360 --> 0:13:15.360 could see Russia from her back door? Why did that 0:13:15.440 --> 0:13:19.280 hurt her so badly? But this comment about not even knowing, 0:13:19.520 --> 0:13:22.199 which show you didn't even know what Lincoln did. Nobody 0:13:22.240 --> 0:13:25.800 really didn't didn't boom around or anybody. Well, and Tina, 0:13:25.840 --> 0:13:29.040 it's to me it's more than that because Trump has 0:13:29.040 --> 0:13:32.120 gotten more pants on fire ratings from fact checkers than 0:13:32.200 --> 0:13:36.440 practically any candidate ever, And that too doesn't seem to 0:13:36.440 --> 0:13:40.720 be resonating as much. But also I think you have 0:13:40.840 --> 0:13:46.200 to factor in it's now six and Sarah Palin was 0:13:46.280 --> 0:13:50.000 eight years ago, and I think the whole media landscape 0:13:50.960 --> 0:13:56.120 has changed significantly just in that eight years. And there 0:13:56.160 --> 0:13:59.439 again to go. And it's not an excuse, it's an 0:13:59.480 --> 0:14:04.720 attempt a description. There is a volume of stuff that 0:14:04.920 --> 0:14:09.160 is staggering. If you are in the media business, you 0:14:09.240 --> 0:14:12.560 can't even follow it. May I also just say that 0:14:12.600 --> 0:14:16.600 I think that the universe has been created now with 0:14:16.679 --> 0:14:19.480 twenty years of Fox News has really come to roost. 0:14:19.520 --> 0:14:21.640 And I'm very interested to see them the National Review, 0:14:21.760 --> 0:14:25.400 the the right wing National Review, they're actually now started 0:14:25.400 --> 0:14:28.360 to come out against Fox and say it has created 0:14:28.400 --> 0:14:30.800 a universe which has been such an echo chamber for 0:14:30.920 --> 0:14:34.120 the Republican Party that they have become a cocoon universe 0:14:34.120 --> 0:14:37.040 in which Republicans could go on talk to themselves, talk 0:14:37.120 --> 0:14:39.520 to an audience that was strictly understood from their point 0:14:39.520 --> 0:14:41.920 of view of the world. And in a way that 0:14:41.920 --> 0:14:44.800 that volume of ignorance and cite the cycle of ignorance 0:14:44.840 --> 0:14:47.520 that the falsehoods and so forth that were put out 0:14:47.520 --> 0:14:50.920 constantly as facts has taken has taken the Land, you know, 0:14:51.000 --> 0:14:53.720 has actually borne fruit. And that's what we've got now, 0:14:53.800 --> 0:14:56.720 is isn't it isn't a less informed electorate because they're 0:14:56.800 --> 0:14:59.960 watching the silo, Tina. I don't think you can blame 0:15:00.040 --> 0:15:03.200 it on on Fox News. I think it's part of 0:15:03.240 --> 0:15:05.800 this story, part of the story. Yeah, of course it's 0:15:05.840 --> 0:15:07.760 not all of that fool But I do think it's 0:15:07.880 --> 0:15:10.160 made a difference to the Republican Party. Look, it's it's 0:15:10.560 --> 0:15:15.760 individual voters who say they don't like what's going on. 0:15:16.000 --> 0:15:21.840 They do not like this establishment in Washington and in politics. 0:15:21.920 --> 0:15:26.520 And somebody who talks tough and kicks a lot of 0:15:26.560 --> 0:15:32.080 sand and is not up on the details of all 0:15:32.200 --> 0:15:35.440 kinds of things and all kinds of history that doesn't 0:15:35.520 --> 0:15:38.280 matter to them. And I, you know, I don't know 0:15:38.960 --> 0:15:43.280 whether it's our job to sit in judgment of people. 0:15:43.520 --> 0:15:45.920 I think what we have people who are going to 0:15:46.040 --> 0:15:49.480 vote for Trump or vote for somebody else, but try 0:15:49.520 --> 0:15:57.680 to understand and then present who these people are in details. Well, 0:15:57.720 --> 0:15:59.680 I totally agree with that, in the sense that you know, 0:16:00.240 --> 0:16:03.240 there's every reason for people to be upset and disenfranchise. 0:16:03.280 --> 0:16:05.200 Has no doubt about that. I guess the question is 0:16:05.280 --> 0:16:09.560 much more is that why don't certain specific things make 0:16:09.600 --> 0:16:12.280 a difference. But we may be making a mistake in 0:16:12.440 --> 0:16:14.640 making this assumption that it isn't hurting him. It's clearly 0:16:14.720 --> 0:16:18.000 hurt him a lot with college educated white voters who 0:16:18.040 --> 0:16:21.480 are normally a pillar of the Republican coalition, who are 0:16:21.560 --> 0:16:24.240 leaning toward Clinton this time. It may be helping him 0:16:24.240 --> 0:16:28.320 with blue collar voters who historically voted more Democratic, but 0:16:28.400 --> 0:16:32.960 it's clearly having an effect in terms of the electorate 0:16:33.040 --> 0:16:38.800 that he's able to attract. We'll be right back after 0:16:38.880 --> 0:16:43.280 a quick break. What do you have to lose by 0:16:43.360 --> 0:16:56.440 trying something new like Trump? What worries you both most 0:16:56.520 --> 0:16:59.360 about the way journalism has changed. You've been in the 0:16:59.400 --> 0:17:03.760 business for a very long time, and uh as I have. 0:17:04.560 --> 0:17:07.919 And I'm curious what you think about the current state 0:17:08.040 --> 0:17:13.080 of journalism, because, yes, the sheer volume, it's hard for anything, 0:17:13.119 --> 0:17:17.880 I think, to attach itself any narrative, although Brian said 0:17:17.920 --> 0:17:21.760 it is having some kind of impact. But but we 0:17:21.920 --> 0:17:27.440 talked about volume, and also there's such fragmentation and niche 0:17:28.160 --> 0:17:31.760 viewing or niche readers, people who want to hear their 0:17:31.760 --> 0:17:34.360 own views reflected back at them. A friend of mine 0:17:34.400 --> 0:17:40.520 set people are seeking affirmation, not information. So what worries 0:17:40.560 --> 0:17:45.159 you most about what journalism has become acknowledging that some 0:17:45.320 --> 0:17:49.200 very good work is still being done. Bob, Well, first, 0:17:49.200 --> 0:17:52.239 it's also not just the volume. It's the pace, and 0:17:52.320 --> 0:17:57.960 it's Internet driven, and it reflects the impatience and speed 0:17:58.480 --> 0:18:02.520 of the internet. Tell me the headline, give it to 0:18:02.560 --> 0:18:07.159 me in a d forty characters. And so the whole 0:18:07.359 --> 0:18:15.320 technology of this has dumbed down the information transfer process 0:18:15.359 --> 0:18:20.359 to people. Instead of expecting a long article, uh, people 0:18:20.600 --> 0:18:25.119 expect something really short. It give give me the SoundBite, 0:18:25.160 --> 0:18:29.560 and you know yourselves when you do interviews, Uh, you know, 0:18:30.240 --> 0:18:35.040 give us the bottom line. And so that takes people 0:18:35.160 --> 0:18:40.159 away from an in depth understanding of things. Now that 0:18:40.480 --> 0:18:45.480 that can't be changed. That's a reality, and uh quite 0:18:45.640 --> 0:18:48.159 quite frankly, and I think we have to confront this. 0:18:48.760 --> 0:18:55.720 No one has found a way in television, radio, print media, 0:18:56.240 --> 0:19:01.480 anything else. Uh, you know, Buck, Roger, Dakota Rings. No 0:19:01.520 --> 0:19:04.919 one has found a way to connect the doubts in 0:19:04.960 --> 0:19:09.679 a way that makes sense, in a way that is 0:19:10.080 --> 0:19:13.840 of sufficient length or time that people will absorb it. 0:19:14.400 --> 0:19:17.280 I think that we should not underestimate the sheer impact 0:19:17.359 --> 0:19:20.920 is having on the professionals themselves, you know. I mean, 0:19:21.440 --> 0:19:25.120 one thing I think that is extremely dispiriting for journalists 0:19:25.240 --> 0:19:28.840 is the constant to your point, Bob, but the constant 0:19:28.840 --> 0:19:31.920 demands to keep filing, filing, filing, you know, posting five 0:19:31.960 --> 0:19:34.880 times a day, coming on Sunday and do Facebook live now, 0:19:34.960 --> 0:19:36.960 all of these things, you know the New York Times 0:19:37.000 --> 0:19:40.560 for insts. I know that journalists feel that as the 0:19:40.560 --> 0:19:42.800 newsroom shrinks, they're being asked to do more and more 0:19:42.840 --> 0:19:47.320 and more in regard to you know, short time consuming, 0:19:47.480 --> 0:19:50.560 time wasting. You could argue, you know, bursts of this 0:19:50.720 --> 0:19:53.760 and busts of that to feed the social media beasts 0:19:53.840 --> 0:19:56.000 that are out there demanding to be fed, to be fed. 0:19:56.280 --> 0:19:57.919 And of course it means that they can't get on 0:19:58.000 --> 0:20:00.119 with their story. I mean, they can't actually spend at 0:20:00.200 --> 0:20:02.600 time doing what you were just doing, returning the call 0:20:02.680 --> 0:20:04.479 from a source and sitting there on the phone for 0:20:04.480 --> 0:20:07.080 forty minutes and getting the story they've been pursuing. There too, 0:20:07.160 --> 0:20:08.960 busy out there having to do something down you know, 0:20:09.040 --> 0:20:11.720 Facebook live thing or whatever, which they have to keep 0:20:11.720 --> 0:20:13.880 doing to feed the beast. Well, let's get that terrible 0:20:13.920 --> 0:20:17.040 effect on the journalism because ultimately they're constantly filing before 0:20:17.080 --> 0:20:19.520 they're ready. And what is the Washington I was going 0:20:19.600 --> 0:20:22.520 to say, what is the Washington Post, though, Bob doing differently? 0:20:22.640 --> 0:20:27.240 You just mentioned rate piece that was done today. They're 0:20:27.320 --> 0:20:31.840 obviously Marty Baron, who's a great editor in chief and 0:20:32.160 --> 0:20:36.280 somebody who cares deeply about good journalism. What kind of 0:20:36.400 --> 0:20:39.639 environment is he establishing for people at the Post that 0:20:39.880 --> 0:20:44.440 is it really liberating them to do this kind of good, solid, important, 0:20:44.480 --> 0:20:50.800 critically important journalism. Like everything it it starts with the owner. 0:20:51.080 --> 0:20:56.000 And several years ago Jeff Bezos, the CEO of Amazon, 0:20:56.800 --> 0:21:01.240 bought the Post and it was a year ago was 0:21:01.320 --> 0:21:05.080 last October. I had a conversation with Bezos and we 0:21:05.080 --> 0:21:10.040 were talking about Nixon and uh Bezos said, could we 0:21:10.200 --> 0:21:14.919 have found out about Nixon before he became president? My 0:21:15.280 --> 0:21:17.919 answer is I don't think so, but we could have 0:21:18.000 --> 0:21:22.520 done more and better before he was elected. And so 0:21:22.880 --> 0:21:27.400 the owner, Maso said, Okay, what we need to do 0:21:27.760 --> 0:21:34.359 is make sure that we dig into the lives and backgrounds, 0:21:34.440 --> 0:21:40.000 do a full excavation of the two remaining candidates through 0:21:40.160 --> 0:21:45.359 after the primary process. And then he said, the editor, 0:21:45.480 --> 0:21:49.639 Marty Baron, will have he will have the resources to 0:21:49.760 --> 0:21:54.520 do this, and so the Post has hired lots of 0:21:54.840 --> 0:21:57.879 new reporters. I look at the front page or some 0:21:58.000 --> 0:22:00.800 of these stories, and I know none of the bye lines. 0:22:00.960 --> 0:22:03.719 I do not know who these people are, but they 0:22:04.240 --> 0:22:10.040 but they are fabulous reporters with experience with the patients 0:22:10.160 --> 0:22:16.920 to dig in and who understand what matters is incremental coverage. 0:22:16.960 --> 0:22:20.040 That you have to stick with the story, chase it 0:22:20.119 --> 0:22:26.920 to ground, and at the same time be aggressively nonpartisan. Uh, 0:22:27.320 --> 0:22:30.440 and to be as fair but tough as you can. 0:22:31.240 --> 0:22:33.280 What do you two make of the of the now 0:22:33.359 --> 0:22:37.159 infamous New York Times stat that Trump got two billion 0:22:37.200 --> 0:22:41.679 dollars in free media coverage during this campaign. He tweeted 0:22:41.720 --> 0:22:48.000 in July about the Milannia controversy, the plagiarism issue, that 0:22:48.080 --> 0:22:51.640 he believes that all press is good press. So by 0:22:51.640 --> 0:22:54.240 that standard, even if some of the two billion was negative, 0:22:54.840 --> 0:22:57.840 was that all helpful to him and propelling his rise? 0:22:58.200 --> 0:23:00.480 And let me just add to Brian's point by saying, 0:23:00.520 --> 0:23:03.680 New York Magazine interviewed a hundred and thirteen journalists, and 0:23:03.840 --> 0:23:09.240 eight said they believe the media created Donald Trump. So 0:23:09.280 --> 0:23:12.800 how much is the media to blame for the very 0:23:13.320 --> 0:23:16.199 fact that he is the Republican nominee for President of 0:23:16.200 --> 0:23:19.240 the United States. Well, I think a weakness of obviously 0:23:19.359 --> 0:23:23.920 of the entertainment driven nature of the time we live 0:23:23.960 --> 0:23:26.639 in means that Donald Trump is a heck of a 0:23:26.640 --> 0:23:28.760 lot more fun to cover than Hillry Clinton. You know, 0:23:28.840 --> 0:23:31.760 the fact is that that journalists cannot resist where the 0:23:31.800 --> 0:23:34.359 action is, if you like, and Trump was the action. 0:23:34.560 --> 0:23:37.960 And in that sense, I do think there was way 0:23:38.040 --> 0:23:40.959 way too much that without question, that he was allowed 0:23:41.040 --> 0:23:45.000 to go on there and blow hardaway and do interviews 0:23:45.040 --> 0:23:47.560 on the phone in the higher hour and a half 0:23:47.680 --> 0:23:52.040 rallies it's covered without interruption. That was insane. And you know, 0:23:52.119 --> 0:23:53.680 the fact is that there will be sort of one 0:23:53.760 --> 0:23:56.840 sort of slightly combative second question. He would blow blow 0:23:56.880 --> 0:23:58.720 steam and then you move on to your next question, 0:23:58.760 --> 0:24:01.879 instead of doing what should have been done on television, 0:24:01.880 --> 0:24:04.520 which is like the just refusing to let go. It's 0:24:04.560 --> 0:24:07.360 a lot harder to challenge somebody on the phone than 0:24:07.400 --> 0:24:09.520 it is face to face. It is, but there's also 0:24:09.560 --> 0:24:11.600 the question of the second follow up and the third 0:24:11.640 --> 0:24:13.760 follow up and the fourth follow up. We actually don't 0:24:13.840 --> 0:24:16.800 let somebody stop. You don't ask one question, you get 0:24:16.880 --> 0:24:18.920 a blow up answer, and then you try a second question, 0:24:18.960 --> 0:24:20.560 you get a blow fonser, and then you just move on. 0:24:20.960 --> 0:24:23.240 You have to stay with it. If I may say 0:24:23.320 --> 0:24:27.920 and challenge that a little bit, I think that, of 0:24:27.960 --> 0:24:32.040 course we should have done more. That's always the case. 0:24:32.720 --> 0:24:36.239 But it's the voters who created Donald Trump. Let's not 0:24:36.359 --> 0:24:41.400 kid ourselves. He was ahead in the polls, he almost 0:24:41.440 --> 0:24:45.399 from the beginning. If I recall, he won primary after 0:24:45.520 --> 0:24:49.040 primary after primary, and now he's the nominee of the 0:24:49.119 --> 0:24:53.520 Republican Party. So you have to cover that. That's our job, 0:24:54.040 --> 0:24:58.960 embedded in your right team. I mean, these rallies were 0:24:59.320 --> 0:25:02.959 expect to coals. I mean it was almost like the 0:25:03.080 --> 0:25:10.720 Roman color situation. Absolutely yeah. But you covered those and 0:25:10.760 --> 0:25:15.880 then people followed up and there was lots of examination, 0:25:16.040 --> 0:25:18.680 and if you put all the clips together, you would 0:25:18.680 --> 0:25:24.159 be astonished what you never even read or were aware of, 0:25:24.320 --> 0:25:27.119 because there's been so much. Well, I can remember certain 0:25:27.320 --> 0:25:30.520 really good critical moments where it did happen, like with 0:25:30.600 --> 0:25:33.760 Chris Matthews when he really nailed Trump about how when 0:25:33.760 --> 0:25:36.399 he said women who had abortion should be punished on 0:25:36.440 --> 0:25:39.159 his show, and he really was fabulous about that, and 0:25:39.359 --> 0:25:42.159 he really dressed and then Trump took it back. And 0:25:42.160 --> 0:25:44.879 then Trump took it back his mind. He said, oh no, 0:25:44.880 --> 0:25:49.600 no punishment, absolutely, But does I mean the Hillary Clinton 0:25:49.680 --> 0:25:52.560 partisans I know would say that it isn't just about 0:25:52.560 --> 0:25:54.920 the volume of coverage, it's about the tone of coverage, 0:25:54.960 --> 0:25:58.760 the kind of coverage. The Shorenstein Center put out a 0:25:58.800 --> 0:26:01.720 study that shows that Hillary got by far the most 0:26:01.760 --> 0:26:04.880 negative coverage of any candidate in either party. Trump got 0:26:04.920 --> 0:26:08.520 pretty raw ra coverage, at least at the beginning. Um, 0:26:08.640 --> 0:26:12.040 does the press need to be held account for the 0:26:12.080 --> 0:26:15.880 tone that they're striking. Some of the tone is has 0:26:15.960 --> 0:26:20.560