tv Media Buzz FOX News November 30, 2015 12:00am-1:01am PST
turkeys this thanksgiving and donated more than 200 to local charities. that's it for today. have a great week and we'll see you next "fox news sunday." mar. i'll be back tomorrow on "mornings with maria" on the fox network. \s donald trump getting hammered by the media. for appears to mock a disabled reporter, and for the rockets he fires off on twit other. twitter. are you aware that the liberal media and the democratic party in general are trying to paint you as a racist. are you aware of that? >> i think so, but i think people know better than that. you come on night after night and defend no matter what despicable inflammatory thing he says. it's democrat gogry, and it's dangerous and somebody is going to hurt some muslim as a result
of this behavior. denounced as a liar and bully, and a top editor calls for a boycott of his businesses. cry christie on the media of the coverage, his new focus on, and whether his campaign is make a comeback. >> i'm not this for a book deal or show, i'm in this to win president of the united states. president obama getting secured for saying that the media needs to show perspective on covering isis. and this all thole says he was kind of like this guy -- >> let me just sum up, on track, stay the course, 1,000 points of light. stay the course. joyawn meec-- john meech mad
this is "mediabuzz." "new york times" editorial page is accusing donald trump of peddling racist lies. "the washington post" says he's running an ugly campaign and the only way to beat a bully is to stan up. and that's just the beginning. trump spoke of seeing thousands of people in new jersey cheering as the twin towers came down. no one has found any evidence of that. trump claimed vindication after finding a 2001 story from that newspaper about investigation -- >> but fortunately somebody in "the washington post" wrote that and they'll try to deny it. they'll probably say we made a mistake. i limb like that better, because
then i could show you how dishonest they are, but they'll find some reason to deny it. they'll call it a typo. >> joining us to examine the impact, matt lois, senior contributor and columnist for the week. susan fa rich i don't, for "the washington examiner" and simon rosen burg. let's do a lightning round here. do you think media outkits talk dump a racist, a liar, a bully, has any influence? >> i think they're right, and i think he is lying, but i don't think it matters. i think that it actually maybe helps trump. the people who support trump think the -- it's a back lash against political correctness. this plays into his hands. >> so my next question to you, can there be a back lash on the media's part? and can that actually end up
helping trump? >> possible, but the evidence so far is trump is having a hard time growing beyond this core base he has. if he's going to be president, he's got to get moderate republicans, democrats, and you look at head-to-head polling, his's doing the worse. there is evidence it may by working to fire up his troops, but not working with the broader electorate that he needs to win. >> let me read a tweets that are put up by noah chabotman, the executive editor of "the daily beast." another one six month ago, 8,000 racist moments later -- i guess that's an snell exact number -- that's no longer feasible. a top editor at a website calling for a boycott.
>> some are probably loving that tweet. >> why so? >> because it's a liberal-leaning kind of online publication. that's who they attract, who they want to be logging on and reading. it's quick bait, as they say, but you know, it's migrating from journalism into activism, to you have to question he's running "the daily beast" and now he's calling for somebody who's staying at a trump motel. that's activism, not journalism. >> sure smells like activism to me. this guy is obviously a top editor and avalon, who worked for usedy giuliani in the past -- he's not a trump fan, either. so trump has said repeatedly he's not backing down, that he say thousands of arabs in new jersey celebrates on television, he says. no one else has found the
footage. state official sayi not true, but he cites the paragraph about whether there was an investigation of some that he's right. >> you're entitled to your own pin. you are not entitled to your own facts. donald trump, it's hard to hold him accountable, because he has this reality distortion filter. he's going to say i saw it, there are thousands of people cheering. it doesn't happen, and he is lying, and i think it's a responsibility of the media to hold politicians accountable even if they are republican or conservative. even if liberal bias does exist. >> simon, what except this story alive is this piece in "the washington post," in 2001, which by the way didn't say the reporter had seen it, just an investigation that said they found nothing about this allegation.
and a reporter who suffering from a congen cal condition that limits the use of his arms, a great reporter and a great guy, trump is -- and you've all seen this footage, it appeared to many people he was mocking the disability. >> we have discussed on air here there donald trump knows what he's doing and pretty talented. i think this is a huge mistake. he's kept the story alive. >> maybe he wants to keep the story alive, but what he's been effective at is he understands he can get in trouble and the next day reports move look. it all evaluable waits and goes into the collective of the media hole. i think he kept what was a negative story around for days, that he's not perfect. this is a mistake. >> well, trump says that he
didn't remember cobble es can i. it didn't seem he was backing off the story, and again he didn't say hundreds or thousands, some number of individuals. he really -- trump got into it this morning with chuck todd on "meet the press." let's take a brief look at that. >> this didn't happen in new jersey. there were plenty of reports, and you're -- >> chuck, it did happen in new jersey. i have hundreds people that agree with me. >> you're running for president of the united states. your words matter. truthfulness matters. >> check, take it easy. just play cool. >> i really -- i disagree. i think trump has won this round.
he's won this round. it looked like my god, he's finally gone too far. i'm not sure he can go too far. if you look at the reaction, like what he just said, i've got all kinds of calls and tweets who reported the same them. the people who support me say there were thousands of people. so he's winning, telling chuck todd to play it cool, because chuck todd is getting so emotional trying to get trump on this, but he couldn't f. >> trump says he wants an apology from "new york times." >> that's right. he turns it back on them, punching back twice as hard. >> do you agree in pure television terms if he's telling chuck calm down, or is chuck todd doing what journalists should do, and trying to pin him down? >> i think both. i think chuck todd is doing the right thing, because the problem is i think our culture has changed. it used to be, especially if you
were a family values conservative that mocking somebody with a figure form would be deneath the dignity of an american president. i don't know that our culture cares that much about it anymore. >> bill o'reilly chided him on this, retweeting reportedly bog gus rachelle statistics, and trump says i just can't check everything and it's a retweet. >> he's trying to change the rules. >> he as already changed the rules. >> it's already happened. >> will we will know whether this experiment is effective. i still think there's a lot of evidence that it actually will not play well over time, but we'll see. >> ben carson initially was asked about this, did you know about muslims in new jersey? not in the middle east, celebrating on 9/11.
with megyn kellie he said this. >> you admit to a lack of caution in answering that question? >> yeah. yeah. i felt we were just talking about the fact that muslims were inappropriately celebrating. i didn't know they had an agenda behind the question. >> the agenda, what he was asked -- did you see this? yes. did you it in new jersey? yes. >> i thought it was fine. i thought his walk-back was final, and the biggest problem is his foreign policy experience. >> he went to joshen this weekend, kind of shrouded in secrecy, but we do get pictures of dr. carson meeting with refugees and of course is on several sunday morning shows. >> sure. he needed to bolster his credentials. to connect that with trump, we spend all this time playing 2k3w067a with the media with trump and not nailing him down on substance.
he is the front-runner, and we're net doing that. >> just briefly, the terrible shooting in colorado, three people dead, one a police officer. first liberal huffington post and now "the washington post" questioning why only three candidates put oy any statements, first ted cruz and later jeb bush and john kasich. any statements regardless of what is your yew, expressing sympathy for the victims. is that a fair point to draw out? >> they're running for president. i think it would be quicker. >> just say, i'm real sorry about what happened. these candidates are veg concerned. it's treacherous, on "meet the press "donald trump was asked about it over and over where i believe chuck todd tried to connect his favoritism of the videos with perhaps this outcome in colorado, and he wouldn't do it.
i think that's what these other candidates are worried about. it's always dangerous with if politicians that doesn't spout been that leads to violence. you can e-mail us, and ahead, chris christie on one pun debt ace conclusion that he's battled his way back to respectability, but hammering president obama saying the press needs to show some perspective in covering the war on terror.
this. i just want to say it, but one of the things that has to happen is how we report on this has to maintain perspective and not -- you know, empower in any way those terrorist organizations or elevate them in ways that make it easier to them to recruit or make them stronger. >> so therefore we should judd play down these stories? really c'mon, what do you say? >> hi hit the bottom of the barrel. >> president obama now sounding more like a community organizer than a commander in chief, as he trying to defend his approach by blaming the media for the disastrous results of his policies. mr. obama tried to blame the media for empowering the islamic state. >> do you think president obama was blaming the media or saying -- >> not at all.
i think it's an overreaction and twisting what it sounded like he said to me. first of all, the media has been known to stoke fear. if all i did was watch the news, i wouldn't leave the house. they also glam rise occasionally villains. we saw that with the both many bomber on "rolling stone." if he's encouraging them to be responsible, what's wrong with that? >> wushl -- but commenting on whether people are fearful of another attack. it's no question that it feels like the press went way over on a few cases of ebola. >> i think you're job is to cover events truthfully, accurate lid, and nothing more. you can't listen to a president tell you to alter or shape your coverage. our role is to cover it as we see it. obviously the news has been focused on terrorism, on his
foreign policy, and it's been unflattering for him. i think that's why he's talking about changing the coverage. >> perhaps, but when there are days and days of coverage whether there will be a tack over thanksgiving weekend, no credible evidence, cite the authorities. would it have been the same media coverage if george w. bush had asked media not to scare people. >> or the color-coded system? i think what he's reminding is that the goal of terror is to scare people, and to leverage the fear to make it -- to make a single attack in paris even more consequential all throughout the world, and to have perspective. he's reminding everybody we have to make sure we understand -- look, we've had three times as many americans in mass shootings as died in the paris attacks, so making sure we understand the relative strength of the attack
and not exaggerate is a fair -- i think a responsible thing. >> >> we debate this all the time and all the volume we use. thank you all for being here. up next, james rosen on whether the media's coverage, differs from the add motion fear of the bush/cheney era. and is gawker getting into media, does that meet gossip is over?
"cheney one on one". >> james rosen, welcome. >> in the wake of 9/11 d 1 dick cheney was going on the television. but here's the media question -- in the coverage now, do you see echos of that period after 9/11? >> sure. there's always the objectivity question that circulated in 9/11, and now. one difference i see between the debates then about coverage and today's debates, we used to wrestle with whether or not to show the latest video message from osama bin laden. that has by and large been decided, no, we'll just show still photographs and that sort of thing, but now that decision has been rendered moot, by the sorbed media where you can find the gruesome videos. >> so the media's the gatekeeper
is done, the people can see it more readily. >> and the press, could we be objective, meaning was there ra fervor in the country, or fear, then/now, for those who want to march to war? >> and that is a tough line for gens, is it not? journalists like to maintain a pose whereby they are disinterested. whichever horse hears the race, as long as it's an exciting race to cover. when the story is the fate of your own nation, when it's come undevastating terrorist attack, that's a hard one to maintain interest in the outcome. >> of course the goal then is to at least have a multiplicity of voices on the debate. so i remember these great media debates a decade ago, about every increase in chatter, versus concern about, are we
unnecessarily scaring people? do you see that -- are we still walking that tight rope? >> we are, but first quarter, i recently did a story for a special report about bret baier that a knew alert system was replaced five years ago, and guess what we found when we looked at it? that new system hasn't given the american people one single alert. there are no tweets on this advisory twitter page, for example. so the question becomes, is the government sometimes doing too little to keep americans informed? >> right, but back in those days, when the memories of 9/11 were so fresh, you know, every approaching of a holiday or major sports event there had be new possible terror alert, and most of those have turned out to be false alarms. the paris attacks were a wake-up call about the evil capability of isis. my question is, is there a
danger now, as then, that we unwittingly serve as a conduit for propaganda if we are constantly peppering people with story alerts that could frighten them. >> here's the bottom line. we report the news. if isis issues a new albert, then you report it, but then you go to the authorities, and the fbi and dhs says there had no credible threat. so you report them both, we report and let the viewers decide. >> that sounds suspiciously like a slogan. in the seconds we have remaining, what was your takeaway from spending all these hours with dick cheney, who still speaks out quite fast-breakly against the obama administration. >> if you love or hate dick cheney, you will love this book. i spent ten hours with the man across three days, and i've never heard him open up the way he did in these ten hours, about his childhood, his spiritual
faith in christ, the presidents and foreign leaders he's worked with, and 9/11 and iraq, where he was very candid in admitting some mistakes to me. >> thank you very much. tweets are pouring in about our discussion about donald trump and the media. terry kershaw -- i think there maybe be a stupid bias and honesty bias. my sit-down with chris christie on whether the presses being fares in covers the syrian refugee crisis, and his attempted campaign comeback. how on earth did
christie and today he got the coveted endorsement of "the new jersey leader." >> front page of "new york times." are you willing to acknowledge a new respect for the newspaper's fairness and judgment? >> no, sir. >> said nice things about you. >> they did. i think they're finally reporting it accurately. >> could it be said that you are in some fashion playing on the fears aaroused by the paris attacks? >> no, it's acknowledges fears. i was in new hampshire this week gent. my town hall meeting, every question was on national security. >>'s for somebody running for high office, you have to just acknowledge them, but address them? >> absolutely. >> as governor you said you don't want any syrian refugees
in new jersey. this is a very emotional issue, do you think the pressure approach to this issue has balanced? or you the media portraying you as heartless? >> the latter. they have no response for protecting the lives of the people of new jersey or this country. my test is very simple. the fbi director has said before congress there's no effective way to vet these people. that's the beginning and end of the conversation for me. american national security and homeland security has to be first and foremost. >> over any hype taern concerns? >> yes, suffer. >> no question that the paris attack changed the tone of this campaign. ted cruz only wands to admit christian refugees. is that a problem? >> it is. the problem is we shouldn't be admitting any. >> you don't even get to the religious question. >> i don't.
one of ben carson's foreign policy says he doesn't know about the middle east. is that a problem for ben carson? >> sure. >> you can expand if you want. >> you want quick questions, you better be ready to answer these questions. >> does donald trump go too far with some of his harsh rhetoric? >> of course he does, but don't goes too far on anything. so this is not something that anybody should be surprised with. that's the way he's always spoken, whether he's firing somebody on "the apresentition" or whether he's running for president. i would ask a broader question. it seems you are going out of your way not to criticize your republican rivals, understandably you're keeping your ammunition trained on hillary clinton and president obama, but i wonder if it's back you feel like maybe i have an outside shot of winning the nomination and i don't want to rough anybody else?
>> no, it's because i'm i want to beat hillary clinton. that's the adver sears we have to beat. >> but for you to face off against hillary clinton, you have a lot of other people in this race in your party that you have to beat. it seems to some -- you're a bit of a political brawler, but like you're pulling punches. >> no, sometimes you need the driver, and sometimes you need the pitching wedge. that's called strategy. it's not called pulling your punches. what's your strategy? >> to make myself the person that the people in the party trust the most to beat hillary clinton. >> but inevitably it's a game of compare and contrast. so would you say you're passing up opportunities to take on some of the people who are way ahead of you in the polls right now? >> no, i don't think so. while people are standing on the stage, they don't need you to do it for them.
>> i've heard you talk about the executive experience of governor. is it frustrating, three out of race, most running at 3% or 5%. is it frustrating that voters seeming not to place a high value on having run a state? >> no, it's pollees. there are no voters yet. no will vote under february, so you're saying politicians tend to love polls when they're in the top tier. >> sure. they love polls when they're in first. i understand that, but the fact is everyone will acknowledge that 60% to 70% of the people polled say they will or could change their mind. so i'm not too worried about that. i'm still in the mind changing business. >> chris lizza said you have fought your way back to respectable. seniority par --
>> no, my goal is to win. i think i've always been respectable. i appreciate his left-handed compliment, but i think our campaign has always been issue-driven and competitive. i'm not in this for a book deal or fox news show. i'm in this to win and be president of the united states. thank you very much for joining us. >> i appreciate it. that "union leader" endorsement used to be huge in new hampshire, b -- after the break, john meacham, why he and other journalists love to kick around presidents, and how he changed his mind after spending time p george
in talks pledge, therefore failed president. wall short-sighted by the media? >> not short-sighted by the media, but -- >> did that feel that way to you at the time? >> sure. i had sort of the dana carvey view of him in my head. it was only after meeting hem and then the passage of time we can come to better historical judgment adjustment. there's a rule that it takes 20 to 25 years after an administration that you can judge it whole. i think that's true. from your book, "news week" alluded to rumors that he had had an affair by a longtime aide. george w. bush asked his dad about the rumors and then did what? >> he called howard fineman, evan thomas, and the answer to the big-a is "n-o." that shut it down.
>> mrs. bush was apparently angry, or upset. she thought that it would feed the story. then vice president vice president bush said in his diary that he worried that barbara was right, but the parents were wrong. it put the story to rest. >> given that bush's '92 unofficial slogan was annoy the media, reelect bush, but before you got there, 1987 ran that famous cover, calling him a wimp. how did you persuade bush 41 to give all these interviews and share the documents? >> good question. i found this to be a much more complicated an intend figure. my argument to them was that this was my book-writing part of my life. you're a multitasker too, you
know this. there was a loot of question, because i was coming from the -- now, what would you had done if you had wanted to take back or asked you not to use some of what he said. >> i was simply going to note parenthetically that whatever response he had had. >> give him the chants to revise or -- >> just extend. >> in some of the reaction. for some of the -- there was perhaps an implications that you, in interviewing a man who's now 91 years old perhaps took advantage of him. how do you feed about that? >> i don't think there's any trust to that, whatever. he made these comments in '08. anyone who knew him knew in 2008 he was firing on all pistons.
so i think this accurately reflects his view of chen yes, rumsfeld and hi son's rhetoric. >> about your first pour trace that you fall in love with your subjects? >> sure. sure. that was my agrees worry about doing a living president, that i wouldn't be able to throw a punch. >> a very charming guy in his life. >> yes, any president there's a charm there. but part of the ethos he created, make the historical judgments, i found it easier, much easier than i expected to say what i thought. >> isn't it also true that we as journalists who have daily deadlines, minute by minute twitters deadlines often runs to judgments about presidents, politics based on incomplete information? >> yes, that's the reflexes to
kick them in the shins. it's i think one of the perils of journalism right now. everyone's a journalist, right? just because we have the ability to speak all the time doesn't mean we always have something worth saying. that's a discipline that all of us should impose more often. >> you're speaking at someone who is perhaps a reformed sinner? >> not reforms. imabsolutely a sinner on this. but one of the interesting things was seeing how this culture was taking shame in the bush 41 years. but cnn's political talk shows are growing. rush limbaugh is becoming more of a force. limbaugh endorses pat buchanan, so what does bush do? he invites limbaugh over to the white house to spend the night,
and carries a suitcase for him. that shut down limbaugh. suddenly he was browing bush as campaign events. but the 24-hour cycle really was -- and hits diary is full of remarks about how the press drives him crazy. any president who says they don't read the notices is not telling the truth. >> john, thanks very much for joining us. >> thanks, howie. next on "mediabuzz," gawker dropping the gossip to cover the 2016 campaign and go after other donald trump and other candidates. stay with us.
a "washington post" editor who once handled the paper's gossip column. does gawker getting out of the media business that gossip is very, i don't know, 2009. >> it does mean that, but it also mean that's the election is far more interesting than anything else happening in the media landscape. so of course they've decided to throw their hat into the election ring because what bigger story is there than election 2016? >> it's huge! to quote somebody part of that campaign. >> i think i know that guy. >> gawker specialized in snark. it pledged to become 20 prsz nicer when it apologized outing a conde nast executive. do you think that's a factor in
this evolution to politic? >> snark is not going away. this is what internet content was build upon over the last 10 or 12 years however it's gotten harder to make money off of snark. social media has changed the dynamic. people may love to read bitchy news stories but they want to look like nice people as far as what they share. that's why you saw the rise of all these inspirational stories, puppy videos, things like that. so gawker is basically doubling down on the one area where it's still okay to be snarky, where it's still profitable to be snarky, and that's politics. >> lola, thanks to twitter and snapchat and a million blogs it seems like gossip, snark whatever you want to call it is everywhere. is there less of a market niche for it? >> snark is u big tuesdbiquitou can thank gawker on that.
but people do want to be like. they're concerned with their followers, and what is more likely to generate more likes, more followers, posting or forwarding or making something perceived as nice go viral. there's not big business in people individually being seen as mean or as pulleys. >> the exception, of course, is with political coverage, political stories because that's where you see people really forming these tribal identities on facebook where you will still see people getting into big fights with friends and relatives. so i think that's something where -- you know, gawker is not new to politics. some other bigger hits have been in the political fill am. the rob ford story out of toronto, the craigslist congressman. >> our lives are more enhanced knowing about the crack smoking mayor. >> right. what about the fact that there are by my count roughly 6 billion websites devoted to politics. >> yes. but the thing that gawker has is name recognition.
there is a brand identity, and you understand that when you go to gawker you are going to get snark, but this time they will be laser-focused on politics. if you want more than just the facts m s man and you want your politics with a heavy dose of snark, cao to gawker. >> gawker doesn't particularly like hillary clinton but gawker said gop candidates would be apocalyptic disastrous especially regarding donald trump. >> trump has been very good business for gawker. if you want an example, this is where snark lives these days, every time they write about donald trump they have a new thing that describes him. this week it's been human dust ball donald trump, republican candidate and pee-stained snow cone. >> as somebody who made her living at this in the past -- >> there are magazines who have made entire industries of making fun of donald trump. there would be no spy magazine
for not for calling him names. there is big business of making fun of trump. i'm sure gawker figured it out. >> maybe trump is the key. >> he's the gift that keeps on giving. >> hope he stays in the campaign. finally, amy, again, you used to make your living at this. the fact that -- do you think that gossip is just sort of transmuting into new forms or do you think it's peaked? >> i think it's continuing to evolve on the web. people are still figuring out what will get the clicks. certainly, though, political news is where a lot of the stuff lives. we got saturated with celebrity gossip. we needed to move on. >> social media, everybody can now be a professional gossip. amy and lola, thanks very much. and next we try something new. your questions from facebook.
questions. ka we actually are more informed or simply more opinionated? no question all the opinionmongers on cable news have helped fuel polarization of the news. but we're also in a wired world. more news and information is at your fingertips. here is a question from marcy. if the media stopped covering trump's every cough and sneeze it would force him to spend his own money on advertising which would end this media circus. how hard would that be? things are better. we only cover every cough, not sneeze. you seem to indicate we're -- trump is a master, much of the coverage is negative as though we said earlier i think that helps him. he makes himself endlessly available for interviews but some of his rivals might take a page from his playbook. that's it for this edition of "media buzz." hope you're having a good thanksgiving weekend. check out fox's new sirius
station. 24/7 headlines where i do a daily media minute. we're back here next sunday 11:00 and 5:00 eastern. look forward to seeing you then sunday." president obama in paris and making a late night visit to the bataclan concert hall, the site of one of the french terror attacks earlier this month. the president paying his respects just moments ago. these are brand new pictures coming in to fox news. this i visit his very first stop, i should say, after air force one had landed in paris a short time ago. this was all been the last hour or so. the reason for his visit, an international climate change summit. one that could shape his legacy years after he is in office. we wanted to quick ly show you that picture because it had just come in. that climate conference generating some sort of a deal