Editor's Note: This transcript was automatically transcribed, so mistakes are inevitable. You can contribute by proofreading the transcript or highlighting the mistakes. Sign up to be amongst the first contributors.
Support for this podcast and the following message come from the Glenn Lovett's new Caribbean Reserve expression, a new single malt with a bold tropical twist. Learn more at the Glenlivet dotcom 20-20 imported by the Glenlivet distilling company, New York, New York.
From WFYI in Philadelphia, I'm Terry Gross with Fresh Air. Today, Fox News, Donald Trump and how they've created a feedback loop of misinformation. We talk with Brian Stelter, author of the new book Hoax.
He says, For the past five years, he's had a front row seat to the Trump affiliation of Fox and the Fox affiliation of America. He also has great sources and spoke to hundreds of current and former Fox employees. Some of them are concerned that Fox has become a threat to American democracy. Brian Stelter is CNN's chief media correspondent and host of CNN's Sunday morning show Reliable Sources, which focuses on how the media covers the news.
He says he wrote the book because of the alarming ongoing attack on the very idea of a free and fair press in the new book Hoax, Donald Trump, Fox News and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth, my guest, Brian Stelter describes how Fox News provides talking points for President Trump and how Trump controls kind of parts of Fox News. Stelter is CNN's chief media correspondent and host CNN Sunday morning show Reliable Sources, which covers how the media is covering the news.
Before that, Stelter was a media reporter for The New York Times. In his new book, Stelter writes, Fox effectively produced the president's intelligence briefings and staffed the federal bureaucracy. Never before has a president promoted a single TV channel, asked the hosts for advice behind closed doors and demand it for them to be fired when they step out of line. The book is based in part on swelters interviews with more than 140 staffers at Fox, plus 180 former staffers and others with direct ties to the network.
He says some people who still work there told him Fox had become dangerous to democracy. Brian Stelter, welcome to Fresh Air. Let's start by talking about the Republican convention, and I'm going to start by saying we're recording this Monday morning. So as we record this, the convention hasn't yet started. To your knowledge, what role does Fox News want to play this week during the Republican convention?
Hmm. You know, Fox's ratings declined quite a bit during the Democratic convention. Many of Fox's viewers did not want to see Kamala Harris or Joe Biden. This week is a mirror image. This week of the ratings will be likely at record levels, even topping 2016, because FOX has become so closely associated with President Trump and many of the network's fans and Trump's fans don't trust any other source of news. This convention is a four night long Fox show, and it's a chance for the rest of America to see what Fox is talking about all year long the culture wars, the grievances, the sense of victimization and victimhood that permeates Fox's programming.
That's what we're seeing at this convention. But, you know, the the convention organizers have booked right wing Internet celebrities, GOP lawmakers who are regulars on FOX.
So what we are seeing at this convention is a reflection of what Fox is broadcasting every day of the year to get a sense of how influential Fox has been on Trump run through some of the people from the Fox News orbit who have become part of the Trump administration over the years.
There are dozens of examples of this revolving door, Terry. For example, John Bolton, a longtime Fox News commentator hired by Trump, thanks in part to Sean Hannity. And when it was time for Bolton to go, it was Tucker Carlson telling Trump to get rid of Bolton. You know, this is a cutthroat world between Fox and Trump, but oftentimes mutually beneficial. So Trump hires from Fox. He fires because of Fox. Someone like Hope Hicks, for example, worked on his campaign, joined the White House, then went to Fox and now she's back at the White House.
Name some other people from the Fox orbit who've been part of the Trump administration. I think some of the best examples are the behind the scenes individuals, for example, Bill Shine, who after Roger Ailes was forced out of Fox in 2016, became co president of Fox News. He was like a caretaker president for a while when it was his time to be exiled from Fox, Hannity started telling Trump to hire him. Trump did just that and made Bill Shine one of his communications gurus.
But you know how it is with the president. He gets tired of everybody. So eventually it was Shine's turn to go. He was given a cushy job over at the Trump campaign. What I find is that Fox and Trump, you know, they give each other soft landings. Fox is Trump's safe space. It's where he's not going to be humiliated, where he's not going to hear uncomfortable truths. He's not going to be called out for his lies and deception.
And in exchange, Trump takes care of his people.
You know, although he does stress out people like Hannity, he also praises them, rewards them with interviews and invites them to the White House, gives them a and then invite them to dinner. It's a cozy relationship like nothing we've seen in American history. There's just no example of this kind of alliance between a president and a media outlet ever before. Kellyanne Conway, who had been a regular Fox guest, became Trump's counselor to the president, she just announced that she's leaving after the convention to spend more time with family.
I don't know how you count this, but Kimberly Guilfoyle, who'd been on FOX, is now Don Jr.'s girlfriend. Yes, and a key surrogate, a key surrogate for the Trump 2020 campaign, Guilfoile is a great example of someone who saw power and sought out power in the Trump years.
I had sources say to me, you know, she'd be a raging liberal if it paid better. You know, there's a lot of figures at Fox that are kind of like blank slates and they go in the direction they think is going to be most profitable and most powerful. On the other hand, Kellyanne Conway, who, of course, ran Trump's 2016 campaign toward the end, you know, like a lot of people, she didn't think Trump was going to win.
And I was told that on Election Day in 2016, she was talking to Fox about maybe getting a job, about maybe getting a commentator job. Instead, she appears on Fox all the time, praising the president, sometimes trying to give him advice through the TV because his aides know one of the best ways to get through to him is through Fox. They try to get booked on certain shows on Fox in order to get their message across. We know that lobbyists and corporations do the same thing.
Sometimes they even buy ads just on FOX in Washington to get in front of the president. But what people don't realize is he usually fast forwards through the commercials, DVRs, a lot of stuff.
That's his only way to actually be able to watch so many hours of TV. You know, he watches most of the talk shows on Fox, but through the DVR, he can watch it at twice the speed.
There are also people from Fox who became part of the Trump team opposing his impeachment.
Who are some of those people? Yeah, this was essentially a Fox war room, you know, during the impeachment trial, you saw Ken Starr, of course, of the Clinton impeachment, who had been a paid Fox News contributor. He briefly left the network to go defend a Trump in the Senate. And there were also other figures like Robert Ray, who expressly credited Fox's Maria Bartiromo for, in essence, introducing him to the president. Ray said, You know, without you, Maria, I'm not sure I would have been a part of this.
And and that was true. The president would look at Fox, he would notice talent. He would say to his aides, I like that person. I like this person. I want them working for me. That's how, for example, he recruited Morgan Ortega, who was a State Department spokeswoman. He liked her appearances on TV. You say that Hannity at Fox News is known as the shadow chief of staff. What earned him that title? He was in touch and is to this day in touch with the president at all hours.
This is a relationship that is extraordinary because Trump shapes Hannity's show. Hannity advises the president on policy and personnel. And then at nine o'clock sharp, the president is watching Hannity deliver the talking points that they have already discussed sometimes after the show at 10:00. The two men talk on the phone again, review the show, talk about what worked and what didn't, talk about ideas for guests for the next day. You know, it's as if the president is a shadow producer and Hannity is a shadow chief of staff.
I think that, you know, we can argue whether that's a good or bad thing. Certainly, the president thinks it's a good thing to have the help of Sean Hannity, who has four or five million loyal viewers a night. But I think Hannity misleads and confuses the president all too often by obsessing over stories that are not that relevant or not that important or not that real. You know, Fox is great at making mountains out of molehills. Hannity is the best at it.
So when we see the president focusing on lawlessness in inner cities, talking about Portland or Seattle, talking about liberal anarchists, he's getting that straight from Hannity. And in effect, Hannity is distorting the president's view of the real America.
What has Hannity been saying to Trump that you know about regarding that and what has he been saying on the air? Well, a lot of the conversations between the two men and just for our listeners to be aware, you know, this is coming from friends of Hannity, colleagues of Hannity and from White House aides, all of whom were sources for this book. You know, the two men sometimes are talking about the personal lives, talking about, you know, things like golf and sports.
But at other times, they are talking about personnel and policy. They are talking, for example, about, you know, how to win re-election, what the what the strategy should be, what the main message is at the convention should be. Some of this is obvious on the air because Hannity is giving Trump ideas right there on the television. In other cases, though, it's more private. You know, it's advice. It's relayed more personally.
So what do you think Trump has picked up from Hannity about how, you know, the violence that you've seen from the anarchists and the leftists in cities like Portland that's coming to your suburb?
And the Trump ads say that the Trump ads show footage of demonstrations that turned to confrontations with police or where, you know, there were looters and just focuses in on that and basically says, if you don't elect me, if Biden wins, this is coming to your suburb.
And he said, like, the suburbs are going to be destroyed.
So or at least the ad has has said that. So is any of that. Do you think coming from Hannity? The president's law and order narrative is absolutely coming from Hannity, as well as Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham and others at Fox. This is a direct correlation, just as it was in twenty eighteen when the whole caravan's narrative started, we hear we all of a sudden heard about an invasion at the southern border. This was mostly made up, but it was televised on Fox.
The president picked it up, ran with it and tried to win in the midterms with it. Now what we're seeing, instead of an immigration invasion narrative, we're seeing this law and order narrative about lawlessness in America's cities.
Hannity and others do this by showing old video of protests, old video of looting, old video of fires. You know, sometimes they're showing videos three weeks old. But when you see it on your television, you kind of think it's happening now. It creates a sense of fear and anxiety. And the president consumes so much of this. And then, I would argue, spits it right back out on Twitter and in campaign commercials and in speeches. It's sometimes hard to know where Trump ends and where Hannity begins and vice versa.
One or two of your sources told you that Hannity has said that he thinks Trump is crazy. There was more of an expletive in there, so I'll leave that part out.
But so what did you hear about what Hannity really thinks of Trump? I think this is really important because I was learning this from numerous sources, friends of Hannity, associates of Hannity, who say that off the record, Hannity is complaining about Trump saying he's a crazy person. I'm a quote one of his colleagues, Hannity has said to me more than once, he's crazy. But, you know, Sean and these other stars of Fox, they're so committed to the business model, to their ratings, they want to make sure their viewers stay tuned so they'll never say so publicly.
They'll never call Trump out publicly. Yes, once in a while. You know, news anchor Chris Wallace and a few others at Fox do fact check the president. It makes a lot of news. It gets a lot of headlines, but that's because it's the exception that proves the rule. You know, if Hannity were to describe his true conversations with Trump, it would embarrass the president. It would hurt the president's reelection chances. And I think Hannity is is too, too committed to his own business model to to tell us what's going on.
Has Hannity's relationship with Trump boosted Hannity's power at Fox? Yes, in fact, I'm so glad you mentioned that, because I think it's an underappreciated aspect of this story, many stars at Fox looked around and saw getting aboard the so-called Trump train was the way to get ahead. Hannity, for example, was starting to lose relevance back in 2015 and 2016. Some of the executives at FOX openly talked about whether they should change his show, maybe give him a liberal co-host to make it more interesting.
So it kind of gotten stale and then came along Trump, the most interesting wildest story in the world. So Hannity very clearly saw that connecting to Trump, arguing on Trump's behalf, promoting Trump was the way forward. It was the way to gain an audience, the way to keep an audience away, to reinvent not not quite to reinvent himself, but to gain newfound relevance. And that's what happened all across Fox News. That's how the network has become Trump and Trump here over time.
You know, it didn't happen overnight. It didn't happen on one, you know, climactic day. This was a slow and steady, gradual takeover of a television network by an American president. I think Sean Hannity represents himself as a voice of the working white man. Is that a fair thing to say?
Yes, it definitely is a fair thing to say. So meanwhile, like Sean Hannity is so wealthy, describe some of the things that he has and how much money he makes.
You know, Hannity has become rich beyond belief, thanks to his right wing radio show and his right wing TV show, you know, first he was a radio star, then Roger Ailes plucked him from Atlanta, brought him to New York, put him on television, and now he's making thirty five forty forty five million dollars a year between radio and TV. Both are very lucrative gigs for him. Television at this point is the more profitable enterprise because he has four million viewers hanging on his every word at night.
That is real, incredible power. And it speaks to just how polarized the country has become every night. He tells his fans that the rest of the news is fake and you can't trust anybody but Trump and Hannity. You can't trust anything else. That's a very powerful and corrosive feedback loop. It has made him a very wealthy man. He flies his colleagues on his private plane. He has his helicopter, his Naples penthouse and his mansion on Long Island, where he has a studio in his home.
You know, I know these days with the pandemic, everybody's broadcasting from home, it seems like. But Hannity has been doing it for years. He even pretaped his show from home on the night Trump was impeached. To me, this was the biggest night of the year, the biggest news story last year. But he phoned it in. You know, he he knew he could get away with it because nobody of FOX is going to tell him what to do.
He really doesn't have a boss. And that's part of the problem at FOX.
You mentioned that Trump tries to use his power to silence people on Fox who point of view he doesn't like or no longer likes. An example you give of that is Judge Andrew Napolitano, who's been a regular commentator on FOX for for many years. But when the question of impeachment arose, he kind of stepped away from the Fox line about impeachment. And he said Trump has committed impeachable acts. So what did Trump do in response?
Napolitano is a fascinating figure because he told the truth about Trump. He said the president has committed crimes there on tape. He's admitted to crimes. He's committed impeachable conduct. And for saying that Napolitano was essentially exiled. He didn't get booked on TV much anymore. You know, he had a great relationship with Trump for decades, going back to the 80s when they when they met for the first time. Trump once told Napolitano, Everything I know about the Constitution I learned from you on Fox.
Imagine that Napolitano was both flattered, but also horrified by that comment. So they had a very friendly relationship. And Trump even talked with the judge about who he should nominated to the Supreme Court. But once Napolitano broke with Trump and called him out on live TV and pointed out the criminality that was going on, Trump turned on the judge big time, tweeting against him, talking badly about him to friends. You know, there were some really ugly insinuations the president was making about his longtime friend.
And it's just goes to show, you know, Trump demands loyalty but never returns it to anybody else.
Didn't Trump send Attorney General William Barr to Fox to try to silence Napolitano? This is some very specific reporting that I have in the book that is about a meeting between the attorney general, Bill Barr and Rupert Murdoch, we know that this meeting, this dinner type meeting happened in October of last year, but we've never known what the meeting was about.
What did they talk about? I have a source in the book who says that they talked about a lot of things, their family, criminal justice reform. But one of the things they talked about was Napolitano. This insider said to me that they talked about muzzling the judge. Now, the DOJ has come out and denied this. But my source stands by the story and I believe it to be true based on other people I've also spoken with. The point of this story is the president was so incensed by Napolitano TV commentary that he's ranting about it to the attorney general.
It's coming up in conversations between the attorney general and Rupert Murdoch. And here's the thing, Terry. It's not as if anybody goes back to Fox and says, get him off the air. Don't let Napolitano on TV. It's never that explicit. It's never that cut and dry. It's much more subtle. One day, Napolitano just happens to lose his Web show, and one day he gets canceled from a TV show that he was booked on. What happened was he kind of his airtime shrank.
And in broadcasting, your airtime is everything. So he started to feel the chill in the air at Fox because he was not he didn't have the right opinions. He had the wrong opinions for Fox.
He understood that the impeachment was a serious process while almost everybody else on Fox was saying it was a hoax. And it's that kind of a truth telling that's not rewarded at Fox News right now.
So this looks like a judge on FOX speaks in favor of impeachment. And the president sends his attorney general, the head of the Justice Department, to to Fox to talk in part about how Napolitano has to be silenced. That's. That's not the way it's supposed to work. Look, we've seen a lot of unprecedented behavior, not just by the president, but by the attorney general, I think in this case, this meeting with Rupert Murdoch was about a lot of things.
They've gone back decades. But there's certainly a sense inside Fox that Rupert Murdoch has a very heavy hand there, that Rupert Murdoch very much controls Fox News and he is very close to the president. I wish that Rupert Murdoch would talk more about that publicly. We need to know more about how this right wing world works because they are in charge of the government. Let me reintroduce you here.
If you're just joining us. My guest is Brian Stelter, CNN's chief media correspondent and host of its Sunday morning show Reliable Sources. His new book is called Hoke's Donald Trump, Fox News and the Dangerous Distortions of Truth. We'll be back after we take a break. I'm Terry Gross and this is Fresh Air.
This message comes from NPR sponsor Capital One. Welcome to Banking Reimagined Capital One. Checking and savings accounts have no fees or minimums and a top rated banking app that lets you manage your money any time anywhere. Check on the account balance deposit checks, pay bills and transfer money on the go. This is banking reimagined. What's in your wallet? Capital One and a member FDIC.
Let's get back to my interview with Brian Stelter about his new book, Hoax, Donald Trump, Fox News and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth. Still, here is CNN's chief media correspondent and host of its Sunday morning show Reliable Sources, which is about how the media is covering the news. Let's talk about the pandemic in the first months of the pandemic.
What you heard on Fox was discussions about how the pandemic was just like a liberal hoax, that the virus wasn't as bad as people were saying, like maybe maybe it would be as bad as the flu, maybe it would be like the flu.
So they were very dismissive as things were getting worse and worse.
At the same time, you write that the Fox News offices were taking precautions to make sure that the staff was safe. So. This is very contradictory, right? The on air sounds like it's no big deal, but inside they're taking all precautions and taking it really seriously. What were some of the things they were doing? This is the hypocrisy of Fox in the Trump age, and this is why the hypocrisy matters, because it's a life or death issue.
When the virus was silently spreading in the United States in February and early March, some of his biggest stars downplayed the threat, almost edged into denialism. And the biggest problem about that is that Trump heard it. He echoed it. They echoed Trump back. So we're into this grotesque feedback loop where they're telling each other it's going to be OK and they are lulling the president into a false sense of security about the virus. Now, I'll be the first to say we don't know how many people died as a result of this.
We'll never know. And it's not up to a television network to officially be responsible for that. I also say there were a lot of failures in February and March. A lot of mayors, a lot of governors, a lot of people made a lot of mistakes. But Trump and Fox had the most responsibility of all because they had the biggest platforms. Trump had the biggest megaphone in the world, and he used it to say things like hoax. Now, to be clear, when he said hoax, he was talking about the Democrats.
He was saying that the Democrats were trying to politicize the virus and that that was a hoax. But you know what? When you use a word like that, you're giving permission to your fans to look the other way to ignore the threat. That's what the word does. When you say hoax, you're telling people to relax, to to be calm, to not take precautions about the virus. And that was incredibly damaging last winter.
So you write about how Tucker Carlson, one of the most popular Fox hosts, was sent to Mar a Lago to try to get Trump to take the virus more seriously. What was that meeting about?
Yeah, and, you know, Tucker does deserve a little bit of credit because Carlson took this virus more seriously than a lot of his own ER colleagues. He warned about it in January. He warned about it in February. Now, that's partly because of his animosity toward China. But he was warning about this virus early on in early March. A White House aide, we don't know who Karlsson's never said who, but a White House aide asked him to drive across the state of Florida to go to Mar a Lago and try to talk some sense into President Trump to try to convince Trump to take the virus seriously.
That meeting happened about a week before Trump actually did start to change his tone. So it didn't work right away. But Carlson at least tried. And that's the world we're in now. That's the country we're in where it's a television star who gets sent to try to convince the president to care more about the pandemic.
I want you to tell a story that involves both Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson, who are the two most popular hosts on on Fox News.
And it has to do with how Hannity wanted Trump to bring on a national security adviser who would be hard line on Syria and Iran. And Trump did. He chose John Bolton, who I think had handed his approval. But then when Trump wanted to bomb Iran, Tucker Carlson interceded. Tell us that story. Yeah, this is in June of 2019, when carleson have been on the air discouraging the president from taking Boltons advice from taking action against Iran.
You know, there was a situation where Trump, by his own account, had weapons cocked and loaded to strike Iran in retaliation for the downing of a drone. Remember, this day, war planes were already in the air, but Trump was thinking about Tucker Carlson. He was thinking about Tucker's on air commentary and he phoned Carlson. He wanted to hear Carlson's voice. He wanted to talk through it with this Fox host. What do you think the president says on the phone?
And and Carlson said the same thing he had been saying on TV. Bombing Iran is not the right thing. It's not why the voters elected you. So here is a television host providing really critical advice as the president is weighing whether to bomb another country.
You know, the president ultimately called off that strike. And, you know, it's not only because of Tucker Carlson, but it's a reflection of the reality we're in now. I had a Fox commentator say to me, this is crazy, but I feel safer having Tucker in charge of the country than Sean Hannity.
And there's a little bit of a joke there. But there's a lot of truth.
There's a lot of truth at you, right, about Ukraine as being a story that actually starts with Hannity back in 2017. So tell us about that. How to Hannity initiate the Ukraine story in terms of the public conversation? And also, you make it seem like that planted the idea in Trump's mind that it was Ukraine that was the problem, not Russia, when it came to trying to intervene in the 2016 election.
Yes. And you've hit on one of the biggest themes in Hoke's, which is that when the president's allies try to help him, they actually hurt him. They actually do him a disservice. So in the case of Sean Hannity in Ukraine, I think we can trace impeachment all the way back to Hannity show in twenty seventeen. When Hannity went on the air and screamed about how it wasn't Russia, it was Ukraine that interfered in the election. Now sometimes Kennedy would say, OK, yeah, Russia interfered, but they both interfered.
He he was really focused on Ukraine being a threat and it had planted the idea in Trump's mind that Ukraine was a bad actor. They shouldn't trust Ukraine. And then two years later, we get to the point where the president is on the phone with the newly elected Ukrainian president asking him to do a favor. This narrative was set on Fox years earlier. Hannity was also on television with guests who were bashing Maria Ivanovich, a name we all now know because he was the ambassador in Ukraine.
He had guests on the air saying Evanovich needs to be recalled, needs to be pulled from the country. This got so ugly that Mike Pompeo had to call Hannity and ask him to call off the dogs, stop criticizing my ambassador. It was commentary on Fox that set the stage for impeachment by convincing the president that Ukraine was against him. And that narrative was repeated all the time on right wing TV. So, you know, for many Americans, impeachment was an obvious answer to criminality.
But on Fox, it was yet another hoax.
How does Chris Wallace fit into Fox News? Sometimes he seems like very independent. Like when he interviews Trump, he can ask some pretty critical questions. What did you learn about his relationship with Trump and his relationship with his colleagues and management at Fox?
Yes, Wallace, along with Baer and a few other news anchors, they are the exceptions to the rule. They are working with blinders on, focused only on their shows, trying to report as honestly and fairly as they can. I do think, however, even programs like Bear Special Report have been affected by the Trump years where they've they've they've moved further to the right in order to placate an audience that has moved further and further to the right. Chris Wallace is probably the the most of an exception because his program, Fox News Sunday, also airs on FOX broadcast stations.
So he doesn't feel as many of the same ratings pressures to please the right wing audience versus all the rest of the programs. It is a it is a difficult situation for these news anchors who want to hold onto their audience, but also live up to their integrity as a journalist. And I know a lot of people outside Fox think that these men are complicit. I think that these men have sold out, think that these men are no longer truth tellers.
But the dynamic internally is, you know, they're trying to keep their blinders on, focus on their shows, tune out the propaganda from guys like Hannity and do the best they can in a very tumultuous time.
Let's take another break here. If you're just joining us, my guest is Brian Stelter. His new book is called Hope. Donald Trump, Fox News and the Dangerous Distortion of truth. We'll be right back. This is fresh air support for this podcast. And the following message come from Pushkin Industries presenting revisionist history. Malcolm Gladwell journey through the overlooked and the misunderstood. Every episode re-examined something from the past an event, a person, an idea, even a song, and asks whether we got it right the first time.
The fifth season is preoccupied with understanding our attachments to objects, rituals and more. Find new revisionist history episodes now on Apple podcasts or wherever you listen. Let's get back to my interview with Brian Stelter about his new book, Hoax, Donald Trump, Fox News and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth. Stelter is CNN's chief media correspondent and the host of a Sunday morning show, Reliable Sources, which is about how the media is covering the news. We recorded this interview Monday morning.
So in terms of Fox's influence on Trump and Trump's influence on Fox, you kind of trace that back to when Roger Ailes was forced out, when the head of Fox News was forced out because of the sexual assault and sexual harassment charges against him that, you know, people on Fox News were trying to please Roger Ailes all the time because he was the king of Fox News.
And without him, there was a vacuum. Are you saying that you think Trump filled that vacuum?
Yes. And this came through in my hundreds of interviews for this book. You know, Roger Ailes was many things. He was a predator, but he was also a powerful leader. And that's why many staffers of Fox told me that they kind of miss him. Some even wish he was still there running the network. He you know, he died in twenty seventeen, but his ghost still looms very large because there is no leader that has the same kind of influence or begrudging respect.
You know, I think what happened is that there was a leadership vacuum at Fox when Ailes was forced out and Trump filled that vacuum. I had an anchor at Fox. To me, it was like, you know, we always produced the network for an audience of one and the audience of one was Ailes. Now the audience of one is Trump, because the way to get ahead of Fox is to be Trump. Here is to be more promotional of the president, to be friendlier.
That's what the viewers want. That's what management seems to want. I had many journalists at Fox who are really concerned about the state of the network who said management encouraged pro Trump propaganda and discouraged real reporting. And that's ultimately why I had to write this book, because there are a lot of journalism Fox who hate the direction the network is heading in. They want it to change. They don't want propaganda. They want real news, but they feel suffocated by Trump.
You know, getting back to Ailes, do you write that he didn't approve of Trump's emphasis or Fox's emphasis on birther ism regarding Obama, you know, questioning whether he was really born in America?
Why did he draw the line there? And did Ailes draw the line on any other factually wrong stories that Fox was putting out?
Oh, this is a great insight, because this shows how Ailes ran the network with an iron fist. He believed in birther ism, but he didn't let stars like Sean Hannity talk about birther ism. He did not let Fox go down that rabbit hole because he believed it was better for Fox to be viewed as mainstream and reasonable. He wanted Fox to be compared to CBS and NBC, not compared to Infowars or crazy fringe websites. He knew that Fox's power as a business was to not go totally, extremely to the right.
Now, I know listeners are going to say Fox was always conservative and it was, but it wasn't nearly as conspiratorial and extreme as the content is now. And that is because Ailes managed it. He told stars when they step out of line, he made sure birther ism didn't didn't leak out onto his airwaves, except when Donald Trump called in for interviews. This was in 2011, 2012. You know, Trump called in every week and he did promote birther ism on Fox.
But he also got to know the Fox audience. Imagine what it's like when you call into a television show once a week, four years, you start to learn how the Fox viewer thinks. You start to learn what they care about. And I believe that that is ultimately why he was able to win the GOP nomination and become president. It's because he was trained, not literally, but trained by Fox through all of his interviews on the air to know exactly how to please his base.
You said that it was Ailes who was behind Trump getting a weekly phone and spot on Fox and Friends in 2011.
That's right. This is Ailes, the television producer, knowing that Trump would be a ratings magnet. Ailes liked to try different people out on his ear. He likes to try out potential presidential candidates. And these two men were friendly for decades. So it only made sense that Ailes gave Trump a huge boost on the way to the presidency.
If other people at Fox News think that, you know, Trump has serious problems of Sean Hannity, has told people that Trump is crazy. Why are they enabling him and why are they? In some ways, bringing out his most extreme instincts and continuing to do that. That is what I asked almost every person I interviewed. Of course, I had to promise confidentiality to most of these sources, but they told me essentially it's about money, it's about power, and it's about a lack of other options.
And the money part's obvious. You know, Fox News is a profit machine. People there are paid really well if let's say you're a, A, B list or C list anchor on Fox or a host on FOX, you're probably not going to get hired anywhere else because you've probably affected your reputation by being on the air at Fox. So you stay for that reason perhaps, or you stay because you like the perks. You know, you get Super Bowl tickets, you know, you get to file on the private plane.
Sometimes you also have to recognize that FOX is a family. And there's a real sense of solidarity there. You might say that's cultish, but there is a sense of family. People feel like they belong to something. And that is another reason why people stay and why people toe the line. But I mentioned power. I think power is a really important part of this as well. When you can influence the president and half the country, when you get the president tweeting about your book or promoting you on Twitter, you know that that feels good.
There is something real about that. So I think it is money. I think it's power. And I think it's a lack of other options because they might not get hired anywhere else.
Let me reintroduce you here. If you're just joining us. My guest is Brian Stelter, CNN's chief media correspondent and author of the new book Hoax Donald Trump, Fox News and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth. We'll be right back.
This is Fresh Air Friends. How many of us have them? So if you're lucky, you have friendships that are affirming and they are like a place for you to be a fuller version of yourself. So why is it that so few of us have friends of different races? Listen now on the Code Switch podcast from NPR.
Hi, it's Terry Gross inviting you to check out our new online archive, collecting forty years of fresh air interviews and reviews.
You can hear my interviews with people like David Bowie, Aretha Franklin, Johnny Cash, John Updike, Toni Morrison, search for names you're interested in. Make a playlist for yourself, our friends at Fresh Air Archive. Doug, that's Fresh Air Archive.
Doug, let's get back to my interview with Brian Stelter, who is the author of the new book Hoax Donald Trump, Fox News and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth. He's CNN's chief media correspondent and host of a Sunday morning show, Reliable Sources, which is about how the media covers the news.
There's a very interesting personal story you tell in your book about how back in 2005, you went on a couple of dates with a Fox intern. But as it turns out, the Fox intern wasn't really dating you as much as she was spying on you. What happened?
Yeah, I know you can't see me right now, but I'm blushing, as you say, that this is an example of Fox's manipulation. I had launched a television news blog called TV Newser. I was working on this blog. I was single at the time. I'm thankfully happily married now. But at the time I was single and this in turn friended me on Facebook, struck up a relationship, went out with me in New York City. You know, I almost started to think she liked me, but what she was actually doing was taking notes and sending them back to Roger Ailes and his PR executives.
And the reason was Fox was incredibly paranoid. They wanted to know everything about the reporters who covered them. And I would tell you now, 15 years later, that's not quite as true as it was. There's nobody as paranoid as Roger Ailes was, but there is still a real sense of control there. When I was working on this book, I had a Fox producer suspect that I was secretly tape recording him. He saw my bag in the corner at a party and he thought I must have been recording him.
Of course I wasn't. But he called his boss to report it just in case because he didn't want to get in trouble. You know, that's the kind of organization it is where the paranoia runs really deep. But thankfully, a lot of people still wanted to talk to me because they're concerned about what's happened to the network. I even had a researcher at Fox say to me that the network's allegiance with President Trump is putting our democracy at risk. That's not coming from a liberal critic of FOX.
That's coming from an employee at FOX. So it's really a remarkable place. And as for me and the intern, she's actually a PR executive now and now. I work with our own stories once in a while.
Well, that must be strange. Did you ever talk to her about this? We did we now that we're both happily married, we had a very funny conversation about it.
So she she confessed that that's what she was really doing, was spying on you.
She did. And she felt bad about it. But I understand what happens when you work at Fox. You feel like you're part of something big and important. You feel like it's us against the world. You know, there's there's a real sense of us versus them at Fox. And I think when you're young and you're working there, you can get caught up in that. But look, her bosses told her to do something profoundly unethical, and that is the point.
What do you think Roger Ailes was hoping to get from you by having an intern spy on you?
Did they want to get dirt on you so that if you said something bad about Fox, they could say something bad about you and discredit you?
Yes. And they also wanted to know what my relationships were with other networks, with other PR people, with other sources. You know, they want to find your weak spots. And that's kind of a trick out of politics. It shows how the network as a political operation as well as a business. And I got to say, that playbook is still very much in effect. They still run it like a political operation as well as a business.
Well, in terms of the future at Fox News, what if Trump loses? This election and Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are elected, what what happens at Fox, they will no longer have the president's ear.
Trump is Fox's Frankenstein. That's that's the way one commentator at the network put it to me, they created this. Well, I guess in the metaphor, he's a monster. They created this man and now he's out of control. There's certainly a fear at Fox that Trump will go off and launch his own network if he loses the election, that he will become a rival to Fox News. But there's also a certain confidence inside the company that Fox is bigger than Trump now, that Fox is more powerful even than the president, and that Fox is always most successful, not on defense for Trump, but on offense against the Democrats.
This is, I think, the most important thing that I learned by watching hundreds of hours of Fox television. The channel is more anti Democrat than it is pro Trump. And by being anti Democrat, of course, they are helping Trump. But at its heart, the channel is oppositional. At its heart, the channels about being against Democrats. That's why when Alexandria Castillo Cortez was elected to Congress, a Fox producer texted me and said, Thank you, Queens, thank you to the Bronx, you know, because they were so thrilled, they had this new enemy, this new young woman who they could create hours and hours of programming about.
I think Fox executives look at a potential Biden presidency and they say we will become the voice of the opposition just as we were in the Obama years. And that could be a very winning business model, even though Trump will be out of office.
I watch your show every Sunday and thank you. You're welcome. It's a good show.
And I love hearing people talk about, you know, the media and how the media is covering the news, which is what you do on your show.
But my impression is, and correct me if I'm wrong, that you've changed in the years that you've been hosting the show.
You're much more outspoken about what you see. You much more opinionated and comfortable giving your own opinions. Am I right about that? And if so, what changed in you and in what you were seeing that led you to be more outspoken and opinionated? In 10 or 20 years, I want to be able to look back and be proud of how I covered the Trump presidency. I think that's the ultimate test for any journalist right now. Will you be proud of what you said and what you did?
I have definitely been outspoken on Reliable Sources. I've been doing more monologues than I used to and so have a lot of other CNN anchors. I think we have found that those personal essays where we are just speaking straight to the camera are sometimes the best way to cut through all the noise of the Trump years, sometimes talking straight to the camera and explaining what the president did or didn't do, explaining how we know it's a lie. I think that's more effective than having a debate between two talking heads or falling for that both sides trap.
Because, Terry, there are certain things that we have to stand up for truth and decency and democracy. Those are not partisan values. They should never be viewed as partisan values. When we have a president who is indecent, when he is calling the press the enemy of the people, we should we should stand up against that. You're definitely right, though, that I have changed a bit.
I I remember the weekend that he first called the press the enemy. And I said on the air, the American press is stronger than a demagogue. This is going to be a hard period, but we are stronger than any demagogue. And I think that's been borne out in the past three years. This has been an incredible time for the news media to try to defend the very notion of truth.
Brian Stelter, I want to thank you so much for talking with us. Thank you. Brian Stelter is CNN's chief media correspondent, the host of CNN's Reliable Sources and author of the new book Hoax Donald Trump, Fox News and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth.
Tomorrow on Fresh Air, as the Republican convention continues, our guest will be historian Rick Perlstein. He spent his career studying the rise of the new right in American politics. He's just published his fourth book about American conservatism, focusing on the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980. It's called Reagan Land. He's also the author of Nixonland. I hope you'll join us.
Fresh Air's executive producer is Danny Miller, our technical director and engineer is Audrey Bentham. Our interviews and reviews are produced and edited by Amy Salit for The Myers, Roberta Shorrock, Sam Briger, Lauren Krenzel, Heidi Saman, Teresa Madden, Faya Challoner, Kayla Latimore and Joe Wolfram, our associate producer of Digital Media.
As Molly Steven Esper. Seth Kelly directed today's show. I'm Terry Gross.