Katie Couric: Why Facts Aren’t Enough

[music]. who is doing the news in in South. Africa. >> So in South Africa there's the South. African Broadcasting Corporation which. is similar to the BBC, right? In that. it's state funded modeled after the BBC. >> Yeah. It's modeled off the BBC and then. it's state funded. People pay a fee, you. know, for having a TV. It's like a. nominal fee and that basically goes to. funding it. Um and and their reporting. Then we have a few independent stations. as well, but none of them have a clear.

>> ideological bet. >> No, no, no. That that would be I think. most people agree that would be crazy. >> Like we wouldn't we wouldn't we just. >> like there's not the proapartid network. [laughter]. >> Oh my goodness, Katie. Can you imagine. [laughter] the proide network? Oh my. goodness, what a great idea. >> The PN. [laughter]. Hi, we're welcome to PAM. [laughter]. >> Oh wow. >> You are my replacement.

>> Oh wow. >> What a fantastic premise. [music]. >> This is What [music] now with Trevor. Noah. >> [music]. >> Oh, this is so fun. Yesterday we wore. both wore cardigans. >> Yeah. >> What a fashion disaster. >> It was terrible.

>> Was it? >> Well, it wasn't a disaster. It was more. It looked too coordin. >> Yes. Yes. Double Mr. Rogers. That's what. >> No. So, I was like, "No, it will never. happen again." So, today I had a backup. plan. I was like, "If he's wearing. brown, I'm covered." Oh, you're going to. switch it out. Okay. >> I really like that jacket. We both do. kind of have a similar thing going. >> I'm He's trying to avoid me and I'm. trying I'm trying to fully fully line up. with him. [laughter]. >> Is that good? >> I'm trying to make sure that our our.

friendship is fully aligned. That's what. I'm looking for. [laughter]. >> I don't want him to be able to escape. me. I want people to be like, "Are you guys. twins?" That's how [laughter] closely. aligned I want our dresses to be. >> How often do you record your podcast? >> Whenever. Whenever. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Whenever is whenever. So, you know, we'll fly in from South Africa and then. we'll do a bunch of episodes and we'll. come in. But then sometimes we're doing. them, >> you know, like one spaced out and then. it's but it's whenever. >> You don't feel that you need to have a. specific cadence for like to when people.

No. What's What's your cadence now in. life? What do you. >> Well, we do sort of uh a trunch of them. if you will. you know, we we have sort. of, you know, a when does a season, but. then we're [clears throat] not really. doing seasons as much because I'm really. responding mostly to news as it happens. So, >> you know, it's funny you guys cuz I. >> every platform I do different stuff like. you, you know, you have to be kind of.

multiplatform. So, >> like tomorrow I'm doing a Substack show. Uh Wow. >> Yeah. uh which I do once a week and then. I do the podcast slash video cast and. then. >> you know um yeah I think that's primary. then we have a newsletter and sometimes. I do just kind of straight to camera. reports on Instagram, you know, like I. explain what the safe act really is. >> Um. >> I think I saw one of those about I feel.

like it was about Iran or something. It. might have been about the Pentagon and. journalism and what they're doing and. how they're trying to keep journalists. out of the Pentagon. >> There's so much misinformation. So, I. just I just try to kind of give the. facts and like the timeline of what. happened at the Pentagon and why they. were kicking some outlets out and. bringing other outlets in. And um you. know just I think there's so much. information assaulting people every.

minute that sometimes I just try to say. hey this is what the SEV act does or. this is why they're looking at. redistricting in Virginia. >> Yeah. >> Let me give you a little bit of the. backstory so you understand cuz I think. it's it's really hard to process. everything. >> There's too there's too much of. everything everywhere all the time. I I. I I I always think to myself, we think. that we should judge people because. they're uninformed. And I think we.

should actually process it a completely. different way. I think people have too. much information. >> I agree. >> And a lot of that you you you you just. aren't able to pass the information. Is. it good? Is it bad? Where does it come. from? Where should it come from? Like. back in the day, I mean, you were you. were. >> what? >> Cuz these things happen all the time, Katie. He'll say statements as if he was. there during George Washington era. [laughter]. and he would say back in the day. So. it's my job to save you from this. How. how long is back in the day? Give us a. timeline. >> This is a actually we we have one of.

>> I I am the I am the physical. manifestation of back in the day. [laughter] Yes, it is. It is me Eugene. I that that will be my new Chiron. [laughter] Katie Curr. >> because that's me. [laughter] No, but. you were you saw I mean I would argue. that you came from an like like a golden. age of news in the United States when we.

think to a time of news. >> You are from that era and then you rose. to become one of the superstars of that. era. >> and then I don't want to sound too um. you know pessimistic about it but I. almost feel like you you also seen it. sort of come to an end in some ways. >> Oh yeah definitely. I think well you. know I guess I think most people might. look back on the era of Walter Kankite. >> Yes. >> You know back that long ago as the. golden era of TV news. Of course it was.

an era era when you know most of the. newscasters and reporters were white men. right and not diverse at all. But there. were just a handful a very small group. of authoritative figures right who you. went to and you believed. >> they trusted people. >> trusted people inverted and and and it's. interesting I was thinking the other day. about Walter Kankite uh when he said.

talked about Vietnam honestly and talked. about how it wasn't a winnable war or. whatever he said specifically and LBJ. said if we've lost Walter Kankite We've. lost America. >> Wow. And you know I think that I was. actually thinking about that because. there was a modern day example which now. I can't remember but it just these. people had such there was so much trust. >> in these figures and similarly with a. handful of newspapers with the.

Washington Post which I read every. morning growing up actually my dad read. it and I watched him at the breakfast. table but you know um that's how life. was it was it was believed and trusted. did. And then of course you had this. evolution. You had 24-hour news. networks. You had cable. You had then. the bifurcation of liberal cable versus. conservative. You had Fox News. >> You guys have over here. >> Yeah. We don't have that. >> Yeah. Yeah. We don't have it. It's just. news is just news. You guys have these.

kind of people's news and these other. people's news. >> And how do you who is doing the news in. in South Africa? So in South Africa. there's the South African Broadcasting. Corporation which is similar to the BBC, right? In that it's state funded after. the BBC. >> Yeah, it's modeled off the BBC and then. it's state funded. People pay a fee, you. know, for having a TV. It's like a. nominal fee and that basically goes to. funding it um and and their reporting. Then we have a few independent stations. as well, but none of them have a clear.

[snorts]. >> ideological bet. >> No, no, no. That that would be I think. most people agree that would be crazy. Like we wouldn't we wouldn't we just. like there's not the proapide network. [laughter]. >> Oh my goodness Katie. Can you imagine. [laughter] the protide network? Oh my. goodness. What a great idea. >> The pan. [laughter]. >> Hi. We're welcome to pan. [laughter]. >> Oh wow. >> You are my replacement.

>> Oh wow. >> What a fantastic premise. >> But I have I do I do have a question. So. is there criticism from the the. population definitely. >> uh that feels or segment of the. population that feels that the news as. it's presented in South Africa is biased. >> and and and how big is the outcry and. what is the response by the by the. publications or the networks? >> What would you say.

>> or the network I guess singular? So in. South Africa the debate will always be. after democracy will always be would a. white party rule in South Africa ever. again. So there's a party called the. democratic alliance which is leadership. is white but obviously they always been. opposing the ANC which is majority. black. So sometimes news readers and. some other news channels would favor. stories that the DA are doing but just. because they're in the news they look. like they're being favored right does it. make sense? Then the people on Twitter.

obviously cuz they follow the same. politicians and they get to see what. they're doing. When the news comes on. once a day about that specific. politician, it looks like it suits the. agenda of the politician, >> right? >> But we were having this discussion the. other day. We were saying the news. makers are now trying to make their own. news. If something sells, they'll go. with it. If people are talking about it, if they see it on social media, they'll. obviously go for it. But if the other. part is doing nothing on social media, there's nothing to talk about. Does it. make sense? >> Yes. So, so are you saying that.

politicians are now bypassing the news. altogether and just speaking directly. and co-opting whatever message seems to. be. >> exactly. >> um you know trending if you will at any. moment in time but is it how how. divisive is it uh in terms of. >> it's not like no it's not like the US no. no it's nowhere close to the US nowhere. close. >> and why do you think that is. >> again I think it's just because. in In most in most countries I've been.

to, >> people have some form of criticism for. the news, right? So when I'm in England, people complain about the BBC. The BBC. will even send out um regular sort of. polls and questionnaires to its to its. audience. Do you feel like we're not. covering this enough? Do you feel like. we should be covering this more, etc., etc., etc. >> And people will complain about the BBC. in everything. How did they handle the. Epstein files and Prince Andrew and how. do they handle Israel Palestine and how. have they handled People will complain. about that. In most places I've been to.

people complain about the news in some. way, shape or form. >> In the US, what's different is. your news presents different realities. >> Right. >> That's something that I don't see in. most places. >> where it's like completely I've flipped. between channels sometimes just to me. too. I do that often. Pretty wild how. it's like either one one news station is. covering it and the other one isn't. completely or they are presenting.

completely different stories. >> about the same thing. Yeah. Yeah. And. not even perspectives. Perspectives. would almost be like. >> um the Omus rocket has has taken off. It. is flying around the earth. Why are we. wasting money on this? This is the. greatest thing for mankind. Those are. perspectives, >> right? The one in America is like it's. like uh the rocket has taken off. There's no rocket. >> Yeah. >> Wait, what? >> Or this didn't even happen. Yes. Right. This didn't happen. This is not true. Or. as you said, you know, Trevor, basically.

just ignoring it alto together. >> Completely ignoring it. It's It's wild. I was thinking about the Walter Kankite. thing the other day because of Tucker. Carlson and I was thinking is Donald. Trump saying to himself if I've lost. Tucker Carlson I've lost America but I. think he's not because Tucker Carlson as. powerful a voice that that he has I. think you know is just a tiny slice of.

MAGA world. >> You think he's a tiny slice? Well, I. don't know. When I think about I have to. look at his viewers, but I don't think. he is I don't think I don't know. I I. guess the the time will tell whether he. and other defectors, right, like Megan. Kelly and all these other people. >> I'm not sure [clears throat] if. Donald Trump enthusiasts. will follow their lead. I don't know. What do you guys think? So, there's a.

strange phenomenon that I've noticed in. and around Trump world, and it's that. there's a there's sort of a separation. between Trump and his actions. And I. still don't fully understand how to. process it, >> but I've noticed many people who are. Trump supporters will criticize Trump's. actions, >> but then somewhere in their sentences, they'll say, "But I like Trump.". >> Or, "But he's better than the other. guy.". >> Yeah. or but but but in some way they'll.

they'll basically. >> personalize it. >> Yeah. And they'll. >> that's why they call it the cult of. personality, right? They don't call it. the cult of policy. >> This is true. [laughter]. >> This is true. >> Yeah. But what they'll do interestingly. is they will they'll almost excuse him. from his actions. and when he does something that they do. not like. Okay. So let's use an example, a concrete example. when Donald Trump. posted a picture of himself like an AI. generated image of him as Jesus healing. the sick or healing people.

[snorts] when his base was like really. really really angry about that. understandably they were like how what. are you doing this is blasphemous. >> the amount of people in the comments of. his post saying. >> take this down this is not you um I love. everything you do this is this is not. something must have gone wrong here Mr. President, please someone has your. >> They were defending. >> Yeah. >> that action. >> They weren't defend. They were advising. him. >> not to do that.

>> And they were incredulous that he had. done that. And they were convinced that. he had made a mistake. >> Yes. That's what I mean. >> It wasn't intentional. >> But they had separated his mistake from. him, which I find very interesting. >> Do do you get what I'm saying? >> Same thing goes with Iran. People will. go, "This president said he's not going. to go to war. I voted for him because he. said he's not going to be dropping bombs. in other countries. I voted for him. because he said the price of gas was. going to come down. And then you're. like, so what does that mean for you? And they go, well, clearly he he he's.

being influenced by the wrong people and. and you know, this is not what he wants. Or they'll say. he got rid of a terrible regime and he. was the only person who had the balls to. do it and we're not going to be in a. long protracted conflict and uh what he. did. I I I think there's this macho. undercurrent too, you know, this. >> this display of raw power.

>> that that people. >> are attracted to as well. And while they. may have have doubts about the action. and are not necessarily thinking about. the geopolitical ramifications, yeah, there's something about sort of the. brute force, the Pete Hegsth, you know, the ethos of the military that the US is. once again proving who's in charge that. is that is I think. >> very sort of subconsciously or. consciously appealing to some of these. folks as well. It it it's definitely.

that and and on top of all of it, I blame part of it on the sort of. sportification of politics in America. in that. in America politics has become the way. sports is in that you have a team. >> you stick to that team forever you and. again please correct me if I'm wrong. here but I I distinctly remember.

watching American television and. watching American people regular people. get interviewed about their lives about. everything I would commonly hear people. say the phrase you know well my mom was. a Republican my dad was a Democrat oh my. dad was a Democrat my mom was. Republican, but they'd like say all the. time people would talk about how their. families and then they wouldn't even say. was, they would say voted. >> Mhm. >> You know, they go like, "My dad voted. Republican in the last election." And. and people would say that on the news. I'd watch interviews. They'd be like, "Well, I voted Democrat last time, but. I'm not happy with things, so I'm I'm. going to vote Republican this time.

because I'm not but it was an action as. opposed to an identity." Yeah. >> Right. And I was going to say I think. that is so spoton that it has become so. tribal and you're we're talking about. why people sort of stick with Trump no. matter what. I think. changing or pivoting or reconsidering is. an assault to their whole identity. >> I think to all of us to be honest. >> I I think so too. I like I I I'll say. for myself if there is something that I.

have tied my identity to and that thing. falls in some way my first instinct is. to defend it as opposed to now. questioning my world view and beliefs. >> Do do you know what I mean? >> Oh totally. I think it's deeply. psychological. I think it's primal. >> Yeah. >> And very visceral that I mean I find. myself that way too because if you know. although I try to check myself you know.

my feed is full of people who agree with. me basically I try to look at other. points of view as well but my you know. talk about confirmation bias. On the. other hand, this isn't like Mitt Romney. and Barack Obama. >> No, you know, it is it is not. it is it is not normal. And so whenever. I feel like gosh, am I rooting against. Trump? Does that mean I'm rooting.

against America? >> And and I I question myself and I. question my emotional response to some. of the things that happened. >> Yeah. But I also think this person is. dangerous, corrupt, and um you know it's very difficult for. me and then I'm like I need to note when. he does something positive, right? Like. even mentally I need to be more.

receptive. Oh, this was a good thing. Right. >> Right. And I think it's hard for many of. us who have been inundated with the bad. things that he's been doing, the bad. choices, the lack of um respect for the. rule of law and the constitution, the. the self-enrichment of him and his. family. I mean, the list goes on and on. the cheering when Robert Mueller dies, you know, just the so many distasteful. things that that that it's hard to kind.

of even have that little crack to say, "Oh, that was probably a good idea, a. good policy, and maybe that's. >> that's helpful." Whether it's like, you. know, sort of in the first term the. criminal justice reform stuff even, right? you know, which arguably was a. good thing, you know, getting rid of uh. what minimum maximum or whatever and and. people who were being incarcerated. >> and Kim Kardashian got involved and you.

know, you think, well, that's a positive. thing. >> Yes. >> But the negative stuff, so it's like a. tsunami of negative stuff. It's hard to. kind of, you know, come up and and and. gasp for air and say, "Oh, that's good.". And then you're like sucked under again. Vibe the bad stuff. >> I I'm I'm surprised that you even. experienced that cuz I I've always. assumed incorrectly that journalists. pull, you know, their inspiration and. ideas from a from a from a different.

spiritual realm. Does does that make. sense? Like I always assume that we the. people who are reading the news are just. reading the news and then journalists. are sort of on this ephemeral plane. where news is is is merely like a a. different idea to you. But but it's. interesting that you are in it. So I'd. love to know how do you then or do you. even think of putting on different hats. as like a. a person a citizen and then a a.

journalist? How do you is it even. possible to do that or do you or do you. conscious or do you always have to. remind yourself that you have all hats. on at the same time? >> I mean I think that I have become a. citizen journalist. >> Oh, interesting. I'm a citizen first now. and a journalist second because I feel. like it is such a perilous time and such. a dangerous time that I am paying.

attention in a different way. And I. think you know as I said it's not just. policy differences that we're evaluating. here. It's not just saying, you know, if. you feel morally repulsed by the way ICE. was behaving in Minneapolis as a. citizen, >> that deeply offended me. >> And I am not going to both sides like.

this is what they're doing. This is how. the people of Minneapolis are reacting. >> Yeah. I mean, I think looking back on. it, even ICE defenders would admit, I. would hope many, that it was out of. control. Yeah. >> Things were completely out of control in. Minneapolis earlier this year. >> And so, I am also someone who I feel has earned. the privilege of at times.

um experience experiencing moral outrage. at what I'm seeing. And I I am not encumbered by, you know, a corporate overlord saying you can't. say that, you can't do that. >> Was that was that common in your. previous job? Like give me an. understanding. of what it's like? People often use, you. know, phrases like the mainstream media. and they don't want you to.

What is your honest assessment or even. experience of working in an environment. where you are under a corporation and. they how much do they decide what you. are. >> everything everything well first of all. I think there was a lot of separation. between sort of the companies and the. news divisions you know you saw General. Electric owned NBC G when I was there. >> and you know uh there were times where. if there was a story about GE, we would.

either not report it or say it's the. parent company of NBC. >> Okay. >> Um and but but for the most part, these. corporations kept out there was very. clear a very clear line between the. corporation and the news division and. they didn't they didn't mix. Mhm. >> And now obviously there are quidd proquo. happening. >> in corporate media and news division. So.

it is a completely different ball of. wax. It's like apples and oranges. I. can't say like this is how we did it. back in the day because everything has. changed. Trump is comp is basically. controlling these uh huge multi-million. dollar consolidation conglomerates, whatever you want to call it, mergers, and. they can't merge without the FCC and his.

administration giving them approval. So, they're basically bowing down and. saying, "We're going to give you $16. million to because the Kla Harris. interview was edited in a way that you. didn't like," which was complete. unadulterated That case had no. merit, >> but they gave him $16 million. Similarly, ABC with George. Stephanopoulos $15 million because he. said uh sexual assault I think instead.

of or I think he said rape instead of. sexual assault or whatever. >> And normally I think back in the day, Katie correct back in the day. Um we we. would probably issue an onair apology. correction. >> Correction. Yeah. Um, but I don't think. anytime I worked at a network would they. pay somebody because they were afraid of. the ramifications if they didn't. >> You would you would feel like it would. be like a badge of honor. In fact, you.

know, I like. >> a badge of honor to what? >> To be um like sued by a person in the. administration, any any administration. I I always felt like. journalists who came up against like the. government, I always felt that that was. a badge of honor. We saw it in South. Africa. >> The journalists who were arrested by the. apartheid government, it was a badge of. honor. You know, the journalists who. were in war zones, who were arrested by, you know, rebel factions or the. governments that people were trying to. overthrow, it was a badge of honor.

>> It always used to be this badge of honor. where it's like, oh, we're now going to. stand our ground and show. >> speaking truth to power. On the other. hand, I think you know if journalists. make mistakes, right, and collect. information incorrectly um or report it, uh then then I think. >> that's how the. >> how the system works, right? And so I. don't think you can say sort of cart. blanch that or or generalize that it's a. badge of honor all the time. But.

you know it's totally different now the. way they're using their power. >> to suppress stories to change how the. framework of stories or you know how a. story is positioned. I was talking to a. friend the other day about when CBS News. did a 16-second reader on January 6 and. they were basically saying Hakeem Jeff. said this, Donald Trump said that. >> Yeah. Now, if there's no universal.

understanding that January 6 was an. insurrection, that people were killed, uh, police officers, and yes, one. protester, but that it was. >> an attempt to overturn an election and. and disrupt the peaceful transfer of. power. >> and hang Mike Pence to hang Mike Pence. because they had a they were like, "We're coming to hang Mike Pence. >> and throw the election in Donald Trump's. favor." then they're just they're not. being truthful.

>> Yeah, >> that is factually incorrect. >> I think the conflict for anyone who. doesn't live in America is America has. always gone into other countries to try. and defend their democracies. And if. people voted for this dispensation, aren't there mechanisms in the same. constitution to coil anything that they. don't like from the same dispensation? >> Yes. What? I kind of understood that. question. >> So if it's a democratic state, >> Yeah. that is voted in by its citizens. Surely there must be a mechanism within.

the constitution of the same state that. can stop things that the people who. voted don't like. Do you get what I. mean? >> But it's it's a yes and no. That's the. weird thing, right? So I mean. >> the first the first thing about. elections. >> certifying the election, right? And. that's what was happening on Capitol. Hill when this whole. >> riot broke out. So I think you're right. There are steps that will ensure right a. free and fair election. The question is. if those steps aren't followed by the.

frigin president of the United States, >> where does that leave you? But it's also. weird, you know, to your question is. like. one of the strange things about. democracy is that. you are buying something you do not yet. have and you've never tested and you've. never really owned. >> Yeah. >> And you you're paying for it up front. So in many ways I think like voting is. similar to buying a house. You walk in,

they show you around, and then you're. like, "All right, I'll take it for the. next however many years of my life.". this is for me and then only when you. sleep in it for a week do you go I think. this is haunted. >> do you know or [laughter]. you know just rented. >> yeah you're like what what just happened. here but I think that happens in. democracy we take that for granted as a. system it's it's it's maybe the best one. we know right now but I do think it's a. little bit strange that we go. >> okay Eugene tell me your pitch uh Trevor. I promise you pizza every Friday all.

right I vote for this guy and then. Eugene comes in and then he's like I. don't like It's a It's weird because I. voted for you based on like I do think. it is strange that there is no mechanism. to hold politicians accountable for the. thing they said they were going to do. called elections. >> No, but that's No, no, no. >> You're called the next election. >> Yeah, but you see THAT'S TOO LATE. WAIT, IT'S TOO LATE. OKAY, now let's let's use. this analogy somewhere else. Imagine if. you went to a car dealership and you.

said, "I want to buy this SUV for my. family." They go, "Yeah, great. It's a. sevenseater SUV for you and your family. You go, you sign it, you take it, you. drive out of the lot. When you get home, there's two seats and you like, "What? What? What just happened?" And then you. phone the dealership and you're like, "You said seven seats." And they're. like, "Yeah, we just realized seven. seats wasn't going to work, so we switch. it to a two-seater and um you can switch. it out in your next lease.". >> Yeah. >> I think I still have to own what you're. saying. There should be a better. business bureau for the government.

>> I I think I think there's a better. replacement for democracy. I think they. could be. >> No. Yes, I think so. >> A better replacement for democracy. >> for the way we run it. I think they. could be. >> Okay. What? >> Because people assume, >> well, I'll speak for my country. People. assume, first of all, in our country, people had to explain to people which. they didn't know in this age of. information that we actually don't vote. for the president. We vote for a party. The party elects people, puts them in. parliament. Parliamentarians in their. different parties elect a president. >> Yeah. >> So, we don't choose who the president.

is. So that's the first part. But what. we've done is I think if democracy was. real, we would have to be able to choose. in real time all the time. You can't. choose once. >> See, this is why you're my guy. >> You can't choose once every. so every day an election. >> This is why we wear a day. >> This is why we dress the [laughter]. same. >> Holy marketed. >> So here's the thing. If you vote for a. president, you vote for a party. The. party elects a representative. The.

representative. themselves in parliament elect a. president. That person who's the. president now elects people that he. likes and trusts. >> Yeah. >> And then they go on to elect people that. they like and trust in different cabinet. positions, in different ministries. So. basically what you've done is you've. empowered an institution to create its. own sub institutions. And everyone puts. people that they trust over and over and. over. Local municipality suffers because. people are always looking at the bigger. picture which is the president of the. country. And no matter how many times.

when people are dissatisfied with. service delivery when the president says. but I don't control anything in. municipal level yeah no one will believe. them because people assume because you. are on the ballot paper we voted for you. right and also these mechanisms of. little local elections and municipal. elections and by elections they're never. as advertised as the big Super Bowl of. elections. >> No they're not even here people don't. vote on at on that level in the same. way. >> Yeah. So I I think people should be able. to select the president, not from just a.

party, just select the individual and. then also have a say in the individual. that that individual selects. >> So I Okay. Can I can I pitch you my idea. on this? >> Yeah. >> I actually think the biggest issue. >> Yeah. >> with politics. is individuals. >> Yeah. >> Let me try and explain this. >> When somebody goes up and starts a. campaign, we know nothing about them. We. do not know their ability or inability. to do things for the most part. >> Worse, we don't know their friends.

>> This is true that they're going to elect. people. They will elect their friends. They'll elect them or where they're. getting their money to run the. >> exact all of this. >> I know when I came to back in the day. [laughter]. >> So, so I think I think. sometimes when I'm trying to solve a. problem, I try and go back to the. original idea of what we were trying to. solve, right? Why do we have representatives? >> I would argue the reason we have. representatives in every system is. because it was not feasible for all of.

us to be contributing or or discussing. how to do a thing. So we said, "Hey, we. we live at this table. We are the table. people. Uh everyone at other tables also. has decisions to make. >> So why don't we send someone from this. table?" So Katie, you go represent us, please, at the national table convention. and tell us what other people from. tables are thinking, but let them know. that we like certain kinds of tables, please. That made sense. >> It made sense at a time when there was. no internet. It made sense at a time.

when information couldn't just travel. instantly. I think it makes a lot of. sense, right? >> When means of productions were. controlled by limited few. >> Completely. Completely. We now live in a. world where I think we use all this. great technology for in my opinion like. trashy things. >> Online betting. >> Yeah. We have online We have like online. sports betting. >> Yeah. >> Instant like decisions and you can to do. what? To to bet on a game and then go. broke and then you know your family's. destitute and young men are like.

homeless and what we have it for what? >> Voting on like a singing competition. >> Send us your votes now. That's instant. Mhm. >> We've got amazing technology, but we use. it for like the most gimmicky thing. Oh, put your opinion online. Imagine if I. know this sounds crazy, >> but imagine if people could alocart vote. digitally about things that a country is. doing. >> Yes. >> Instead of having it be one day to pick. one person who's going to make all the. decisions. >> But having said that, you know, to.

really explore and analyze an issue. takes tons of time. the American people. and I don't know what the situation is. in South Africa. It it takes a lot of. time and energy and focus to really. understand deeply all these issues. Ostensibly these people are there to. really learn, evaluate, have staff. people look at things. Now, yeah, ideally, right, the average American doesn't who's.

trying to earn a living, you know, be. productive in the world, take care of. his or her family, >> right? >> Isn't necessarily going to have the. expertise in a certain area, I think, to. I mean, I think they can get involved, they can call their member of Congress, etc. But do you believe that that would. really work that every you know if let's. say there's an issue of are you saying. for example like funding DHS that we. should have a national vote like.

American Idol. >> and people should say how they feel. >> So so so I I love that you that you. brought that up because I think it it it. captures two elements of politics that I. think have broken down. One is the. ethmology of politics itself right from. the Greek poly for the people politic. it's like it is literally the thing for. the people of the people. >> if we the people cannot understand the. thing it is wrong is is my opinion. >> why have you made it so convoluted it is. easier to understand than you make it.

and I think politicians have created a. world where they've made it like uh look. you you guys cannot understand this let. us do it for you it's so complicated. your tiny little brain cannot understand. this. Just give us your tax and then we. will do it for you. We'll take care of. it. >> You small brain person became Indian. >> Oh no, no, [laughter] no. This is a just. a a lord a lord of something. But this. should this should be part of what every. politician runs on and every citizen. should insist on. Administrators should.

never be touched. So if you think of in. South Africa for example the ministry of. home affairs. >> Yes. I'm the minister comes in he must. not touch. >> You see I'm loving this. the general. manager. He must love the the. departmental heads because these. appointments that are because of. friendships are the ones that destroy. the bureaucrats. Exactly. This guy, do. you get. >> now? You're a political figure, political appointee. >> Yes. >> Destroying what the administrator has. done for years and years and years and. things have been working. Then we let. that happen because we assume that they.

know what they're doing. But this person. just 6 months ago was in a political. party rally. Yes. Yes. And. >> now he walks into home affairs and. department of immigration and department. of finance and department of health and. elects people that he thinks know what. he's going to be doing and political. deployments have never worked. >> So this is so this is what I this is. what I mean by I agree with you that. most of us do not understand the. intricacies of of the things going on in. a bill or the issues et most of us but I. would I would argue that most of us also. include many of these politicians. >> The reason I say this is because if you.

talk to as you have senators, congress. people etc. First of all, they have a. whole barriage of staff. >> who processes it for them and then gives. them footnotes. And those people, if. they're influenced by the right person, choose which footnotes to give or not. give. And you've seen it in these. hearings sometimes where like someone. will ask a senator themselves, they'll. be like, "Do you know what's in the. bill?" And then the senator will be. like, "Well, I mean, I I know what the. bill and then they're like, "Do you know. what's in the bill?". >> Yes. And then it's like, well, I look, I.

don't know every single thing. Did you. know that in your bill about bridges, there's also a thing here about schools. and then like how pigs should be. shipped? >> What pigs? Yeah. Yeah. There's a thing. about pigs. It's a bridge. Yeah. Yeah. This is infrastructure, but there's a. thing about pigs. >> You know what it is? We assume that. everyone who dispenses medicine is a. pharmacist. So when we elect officials, we assume that they know what they're. doing. >> Yes, that's what I We we want them to. dispense democracy on our behalf and.

they keep telling us you guys are too. young to know what this thing is. Let me. drive it for you and I'll let you know. when. >> there could be another way, Katie. >> There could be another way. >> Okay, so guys, what are you proposing. here? >> Ah, we thought you'd never ask. [laughter]. >> No, you know what's funny? This is how. I'll even I'll I'll say it. >> Look at what you're doing in your life. now. If if I had come to you three. decades ago and said, Katie Kurrick, I. think you can run your own media. organization that chooses its own. stories. >> from the comfort of your own home.

>> Yeah. And just and [clears throat]. not even have a time that you actually. put something out, there will be no. fixed time slot. There will be no time. length overload. >> Do you think you would have looked at me. and been like, "Yeah, this sounds. feasible.". >> No, I would have said, "You're nuts.". >> Thank you. That's that's what I mean. So, and when I look at what you've done. today, it's exactly that. It's it's. citizen, you know, citizen journalism. where you you've taken taken all your. expertise, all your experience, all your.

everything that you've gained over your. life, your connections, your respect, your everything, >> your knowledge, >> and you've created something that is. very necessary. And we're seeing many. organizations that are doing this, you. know, like one of my favorites like on. YouTube like a More Perfect Union. >> Oh, yes. Mhm. some of the journalism. they're doing is like you're like wow. why isn't this just everywhere. >> why isn't this everywhere yes or Midas. Touch uh you know is doing some great. work and Courier News uh as well it's. funny cuz my friend's daughter is.

>> is like the head of all digital content. for more a more perfect. >> okay yeah kudos to them. >> and so it's it's really interesting. >> but that idea seemed crazy the idea that. a a person could make an album in their. bedroom and then send it out to the. entire world and the world could choose. how to listen to it. Seemed like a crazy. concept, you know, and then look at. someone like Billy Isish. >> But but but but how. >> I think for voting we could do it and I. think we have all the tools now. >> All right. Well, let's talk about that.

I mean, I'm just going to challenge both. of you. So, how would that work? >> Please leave me out of it. >> Huh? [laughter]. >> No, it was you. It was you with the. grip, the big. >> I don't want to be challenged. [laughter] So, so I I I would love to. hear more specifically how this would. work pragmatically. >> Okay, here's how I pitch it right now. This is this is still in beta. So, this. would be the idea, but there's a few. things we have to address. So, number. one is there's a delusion of. information, right? And there's a. breakdown in how people understand that. information. I do think AI has given us. a tool that we've never had before in.

that AI can tell you exactly it can. translate it for you for you. >> Mhm. regardless of your aptitude, regardless of your proficiency in a. language, regard AI can help you. understand anything the way you need to. understand it. All right? So that's the. first thing I think is we've now got a. tool that can take large amounts of. information, synthesize them for you. Right? >> So that's that's the first part. >> The second one is we already possess.

digital technology that requires. verification and authentication. So people are trading like Bitcoin and. all these things. You got to have your. ID in there. You've got to have facial. recognition on banking apps. Twostep. ver. So there's a a measure of security. >> biometrics. >> that is often more intense than voting. security right now. >> So it's like okay. So there's a way to. verify that this is Katie Kurrick who's. making this decision. So that's I would. argue handled already and and can keep. getting stronger.

>> And then the last one is the instant. nature of it. Instead of having bills. that are built on other bills that are. built on other bills that are built that. in my opinion mean lots of things don't. go anywhere, you could just have an. alocart system where people in their. cities, in their states, etc. of voting. on bite-sized ideas, which is how we. already consume information. >> Mhm. >> Then you just go, "Hey, would you like. more or less funding for the parks and. this? Here's how we breaking the. spending. Here's how we doing this. Because I do think there's a way we.

could simplify the information without. diminishing any of its fidelity. >> Yeah. >> And get people to make decisions as. opposed to saying you can make no. decision. You can just pick a person and. then that's it. >> But there's a lot of uh things that go. into running a country, right? Yes. So, are you suggesting that every issue, every decision, every spending cut or. increase is voted on by the CI. citizenry? >> No, but I do think there's a large part.

of it. I think we right now we're at. like zero is what I argue, right? Maybe. not zero to be fair cuz I guess people. vote on what do you what do you call. those in America? The. >> uh a referendum. >> Yeah. And also there's the other ones. where people go um. >> ballot initiatives. >> Yes. Thank you. Ballot initiatives. Right. So, it's not zero to be fair, but it's. it's very few. I'm not saying it could. it would be a hundred cuz I love. bureaucrats. I'm going to go on record. to say as like Eugene said, my friend. over here, you know why? Because.

bureaucrats. make the world move and we've been. conditioned to like hate bureaucracy and. hate. No, they are the people who make. sure that the bridges are going to work. and make sure that the engineers numbers. match up and they and they make sure. that the roads are built and they make. sure that the that the drug companies. are actually testing and they're looking. at the studies and the. >> I think some bureaucrats I mean I think. bureaucracy has gotten a a a bad name. and I think there are public servants.

who do exactly that serve the public but. there also bureaucracy conotes a certain. kind of. >> bloat, right? And and I think Democrats. and Republicans agree that the. government had gotten too big and could. have been more efficient way. >> and that's not and and and of course. Elon Musk took a literal chainsaw to it. where it needed, you know, an Xacto. knife, right? And so I think that u I.

agree with you. his weird but but you. know I think we're in this binary world. You can't say bureaucracy is good, bureaucracy is bad. >> No, that's why I'm agreeing with you. That's why I'm agreeing. I'm just you. know what's funny about the Elon Musk. thing? He took a chainsaw to it. >> I've never seen somebody take a chainsaw. >> and then somehow cut everything down. [laughter] but also miss all the trees. cuz he didn't save anything. He saved. like no money but everything was.

destroyed at the same time. You're like, "What were you doing with this chainsaw, Elon Musk?" Like, "No, no, but to your. point, that's what I'm agreeing with. I'm saying. >> I'm saying I think there can be a. balance. >> that can He did miss everything. M. >> I think there can be a balance where we. just find a world where we are a little. more involved. and politicians are held a little bit. more accountable along the way. >> as opposed to making it like I'll guess. I'll wait four years to you know. >> I think that people I think that.

election day should be a national. holiday. >> I'm loving this Katie. >> I think people should be fined if they. don't vote. Wait, let me think on Wait, let me think. on the second one first. Let me think on. it. >> National holiday. I'm in. I'm in. Find. I'm in, Katie. I'm in. >> Wait. Now I would I wish I knew at the. top top of my head. Does Australia some. country. >> you have to you in Australia? You have. to vote. >> It's mandatory, right? And what happens. if you don't? >> I do think there's you get penalized in.

some way. That's why people vote for. like Darth Vader and stuff there. >> It's quite quite common. You get. penalized. I think you get fined. Penalize comes from the word penalty. >> Yes. >> So you get Okay. >> Yes. That's exactly what it is. >> Don't you think? I just feel like. >> Why did you say penalized? >> Cuz you could have said penalized. >> because I think it's penal. I don't even. think it comes from penalty. I think it. might come from penal something else. >> Yeah, but penal colonies were penalty. colonies.

>> Penitentiary colonies. >> Pel pel pelaton. Pelaton. >> I don't know. We're going to continue. this conversation right after this short. break. This message is a paid partnership with. Apple [music] Card. Imagine this. You're. at a checkout counter. You're ready to. pay when you realize you don't have your. wallet. D. You could drive all the way back home. and you could get it, but you remember.

that you have your Apple card on your. iPhone. So, you can tap to pay with. Apple Pay. Imagine that. No need to. carry a wallet. But you know, one of the. things I do like about having my card on. my phone is we live in a world where you. lose your card and then you don't know. where it is. And then you're like, what. do I do? Well, if your phone is. connected to your card and your card is. connected to your phone, you know what's. going on. The best thing about having. the Apple card connected to your phone. is you know what every transaction is. You know, like sometimes you're like, what did I spend this month? The Apple. Card will show you. One month I had. spent an obscene amount of money. ordering videos online. Just videos.

They were just videos. What kind of. videos? That's not the point. Sure. >> The point is, I knew that I didn't want. to order those videos anymore cuz I'd. spent too much money on it. It was. videos on how to not spend money online. I felt like I'd been duped. Point is, Apple showed me what I was spending my. money on, and I was able to change my. spending habits, and you can do it, too. I earn up to 3% daily cash back on every. purchase with my Apple Card. That's. [music] unlimited daily cash back no.

matter where I shop. What a refreshing. change of pace. Apply for Apple [music]. Card in the Wallet app on your iPhone. Subject to credit approval, Apple Card. issued by Goldman Sachs Bank USA, Salt. Lake City branch. Terms and more at. applecard.com. [music]. So, here's my thing about voting. First. of all, I think it's politicians that we. agree. We're in by the way national.

holiday. We're completely in. >> and penalty. >> Well, I'm in. I'm in on this. >> if you don't go vote. Your democratic. responsibility, not right. >> Cuz I think at some point it becomes a. responsibility instead of a right. Okay. >> So, here's my thing. I think politicians. are the reasons why or are the reason. why normal citizens hate bureaucrats. because they've used words like red tape. and bloated. Um they they've used those. words to excuse them not being. efficient. So they've said, "I would. love to do this, but ah there's so much.

red tape, but if I put someone that I. know who can cut through the red tape, then for four years, someone is putting. someone that cuts through the red tape, and as soon as they get there, they. don't cut through the red tape because. maybe there's no red tape. That's how. things work. If you've ordered a. thousand buses from Malaysia, it takes. one year to make the buses, ship them. over here for 6 months." I mean, Trump. came in saying they're going to drain. the swamp. THERE'S NO ONE AT THE. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT. Who doesn't. want the bus? >> We got to drain it. And then you go. there and you're like, what? What did.

you drain? I I mean, turns out it's not. a swamp. It's a bathtub. You can't drain. the bathtub cuz we got a bath. We got a. bath. That's what it is. [laughter]. You know what? You need to be penalized. for [laughter]. doing that accent. So, so the second. part is I think there should be. categories of who can vote and how many. times can they vote. >> So, I'll give you I'll give an I'll give. an example. >> in Chicago.

>> Because here here's my thing. There's. banks who who have more security than. governments when it comes to voting. >> Okay? >> And there's also buildings that are run. more efficiently than governments. >> Okay? >> So, we can combine those two. Here we. go. People in some buildings who have. kids can vote if the place needs to be. kid-friendly or not. But if you don't. have kids or you don't have a dog, I. mean, sit this one out. >> So, this is an interesting idea. >> So, we must go. >> You're going like granular with the. voting. >> Yeah. So, if we go, Katie, how many kids. do you have? And you go, I've got three. kids. They go to school here. Here's.

their age. And then we go, okay, in the. voting ballot paper, you get more of a. say because you are creating a future. for your kids. >> Oh, this is an interesting idea. What do. you think about that, Katie? I don't. think that's a good idea. Why? >> Why not? >> I mean, you're saying that people with. kids should have more than one vote. >> The same way people with kids get to. board the plane first. >> Yes. >> So, no, I'd like to know your thoughts. on people with dogs get preferential. treatment at the buildings and the. parks. I want to hear what.

>> I'm not I don't own a dog, but when I. see a dog lover rolling with their dog. in a dog park, I'm like, I understand. you wanted this to happen and this is. benefiting you, but I if I was left to. vote for your comfort and your dog's. comfort, I can tell you now, you and. your dog wouldn't be here. [laughter]. >> But no, this is an interesting What do. you think of that? >> I don't think I don't know. I've never. really thought about it and I just don't. think it's practical. >> Okay. Okay. going to tell us how. >> You tell me how. All right. So, what do.

you do? A census and are you're saying. that people. >> when you're registering to vote, obviously government already knows from. the birth certificates of your children. how many children you have. >> Can I tell you something? It sounds like. a crazy idea. When you said it, I. thought it's crazy. when you explain it, there's a there's a little bit of sense. to it in that like. >> it also feeds into project 2025 where. they want more people to have more kids. that that they feel like that people. should be procreating at a much faster.

rate. >> Can I tell can we just pause can we take. a tangent on that? >> So what if people say okay I'm going to. have more kids because I want to have. more votes. Is that a good reason to. have children? >> No, there's not a good reason but your. body's not going to cooperate. [laughter]. Like good luck. Good luck just making. kids. >> partners as well. >> Yeah, you're in trouble already. >> I mean like the weird thing about the. human body is everyone can say like I'm. going to have more kids but your body. might be like no you're not. >> your agenda. [laughter].

>> You know it's it's just a weird. >> I think it's a it's not a good idea and. I can't really really get into all the. reasons why because I have to really. think. >> there we go Katie. But do you would you. live in an apartment building that's not. kid-friendly when you have kids? >> No. >> This this building says we don't want to. hear children playing. We don't want to. hear them laughing. We don't want to. hear anything. >> No, I wouldn't. >> You wouldn't live there, right? But why. do we do that with a country? >> Why would you do that with a state. >> that doesn't allow us to express.

ourselves and our needs and the things. that we care about on a granular level, but on a gigantic scale? So, >> well, I think you do by voting for. people who you think have policies that. are going to be better for your. children. >> But we've discovered that they don't. even know how the Department of Health. works. >> It is true. >> They've told us. They're like, I'm a. politician. >> Okay. How about this? I'll pitch this to. you before we get to our crazy ideas. Can I pitch something? >> YOU HAVEN'T GOTTEN THERE YET. >> NO, NO, NO. Because we are No. I'm. saying before cuz we haven't won Katie. over at all. >> And also Katie's coffee has run out.

That's why I think she's so skeptical. about. >> Good. Let's Let's Let's Okay. How about. How about this? >> Yeah. >> Could I pitch to you? How would you feel. if I said. nobody should be allowed to run a an. area of the government that they don't. possess an expertise in? How do you feel. about that? >> Good. >> Okay. Okay. So, you would agree like cuz. I I think it's strange that somebody who. has no experience in the field of. medicine or science can go and run the.

fields of medicine and science. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. Okay. No. So you of course. >> And then here here's another one. Here's. another C. >> What's that have to do with being able. to vote more because. >> No, no. I'm just trying to see. We're. giving. >> Of course I you know I you know I think. >> I'm trying to like I'm trying to see Oh. Are you are you building your argument? Okay. No no no. I'm just trying to see. where where we get here's my other one. Here's my other one to add to because. now we're going we're not going extreme. actually. We're going.

>> these are mediocre. We're trying to win. a voter of one. Every politician that. runs to run a certain department must. run it their campaign together with an. elected bureaucrat from that department. >> I'm not mad at this. >> So they like they're like Department of. Health. Yes. And then there's Steve. who's been at the Department of Health. for a long time. >> I like this. >> And then he endorses me cuz Steve thinks. should I come in here there's things. that I could do at Capital City that he. can't do but there's things that he can.

do inside there that I can't do. So his. running mate is a bureaucrat. So. everybody. >> what if the what if the the person who's. coming in to power has has meaningful. and important reforms to institute. You. get the bureaucrat who is basically. adhering to the status quo and saying. this is the way we've always done it. when the person coming in might say we. need to change this. This needs to be. done differently. >> There's a good point. But how do you. respond Eugene? They'll need to convince.

the bureaucrat why as an outsider they. think that would work when the. bureaucrat has been there for 20 years. >> I don't know. I'm feeling it's getting. gummed up now. >> where. >> cuz now they have to convince a. bureaucrat. Now I'm a little bit with. Katie on this one. >> Okay. If if I've been there for 20 years. and I'm telling you that's how we do a. podcast. This how it's been done. The. podcast has been going out. In fact, the. fact that you exist as a politician to. want to try and run this department. and then you come and go.

here then, here you say, "Now we're. getting to my voters again, but we're. not going to go there." Then the person. says, "Okay, I think if you change this. studio and if you change this location, if you change this microphone, >> then the person who's a bureaucrat that. goes, no, if you change that, this is. what would happen. If you don't change. this, this is what would happen.". >> But you're saying give them equal. authority, right? >> Yes. Because they are running together. So now I'm with Katie. I'm sorry. >> You want the politician to be. >> You've lost our I mean is it you're. saying that the politician has to have. expertise. So in other words, the person.

who's running the CDC has to have. expertise in health, public health, and. you should at least have some sort of So. if that's the case, that person to me. should have the authority to and. hopefully you have decent people who are. intelligent and knowledgeable and take. information from the people who are. already there, but that person has to be. in charge because I'm just afraid. Yeah, I just don't like your plan. I'm sorry, Eugene. >> Sorry, Eugene. failed. [laughter] Can I. ask you can I ask you a question? When.

you um. >> Katie, I'll win you. >> I'm assuming over the years you've. developed countless sources and and you. know, people who are insiders and just. people who have like told you things. about this could be an incorrect. assumption, but I'm assuming this. because of your time in journalism. >> Have you heard from people inside what. we call the administration? and [clears throat] and have any of them. signal to you that like they're sort of. not sure or they you know how do they.

even manage that in congruency between. what they think should be and what is? I. haven't heard that many people who are. currently inside the administration. because I think first of all they are. >> uber paranoid about leaks there and and. you know whether you're working at the. Pentagon or wherever uh. >> I think that and and also I think if. you're covering something you have to be. at the Pentagon to really have these. inside sources um that's why reporters. have different beats right so they. develop sources and have an expertise in.

that area but I do know a lot of people. who have left the administration, who. have been fired from the administration, who then are speaking out. For example, I interviewed a senior level FBI agent. who talked about kind of what she had. seen happening in the FBI, the sort of. the wholesale firing of people with. expertise, for example, in the Iranian. terror threat, right? Cash Patel just. gets rid of this whole unit or because.

some of these agents were investigating. some of the perpetrators of January 6, they got fired. So people like that are. much more open to obviously talking. about what's happening in inside the. administration. Um I I think most people. who are unhappy have left or um are are. too afraid to talk about why they're. unhappy. you know, Lizy was fired as the. chief pardon uh attorney at DOJ. Now she.

has this very very vibrant social media. presence and she's talking about what's. going on in the DOJ. I'm sure she has. sources the some people left who she. worked with. But I think it's very. difficult at least for me and maybe. White House correspondents who are. actually on site and can develop these. sources. But I think most of the people. in in the administration anyway, not. necessarily in the federal government. I'm sure there are a lot of people, but. they're terrified too. You know, you.

speak out and you get canned, right? So I I don't really have a lot of. people inside this administration who. would be able to talk on the record. about or you know even off the record. about their displeasure of how things. are being done. >> I've always been fascinated about how. the beats work. So if somebody is when. they say someone is station. or you're at the White House,

>> what does that exactly mean? cuz I I. don't assume as a journalist you get to. like walk around the White House freely. and investigate things. >> Well, you used to be able to Well, I'll. t talk about the Pentagon for a second. because I was the deputy Pentagon. correspondent at NBC only for a year. before I uh became national. correspondent on the Today Show and then. co-anchor of the Today Show. But. basically, when you're deputy or any. Pentagon correspondent, whether it's for. the Atlantic or the Washington Post or. NBC News, >> you develop sources. You walk around the.

E-ring, which is the big. >> Wait, slow down. Slow down. Sorry. Sorry. Slow slow down cuz you're saying. it and I I don't understand any of it. What does develop sources mean? >> Well, you talk to people, you know, you. introduce yourself to people. You talk. to people uh from different uh you know. arms of the you know from the Navy, Air. Force, Marines. >> So you just go around and you're like, "Hi, I'm Katie Kurrick. I'm a reporter. and nice to know you.". >> Well, yeah. Or I remember getting a tip. from somebody, you know, my first week.

at the Pentagon. >> No ways. >> Uh and said, "Hey, this is happening. Are you interested?". >> What was the story? Do you remember? Yeah, it was about a guy who had secrets. and it ended up. Yeah. Yeah. I think his name was he and. he's being accused of being a spy. >> Oh, wow. [clears throat]. >> Yeah. >> And that person tipped you. >> Mhm. >> So, help me understand this. Why do they.

do that? As opposed to you would assume. if you work at the Pentagon and you know. that somebody's a spy, you would just go. to your like your superiors and be like, "Hey, this person's a spy." Why would. they come? >> I think the person was already being. investigated. >> and I think they thought it was a good. story that it was worth being in the. public domain and that. >> it was worth reporting on. I mean, I. think people have various motivations, right, for for telling a reporter.

something. It could be for their own. self arang grandandisement. It could be. making them feel powerful, could be. because they truly believe in the public. in the public's right to know. >> Um, but anyway, so you would walk. around, you would talk to people, you. would meet people, you would meet them, you know, getting an egg sandwich in the. morning. I mean, all kinds of ways, right? Fascinating. >> And um, >> and you would walk around. I would just. walk around that Pentagon like do. circles around what they called the.

E-ring. >> just 10,000. >> and I would talk to people and um. introduce myself and. and now they have limited your ability. to walk around the Pentagon without an. escort. There are certain parts of the. Pentagon you can't walk around. >> They you you know all the different. restrictions they've tried to place on. reporters at the Pentagon. They first of. all kicked out, you know, they got rid. of people's workspace. They made the New. York Times and I think NBC News and. another publication leave.

>> uh cuz we used to have desks and. offices. You'd report from the Pentagon. like we had a soundproof booth and. they'd come to us. Um and so they kicked. some of them out. They did more. administrationfriendly. news organizations, invited them in. Then they said you had to sign an. agreement saying before you reported on. a story, even if it wasn't classified. information, you had to clear it with. the Pentagon. >> Oh wow. >> With the with the Pentagon people and.

that dictates and and then a judge said, "You can't do any of this." And now. they're still trying to put the Pentagon. reporters outside the Pentagon proper. They're trying to annex the reporters. and keep them out of the building. I. mean, they're just trying to make it. very, very difficult. Now, reporters, to. their credit, from the New York Times. and all the legitimate news. organizations. haven't let it stop them. But one. Pentagon correspondent told me.

>> that one of her sources is afraid to. meet her at a restaurant, right? or is. afraid to be seen talking to her at all, you know, which isn't surprising, but. >> it's just very it's much more difficult. and it has a chilling effect on what. people are are going to feel comfortable. talking to reporters about, right? they're going to be so scared and I. think that uh Pete Hexath has really. made it clear that he will not tolerate. any leaking and but that's when you get.

information about things that are going. on that perhaps shouldn't be going on. that warrant the public's attention. >> So they're doing um it it's really. upsetting. They're really trying to to. muzzle reporters and ti tie their hands. behind their backs and make their jobs. very difficult and it's just not right. >> I sometimes like how you explain now. makes sense of what I always think. I. sometimes feel sorry for hardcore.

journalists who are invested in telling. people the news because of how much. information just gets lost in between. Right? So if you think about in South. Africa right now, what they're trying to. do is they're trying to pass a law that. incentivizes a whistleblower. So if a. whistleblower comes out in a department. and says 16 billion rand was stolen, >> they when the when the person gets. convicted, the person gets a share of. the money recovered. >> Whoa. What? >> Yes. >> I didn't know this. >> Yes. So they first get protection while.

the case is being investigated. >> Wait. Uh. >> and then afterwards they get a cut a. percentage of what was recovered. So I. think of of the news and I think of the. era of maybe like CNN during Desert. Storm and you'd find these journalists. in there telling the news. They were the. source of the news. They were reporting. live from there. So I can imagine. someone who has a a source who works at. the Pentagon, whoever gets this. information, >> gets the story out, but they go on. social media and there's so much. disinformation about the same subject.

that they fought so hard for. Yeah. >> All the meetings they had, the life, their livelihood that they're risking. sometimes as a journalist to print a. story. That is true. And there's. potential ramifications for a lot of. people. >> Well, I still I mean there is still. incredible journalism happening. You. know, I think about ProPublica, you. know, a nonprofit. >> Yeah. news organization and they were. the ones who figured out how many of the. people who were being arrested and. detained by ICE were not guilty of.

committing serious crimes and it was. something like 85%. right and others and and so and then you. have like the New York Times or the. Atlantic or I or the New Yorker it was. New Yorker and the New York Times. keeping track of how the Trump family. has enriched themselves to the tune of. over $4 billion and county. This was a. few months ago, so I'm sure it's much. higher. >> Um, so, you know, I think that you're.

right. Everything becomes diluted in. this media landscape where everyone has. a voice and an opinion and pretends to. be a journalist. But I still believe. that for well-informed people and I. think media literacy is more important. than ever. I think that we have to have. people who understand how to how to. consume information and to judge. information and the accuracy. >> But um I think that that those stories.

do break through. And then what happens. is, >> you know, for all the belly aching about. mainstream media, whatever that is now, you know, it's these big organizations, news organizations, some of them, who. are h are are invested in news. gathering. they're reporting on stories. and then those stories are then uh. ingested by other people and explained.

to their social media followers. Um, you. know, so a lot of these single sort of. social media opinion givers and. reporters are taking. >> the the reporting, the core of the. reporting done by these news. organizations and basically I don't want. to say plagiarizing, but they're. basically reporting what these other. people have been working so hard to. report. >> So in a way it has a ripple effect. And.

so these news organizations are doing a. great service and even amplifying it. even if they're putting it in their own. words is a positive thing because it is. the result of often times weeks if not. months of reporting if that makes sense. >> No complete sense. Yeah. I I wondered. like how you grapple with as a as a. journalist when to put. um free speech or or the freedom of the.

press. above or below what you may perceive as. the interests of the country cuz I this. has always fascinated me like. you know America will be conducting a. military exercise or something and then. I'll see in the newspaper they'll go. well the military plans to da da da and. they plan to blah blah blah. Then I'm. like, do other countries not read. newspapers? Because it seems weird that. you can you can say you can report. >> what is going to happen. >> Yeah. Like like I'll read in the.

newspaper that they've just discovered. that the military is planning to do X Y. Z. >> Well, that's what happened in South. Africa. There was a military operation, joint military operation that was ran. with the US Army and the South African. army and the president didn't know about. it. >> And then someone report it. >> It was reported in the news. >> Yes. Then he had to call the general. info and inquiry. >> Imagine how weird that was. >> But but this is what I mean. >> This is this is what I'm saying. >> He found out in real time with the rest. of us. >> Yes. But what I'm saying is as a. journalist. >> I think there are national security.

considerations that I think you pay. attention to. >> Um if there if if. >> uh I'm I'm trying to think if there was. an example like that when I was at the. Pentagon. You know, Panama for example. Um, I think. I do think that you do weigh sort of. national security considerations with. the public's right to know. >> Uhhuh. >> You know, and I think it's a case-bycase. situation. >> So, I think that a lot of I don't know.

now in the current landscape, who knows, right? But I think most legitimate. journalists in a certain situation. wouldn't necessarily preempt a military. action. And I'm trying to think of. examples and and report on them prior to. them taking place, but they might. I. have to I have to really think about. that and look back on different cases. >> It's such a strange one because I I. don't know if people So, okay, like an. example, let's use a hypothetical. Nicholas Maduro, the US military going.

in and getting him and then bringing him. to the US. >> That's what we call it now. >> What What do you want? What do you want. to call it? >> Getting him like they're giving him a. lift. >> They they got him. >> He wasn't in a sleepover. But he was not. like he. wouldn't say got him sleep over. No. No. That would be picked him up. >> Got him means like got him. Do you get. what I'm saying? That's why you say got. him versus picked him. If I said like, "Hey, what happened to my friend Eugene. the other day?" I'll be like, "Oh yeah, I picked him up." I've never be like, "I. got him.". >> Oh, but you could also say I'm going to.

get Eugene later so I can meet you at 3. >> I'm going to get Eugene. Yeah. Yeah. This is true. I guess it depends on like. the inflection. >> If snatched. >> Snatch. >> Yeah. If Eugene come to your house, what. word would you use? >> Okay, I'm going to use snatched then. They went and snatched him. [laughter]. >> They went and snatched him up. Right. >> That type of story. >> Mhm. >> Or even let's say Iran. When you look at how the public, and.

obviously it's not all of the public, but when you look at how like the. American people have responded post some. of these things, maybe Venezuela people. weren't as attached, so they're like, "We don't understand what's happening. We don't understand why we're doing. this." But then like with Iran, the. American public seems to be against this. on mass. Most of the people in America. are going, "We don't want this and we. did not want this." I wonder if a. journalist had. >> a billion dollars a day, right? >> Is that what it is now? a billion. dollars a day. Oh man, that's a lot of.

OMIC people could be buying. People like. there's no money for healthcare, but. there's money, man. If someone could. have reported that cuz somebody knew. something ahead of time. >> Mhm. >> I wonder if that type of reporting, which seems to go against the sort of. interests of the administration, >> go in the interest of the country. Because if if if the country knew. beforehand and then the country goes, "We heard this was going to happen. We. don't like it." There's a good chance it.

wouldn't happen. >> Well, I think it was pretty clear that. something was going to happen in Iran, you know, with all the ships that had. been deployed and all that, right? >> And you think about the leadup to the. war in Iraq, right? The whole argument. that. >> the Bush administration was making about. weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that. turned out to be wrong. And I think the. reporting on that. >> was pretty strong, right? But it was. strange because that was sort of post. 911 and there was a tendency certainly.

for Afghanistan but later for Iraq to. not question sort of the administration. as voseiferously as they should have. been in the run-up to the war in Iraq. And uh the White House correspondents. and a lot of journalists were roundly. criticized for not questioning what was. happening more. Um, but they were. definitely reporting on it. And I think, yeah, I I I I'm going to go back and. look at sort of how military operations, if anyone scooped a military operation, if it had a ne a a a negative impact on.

the execution of that would be. fascinating, too. Yeah, I'm sure there. are a lot of cases. I'm. >> Yeah, I can't think of any now. >> We'll be right back after the short. break. >> [music]. >> How do you. um or how have you I should say cuz I. think you've done a a really good job of.

it. How have you managed to be Katie. Kurrick the person and Katie Kirrick the. journalist for as long as you have and. sort of maintained. especially on the journalistic side the. like the the prestige of that role and. not lost it because people like know who. you are you know you you've spoken about. your family you've spoken about loss. you've spoken about death in your life. you've you you've shared so many things. as a human being. >> and yet at the same time I don't know. how to explain it it's almost like it.

hasn't celebrityified your your. journalism if that makes sense. People. still. >> tainted it. >> Yeah. Yeah. Because you know sometimes. sometimes sometimes some news people or. some journalists. >> start to like become the stories in some. ways. >> Yeah. >> I wonder how you've how you've how. you've. >> have you purposefully looked to strike. that balance and how have you done that? >> Not really. I mean um I sort of don't. feel like I am two different people uh.

and and at times I think I have become. the story right in a way I use my. husband's death to become a cancer. advocate right and so that is when my. personal plight and my journalism have. intersected right. >> um in terms of trying to inform the. public about colon cancer and colon. cancer screenings uh. >> I mean they they still call that correct. effect, right? >> Well, that the fact that yeah, colon. cancer screenings increased 20% after I. did a colonoscopy on the Today Show.

>> I know it was crazy. >> Sorry for your loss, by the way. >> Thank you. I appreciate that. Um, >> but I don't know. That's kind of I I. don't even know how to answer that. question. Uh, I am a person and I'm a. journalist and listen, I try to do the. best I can in both roles, right? Um, yeah, I don't really see a delineation. between, you know, of course I have my. personal life that I don't necessarily.

share with everyone. >> Um, and then I have my my professional. desire to keep people informed, >> but. >> I don't know. That's a I've never been. asked that question. I don't really know. how to answer it. >> How do you take a break from being. informed? I I I selfishly. >> hard. It's really hard because. >> the the volume and velocity of stuff. coming to you. If you kind of check out. for a day,

>> you miss the. >> I feel like, oh my god, you miss a war. I feel like I don't know what's going. on. >> You lose a billion dollars a day. >> And you're like, oh my god, wait, what? And there's so much to keep up with. And. you know, and I was just rereading a. couple of stories, you know, preparing. for our conversation. I was like, I have. to really understand why the CDC kept. this report about the COVID vaccine from. being made public. I know they did it. I. saw the headline, but I don't know.

enough about why they did it. >> And what did they say? and well I also. read that but all I thought was that. they were just like we don't think that. this is valid or. >> they they question the methodology which. was you know that this morbidity. mortality weekly report which must be. really a fun read that is published by. the CDC and has never changed how they. go about analyzing information. Um they. they because well they kept it they.

blocked it because it didn't fit with. their narrative because it showed the. COVID vaccine decreased emergency room. visits by 55% and hospitalizations by. 50%. >> And this is a CDC and uh you know uh. department of um you know uh RFK. juniors. What is his? It's um what is RFK in. charge of you guys? What is the health. secretary? What is secret? Yeah. Health.

and human services. Sorry. Health and. Human Services. Sorry. Department of. Health. I'm getting my acronym. Yeah. No, we call it Department of Health and. Human Services. You know, they are. clearly antivaccine, anti-COVID vaccine. So, they are suppressing a report that. showed the positive impact of the COVID. vaccine. Trump's vaccine, may I add, I. don't know why my man gets no credit for. that vaccine. He put Operation Warp. Speed into effect. You remember this? >> Yes. And in fact, somebody was talking.

the other day and he was pushing it home. accomplishments. >> It was one of his proudest and he should. be proud of it. >> And and now, you know, obviously it. doesn't fit the narrative. So. >> now he's stepping back from the. responsibility of it. >> No, not even. It's like what happened. was weird. Trump was responsible for. like he was at the the head of. spearheading this COVID 19 vaccine in. regular time. >> Not just the roll out but getting the. entire scientific community to research. a thing to put into place a system that.

normally would take up to a decade or. something and saying how do we run. certain processes concurrently to make. sure that we can get this out as quickly. as possible so the world can come back. to life. It was a fantastic thing. >> It's a fantastic thing. so many lives. and of course mrna. >> uh vaccines and this whole approach is. actually responsible for this new. imunotherapy that they think has a lot. of promise for pancreatic cancer. So not. only was the co covid vaccine a positive.

it also led to a lot of other vaccines. for other serious illnesses and a new. kind of. >> um you know therap therapeutic approach. So, but in this world where black is. white and white is black and up is down. and down is up, >> it didn't fit with it didn't fit with. what the base and the narrative were. going with. >> And so what was strange was Trump said. it at one of his rallies. I remember he. said he's like the COVID vaccine was my.

vaccine. I did it. I did. And the crowd. like he's like a lot of people they. don't like that. They don't like it. So. I don't talk about I don't talk about. but he was like yo I did that thing. It's not Biden's vaccine. It's my. vaccine. But because the pe his people. didn't like it. He was like, "All right, fine. But it is mine, but I fine. Nobody. wants to talk about I'm not gonna talk. about it anymore." Assault on science is. so infuriating, especially someone like. me who's done tried to devote so much. time to cancer research, to raising.

money to support science. and this this. idea that that. you know people don't believe the. scientific community and the way that. Anthony Fouchy has been demonized. >> is just in my view a disgrace. >> Yeah, I think I think it's a you know. it's one of those things where hindsight. is 2020. So I remember when we had Dr. Fouchi on the show and I asked him this. question or a version of it was just. like how much do you feel responsibility.

to inform people of what's happening cuz. at the time the thing I said as well. about like the CDC and all of it was. they were giving mixed messages you know. so first they told us don't wear masks. please do not wear masks masks are not. for you don't wear the masks don't wear. the masks and then all of a sudden they. were like everyone get a mask and we're. like what the hell just happened here. and it was like uh this many feet away. from other people no feet do indoor no. out And then when you realize they were. trying to like manage people, >> I was that was like the only criticism I.

had was I went regardless of your. intentions and I think parents see this. a lot. Sometimes you think you're going. to lie to your kid for a good reason and. your kid will appreciate it. >> I think they should have been more. transparent that this is a new virus. We. are learning about it every day. We're. learning about transmission. We're. learning about how deadly it is. We are. learning and we are really doing this as. we go. >> Sweden did that.

>> Yeah. And I think that that would have. perhaps made people less critical of. kind of oh wait now this now that. actually on the other hand well we've. re-evaluated this. And I think that. science, you know, there's an art to. science, too. And it's cumulative and. you you don't necessarily have all the. answers immediately. >> And I think the scientific and medical. community did an incredible job of.

taking this pandemic and trying to. understand it. But I think there was. something lost in communicating what. they were learning to the general. public. >> Yeah. It's a it's it's it's I don't. think it warrants the kind of um. >> oh no like the world ending de it's like. it's it's extreme it's but it's also. again it goes back to the sports of it. all. >> right. >> if you ask sports fans what should. happen to somebody who's made a bad. tackle depends on the team someone be.

like ah come on we that happens get a. walk it off the other times like no kick. him out of the game eject that person. and ban them even that was the the most. flagrant so I think. >> the tribalism. Yeah, that has marred how Americans in. particular I find discuss any issue. >> Even even this is something I've always. wondered even in journalism. >> When did that thing not that you would. immediately know, but why do they put. Republican or Democrat before somebody's.

name in an article? Like why why does. American news report things like that? Or they'll even say a win for Democrats. as um child care law passes. Then I'm. like, but why don't they just say. childcare law has passed? >> Win for the people. >> Yeah, I've always wondered that. Like, why why do they in my opinion? >> I guess in a two-party system, you. >> have to. >> you I I guess maybe it's a way of. >> of figuring out people's priorities and. getting back to elections, you know,

what they care about and what they. choose to focus on and move the needle. on, right? >> What promise seems delivered and by. whom? >> Yeah. Yeah, but but what I mean, okay, so it would be different if it if the. headline said. Democrats promised child care law, it. has now been passed. I know this is not. a sexy headline, right? But that is what. happened. But if they go in a win for. Democrats, child care law passed, to me, it makes it seem like the Republicans.

have lost and the Democrats have won. And the childcare law doesn't have. anything to do with the children in the. law. It just has to do with who passed. it. >> I mean, I don't know where you saw that. headline. >> Oh, no. This is there's a headline I'm. par, but I could pull them. there. there's always like in a winfall in a. you know and then and then the other one. is just when people speak so they'll go. um Republican Katie Kurrick passes law. on or says that we need to have fewer. this and sometimes I think if you could.

remove that R or D before the issue I. think people would approach it with a. more neutral and honest opinion. >> perhaps. >> you know did you ever see that that quiz. that the New York Times that you you. didn't see this but you you'd love this. though. You'd love this. >> How do you know I didn't see the quiz? >> Ah, Brian, you don't read. I know this. So, [laughter]. no. So, it was it was here in the New. York Times. Um, they put out a quiz. It. was around like when Hillary, Bernie, everyone was running. So, I think 2016.

somewhere there. And the quiz was. you just choose your issues, we'll tell. you who you should vote for. >> Oh, wow. And I remember in the building. we did this in the office and everyone. ran this quiz, right? And I was working. at the Daily Show at the time. And so, you know, some people were liberals, some people conservatives, some. everyone, but everyone had their idea. They were so confident. They're like, "Oh, I I know I'm going to get Hillary. I know this for sure. Oh, I'm definitely. going to get this. I'm definitely going.

to get that tasting of issues.". >> It was literally that you just Do you. think America spends a too much money on. the military? B, not enough money. C, just the right amount. D, what? You know. what I mean? They did that for every. issue. >> And at the end, they would go, "This is. the candidate who aligns with you.". >> The amount of panic and angst in the. building when people got their results, and it even went viral at the time, but. I remember people going, "This can't be. right. I'm not a Bernie voter." And.

you're like, "No, no, no, but everything. you want is align with the candidate.". And that's when I realized half of the. time we are not looking at the issue. We. are looking at the person we associate. the issue with and then we're making the. decision based on that. >> But circle back to my earlier. proposition of how elections should be. running. >> This is not election time. We're not. going back to this. >> You're voting on the issue. >> No, no, no, no. I agree with But what. I'm saying is, do you get what I mean? >> Don't agree Katie, please. You're a. journalist. You know this tactic.

[laughter]. >> He's printing a retraction. >> I'm not printing a retraction. No, no. I. said I agree with I said I agree with. issue based. >> No, no, but I originally agreed with. issue based. No, I I had already agreed. with it. >> Okay, sure. >> The thing I didn't agree with you on was. the bureaucrat buddy coming to elections. >> like a bureaucrat body. >> Yeah. Bureaucrat body I didn't agree. with. Yeah, that I didn't agree with. >> Do but do you understand what I'm. saying? He's like, I I wonder. maybe responsibility is the wrong word, but there's one part of journalism that.

is finding out the facts and the. information and what is going on. >> and verifying them. >> There's another part that is framing it. How is it put to people? >> Packaging it. >> Yes. Mhm. >> And I I that's the thing I sometimes I. just find myself wondering cuz I didn't. grow up like that. is like why is it necessary to have that. person's political affiliation. when they were just saying or doing. something. because then I think it it limits a. person's ability to just go I like or.

don't like. >> or to say a Republican can actually have. a good policy or a Democrat Democrat can. actually that's a good idea. Well, hopefully these things are bipartisan. I. mean, I I'd like to go back and see the. headlines that you have in mind. I mean, I think that people just I don't know, you know, it's just very very. traditional and very um I think has the. way it's been done with Republicans and. Democrats and.

I don't know. I I don't I don't see a. problem with that. >> You don't? >> Mm-. >> Huh. H you know when I when I realized. how powerful it can be was when um we. did a piece on how. there was a there's a town I forget. where this was but basically someone was. running for mayor in a city and in this. city and I think there's a few places. like this you're not allowed to say. whether you're Republican or Democrat. when you're running for mayor. You just.

run. >> Really? >> Yeah. Yeah. And this place has like one. of the highest rates of people voting. across party lines because they don't. know which party the person's from. So. they just go, "Who's running?" Eugene. Eugene wants clean water. Eugene thinks. there should be more cows. There should. be fewer windmills. >> Parents should get more more votes. >> Parents should have more votes. >> People should vote on [laughter]. individuals. >> Exactly. And then they go like, "Okay, we've also got Katie Kurrick. K K K K K. K K K K K K K K K K K K K K K Katie. wants more journalism, more desks at the.

Pentagon, more egg sandwiches and throat. and she wants more um colonoscopies and. [laughter] this is her platform that. she's running on. >> Yes. >> The people the people vote. >> Trevor wants. >> good times. >> So you're saying [laughter] the. obsession with two parties is polarizing. and often. the identity of it first I believe. >> limits people's ability. If I met you. and the first thing you said to me was, "Hi, Republican Katie Kirrick." No.

matter what, my brain has now put you in. a certain space. Even if you said, "Hi, Democrat Katie Kirk." I'd be like, >> "Okay, my brain has put you in a space. Hello, Liverpool supporter, Trevor. Noah." Your brain already goes, if. you're a Manchester United supporter, you're like, I don't know about this. guy. >> For me, the joy is you meet people, you. talk, you discuss things, you experience. life, and then at some point, somebody. goes, "You're an Eagles fan." Oh man, I'm a Chiefs fan. I didn't know you were. an Eagles fan the whole time. Okay.

Okay. That's that's what I think it robs. people of. Honestly, in my opinion. >> No, I understand what you're saying. There was a Heineken commercial a few. years ago about people putting together. a bar. Did you ever see this? >> Building things together. Yes. >> And nobody knew anything about anyone's. background. And there was a trans person. there. There were just kind of a whole. kind of. >> It was a complete life. Yeah. >> And it basically I think this is sort of. the point you're making to to kind of. get rid of your preconceived notions and.

to be more open-minded for different. perspectives. By the time they finished. doing the bar, they all kind of had done. something together. They had talked to. each other. They'd gotten to know each. other. >> And it removed all these kind of, you. know, very specific um, you know, preconceptions Yeah. about each other. So, I think I if that's what you're. saying, I understand. I mean, I don't. know about removing the D and the R if.

that's gonna be the solution. >> Oh, not solution. I just like like a. it's like I'm pitching an amendment. >> is where I go cuz cuz to your point, what you know what I loved about that. commercial in particular. >> was they brought people in. They knew. they had very extreme views about. certain issues, >> right? >> They made them work on something. together. They would work and they would. struggle and they built something. together and then afterwards they'd get. them to say why the other person was so. good and why they worked well together. and they'd be like, "Oh man, you know,

Eugene really builds well and Katie is. such a wonderful teammate." And they had. all these ausive things and they said, "All right, now we want to show you a. video.". >> And they gave you like a video. >> and the person described who they were. >> Yes. And then it was like, "Hello, Eugene. Here's a video." And it was. Katie. >> Did you watch it? Actually, >> it it's amazing. It's amazing. And then. you get the video and it's like I'm. Katie Kurrick. Man, if there's one thing. I hate, it's South Africans. Short South. Africans who are comedians with glasses. I hate them with all my heart. Me too.

[laughter]. >> Or more like, I am a woman. I believe in. a woman's right to choose. I believe in. this. I believe LGBTQ rights. I believe. in this. Um and it ju it just it just. kind of um all these differences. evaporated and it was it was very. interesting. >> It was beautiful because people said. >> people saw each other as humans not as. >> uh. >> there you go. >> idologues.

>> I sometimes do you think that that's. also part of the role of journalism is. to make everyone in a society see the. other people in that society? Yeah, but. I think it's really hard now because I. think when you're there's so much. fragmentation. and you want to get an audience, there's. a a real um. [snorts]. there's an advantage to appealing to. people who feel strongly one way or.

another. And it's it's less of let's. talk about the nuances of this story. It's more as my friend Cara Swisser says. like engagement through engagement. How. do you get people especially social. media and these platforms obviously are. all it's all about the attention. economy. How long you're going to stay. on the platform? How much you're going. to engage on the platform. And so I. think that there's not.

there's not an emphasis on kind of a. conversation where two people could show. a different point of view. >> Yeah. >> I mean, I guess Abby Phillip does that. in some ways on her CNN show. Um, but. it's it that show frustrates me too. sometimes because well like last night. or I saw a clip or maybe it was last. night that they were talking about all. the very incendiary things that.

President Trump has said. >> Yeah. And this one Republican kept. insisting that he was really changing. the dialogue, but he would not or. changing kind of the temperature or. lowering the temperature of of debate or. whatever he was saying. >> And yet he would not concede that some. of the things that Trump has said. >> are wrong. Wrong. You know, you know, you don't cheer when Robert Mueller. dies, right? you know, a true patriot,

you know, and so many things. I mean, we. could list chapter verse all the things. the incendiary and just honestly, you know, uh disgusting things that that. Trump has said and done. >> And he would not he would not just say, you know what, that was wrong. He. shouldn't do that. It's sort of like he didn't want to give. an inch. >> No, but there's no reward in that, I. find now. Well, that's what I'm saying. in society. Okay, I hear you. Yeah, there's no.

>> describing he is on a team to get back. to your sort of team point and he does. not want to do anything that will make. people doubt his loyalty to that team. >> I would even argue. >> so the the environment just isn't. receptive to kind of this give and take. It's everyone is sort of has picked. their side, right? But I but I would. even argue in that instance I would I. would levy some of the blame on the. producers of the show because I would go. [snorts] you know full well that you're.

not bringing somebody here to have a. meaningful discussion. You're bringing. somebody to play a part. >> Yeah. >> Against somebody who's playing a part. >> because when I watch those shows. >> Disgusting. >> Yeah. The the people are very much you. can say whatever and be like oh uh. Donald Trump choked a puppy. Well let me. I mean who likes puppies? Come on let's. talk. And you're like, well, you don't. think that, but because your job here is. to be the pro-Trump or Republican. person, and your job is to be the. pro-democrat, pro. >> I almost go like I'm like, "Oh, we.

haven't we actually haven't created a. show about discourse and dialogue. We've. created the theater of it.". >> Yeah. >> That makes both sides feel seen and it. feels like a way to like try and grab. both sides, but it doesn't feel like a. meaningful way to actually have a. discussion. >> Yeah, I agree. And I guess the question. is again I I think just because I've. covered so many administrations, do we normalize. some of the things the Trump. administration is doing by.

giving it weight in an argument? >> Right? >> And are these policy differences or is. it something more dangerous? >> Right? And and the question is do you. legitimize that. by having that conversation? I don't. know. >> If you if you apply. >> the normal way of doing things to an. abnormal thing,

>> are you now making the abnormal normal? >> Very normal. >> Yeah. >> Essentially is what you're saying. So. when when I mean we we we we've we find. you at a point in your journey, you. know, it feels like one of your many. evolutions. What is your what is your dream? What is. your like if you if you look at what. you're doing now in life, where you're. trying to go with it, what do you hope. it becomes? And what do you hope it. fills in society? >> I mean, I don't hope it becomes. anything. I hope that I can.

continue to give voice to people who. have the wisdom and the experience and. the understanding and the knowledge to. share what we're all witnessing together. and to give it a perspective that I. think is right. Um, you know, I ask the questions. I don't always have. the answers, but if I want to talk to.

somebody who I think does, who can give. an honest appraisal of what's going on. and uh that's what I want to help share. with the world. if that's helpful to. people, if that if if if they're the way. they see the world. I mean, obviously, I'm giving them a platform, so there has. to be some kind of uh level of me. >> kind of feeling like their views are. worth. >> exposing and airing and and putting out.

there for the public. >> Um. >> but but that's what I hope to continue. to do. I think, you know, I gave a. speech last night. I got an award and I. was talking about how science oh thank. you science is refuted. >> how um you know the constitution is. being ignored. >> how expertise is being derided. >> so all those things I want to give voice. to and that's that's all I want to be of.

service to democracy in any way I can. >> um and to the values that I hold dear. you know, scientific discovery and. advancement, uh, the rule of law, you know, um, uh, expertise, you know, I was reviewing, uh, this book by Tom Nichols. I think it. was written in 2017. It was called the. death of expertise and why people don't.

trust people who have a deep well of of. knowledge in a certain area because. everyone is an expert now everyone has. an opinion and then I think the. democratization of media means that. everyone thinks everyone's opinion holds. the same weight. >> but it doesn't there's so many opinions. without portfolio out there I want to. talk to the about the covid vaccine with. a scientist who studied it, you know, and who who will really truly understand.

the impact of it, not somebody who's. trying to kind of uh perpetrate a. narrative. >> about the, you know, the vaccines are. unsafe. You know, nothing is 100% safe, by the way. And I think that that needs. to be transparent too to the American. public. But um you know so so trying to. use my ability to elicit questions and. to ask questions that I think most. people have and to be able to turn to.

somebody who really understands an. issue, who understands like the role of. NATO in the 20th century and you know. post World War II and what it has done. and what is it it has meant while. acknowledging that perhaps some. countries haven't paid enough right into. NATO. Uh but but kind of understanding. the framework. >> I want to talk to a historian who can. talk about that, >> right? >> Um not somebody who just says NATO sucks.

and they're not paying their fair share, >> right? >> It's the nuance. It's the nuance and the. complication. And I think. >> yeah, your your your um your endeavor is. valid because. I think it does something. One of the. first things you said in in explaining. this is you said. I paraphrase you but basically you said. something to the effect of I want to. report on the world and the realities.

that we are all experiencing. I think that is one of the most. important things we take for granted. >> is just giving people a view of a. reality that we do share. M. >> I always say let's argue about reality. but let's not dispute it. >> We can argue all we want. >> Science. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. But let's not dispute. reality itself. >> And also, you know, it's it's messy. >> There's no clearcut answer on some of. these things. You know, my daughter.

often talks about the ability to think. dialectically. Yes. And. >> and I think we've lost our ability to do. that. Yes. two things may be true at the. same time. >> You know, uh the the regime in Iran was. terrible and um you know was able to. survive for too long. >> a brutal theocracy, right? That was. doing all kinds of terrible things to. its people and to the region and. potentially to the world, right? You can.

say that. >> Was it right to do this now? and what. were what was the rationale? Yeah. Right. So I think that also. >> and the way the way it's been done. >> and I think this tribalism has made. people really wary of dealing in the. gray areas. >> and in the complexities of situations. >> Yeah. Scared to be wrong and Yeah. >> Yeah. Scared to be wrong and messy. I.

think messy is the big one. >> Yeah. Because I I think being scared to. be wrong foils debate from the onset. If. you if you run the risk of being wrong, you will never allow your opinion to be. challenged. Number one. >> But I think what this conversation has. helped me realize is the importance of. journalists. Cuz I think a lot of people. who consume short bites of media on. social media do not understand that. their favorite influencer that tells. them the news got that news from a. journalist who verified the sources, who. wrote the story, who broadcast the story. and someone takes it and runs with it.

So, we still need and we should have a. deep appreciation for hardworking. journalists like such as yourself and. other people that you know in the. industry. >> Definitely. I'm so glad you said that. because I'm I'm working on uh a. documentary or trying to develop a. documentary about the evolution of the. news business because, you know, I got. into this business in 1979. and how it's changed and and we should. call it back in the day and [laughter]. and and sort of what it means and and.

and. >> and how important it is. >> to have a common understanding of truth. in a democracy. Yeah, that's the thing, >> right? And we have lost that. You know, people call it truth decay. >> And you know what that means in terms of. keeping a democracy. strong? >> Yeah. It's it's one of the it's part of. an immune system is the way I think of. it, >> right? A body is a messy thing. Its.

systems are strangely messy, but they. all work in in a direction. So like. sometimes [snorts] you feel bad like you. feel sick because your body is fighting. to make you unsick but you feel bad. because of your own body. Does that make. sense? >> Yes. Your immune system. >> Yes. But but it's weird if you. >> Oh, wait. Wait. No. A virus gets in. there. >> Yeah. But the immune system is the thing. that we're experiencing actually is like. your body is making you feel bad. Yes. The reaction. Yes. >> We're experiencing the reaction. >> That's what I mean. And that's what I. mean by the messiness of it all is like.

sometimes I think we take for granted. that the correct way or the the best way. we've figured out for things to work is. the messy way is like the journalism. will reveal messy truths about your. country and your people and outsiders. and insiders and if you if it's good. journalism it will force you to grapple. with those truths you know like like. you're saying and I think I think I. unfortunately I think all of us have. gotten intellectually lazy where we. immediately. >> intellectually lazy to.

>> uh you know our side of the argument. Yeah. Yeah. >> And it's not like, well, wait, what? You. know, maybe this should have happened. differently or maybe that person has a. point. You don't have to agree with them. on everything, but our ability to kind. of. >> look at something critically and. dialectically, I think, has been lost in. this very binary black and white in, you. know, world we live in. Uh, good, bad. >> Mhm. I mean, again, I find it gets.

complicated. when you're talking about. a president who does the things this. president does. >> Yeah. >> You know, because I do think, you know, it's it's been said it's not left, right, it's right, wrong, right? M. >> and it is very difficult to kind of do. those um you know moral equivalencies. when you feel like one side of the. ledger is really.

wrong if that makes sense. Absolutely. No. Yeah. >> So, that to me is the the real. >> the real challenge, you know, it's it's. not two different. >> perspectives on policy like how do you. solve the homeless problem, right? >> It is a way of doing business. that. feels wrong and unjust.

>> Yeah. you know, building. >> of what $400 million ballroom that is. going to eclipse the White House without. going through the proper. um you know process of getting. permission and or loading the people. >> So, it's law for everyone except me, >> right? you know, >> and so I think that's that's where it's. it's become really. difficult and challenging, I think, for.

a journalist. >> Well, thankfully difficult and. challenging is sort of what you've. specialized in. I think it's what many. to what Eugene saying great journalists. have specialized in. >> Difficult and challenging was, you know, covering a Gulf War. difficult and. challenging was, you know, tracking a. drug smuggling ring. Difficult and. challenging is finding a source, informing people, trying to make it. palatable or even um digestible for a. public.

>> Um genuinely, all I can say is I think. myself and many other people, we're. grateful to people like you because we. don't realize how much. >> of our knowledge is based on, as Eugene. said, the work of other people. And then. what we do is we turn around and we go, I don't I don't need that. I don't I. don't need the news and I don't read the. news because, you know, I actually heard. this thing the other day about how and. I'm like, [laughter] yeah, where do you. where do you think you heard it from? >> Where do you think that person heard it. from? >> People just make it like it comes out of.

thin air. I actually saw a thing that. said, uh, it's like, yeah, the same. journalists. >> that you will vilify, the same ones. >> are the ones who put out the news about. how something that was reported a while. ago has now changed. It's the same. place. >> Like I've always found it funny that. people will go, "The New York Times said. this. The New York Times put out a story. now saying that something they reported. on 1015 years ago was like wrong." Not a. correction, but they're saying like, "Hey, actually, we've just discovered. this." And then people go, "See, the New. York Times put out this thing where they.

they uh they found out that this many. years ago they were wrong." I'm like, "Yeah, but where did you hear this?". From the New York Times. So you should. be grateful that the thing exists. >> in its imperfect state because it is. still providing. >> a service. >> But I also think people have to take the. responsibility of being informed. seriously. >> Ah we want to be lazy Katie. Why are you. doing this to us? if they know like some. we I was talking to some people in. Virginia about the redistricting vote.

and. >> uh one of the people were saying. somebody I was talking to said you know. people felt like it was morally wrong. gerrymandering is wrong. >> but I said did they understand that this. started in Texas by uh you know a mid. mids census year request by the. president of the United States to. redistrict in Texas so there would be. more Republican seats. Do they. understand that was the genesis of all.

this? And then it happened in California. and then North Carolina and then. Missouri and now Virginia. And if people. don't pay attention and don't. understand, they it's they have to be. informed and they needed to understand, well, Virginia is doing this because it. started in Texas and if the Democrats. hadn't responded in California and. Virginia, then the chances then it would. be very lopsided for the midterm.

elections. But it's sort of like, and. did you know that in 2018, the Democrats. proposed legislation, I think it was. 2018, to end gerrymandering, period. >> Yeah. Full stop. >> And no Republicans voted for it. So, I. just I think people just need to to have. the background and educate themselves. before they have an opinion. I I think the the assault. on journalism is probably more on the.

journalism profession itself because. it's not made as sexy and as essential. You know people talk about political. >> that's because everyone thinks they are. one. >> teacher. Yes. Exactly. So I think maybe. the battlefield where else we would see. a journalist reporting in the. battlefield I think the new battlefield. is exactly where the plagiarism is. happening and the misinformation is. happening on social media. I think now. the journalist needs to hold that phone. in front of their face as they held the. microphone during the Gulf War and say. in this battlefield this is the truth. and this is not the truth because right.

now I think we've just left it all up to. people who have nice phones and nice. lighting and too much time on their. hands to tell the stories. I think the. journalists need to go and so that's why. I'm happy when I see publications of. social media accounts. Well, I was. actually about to ask, is there a reason. that you decided to go because you you. have gone to exactly to what Eugene. said. You've done that. You've gone to. where the people are. >> Well, that's I mean, it was pretty. obvious. It didn't take a brain surgeon. to see where the population. [laughter]. >> No, not you. It didn't take a brain.

surgeon though uh people in my. profession [laughter] to see that that. linear television news was declining, right? that people were getting. increasingly getting their news and. information online. >> and that you had to then and and people. I think in legacy media organizations. were kind of caught flatfooted because. they had uh a vested interest in. maintaining the status quo you know they. talk about analog dollars and digital. pennies and you know this is where they.

were making the money they didn't want. to cannibalize their product but. >> as you know their their viewers got. older and older. and everyone. uh else was was looking at their phones. for information. Now they're finally. catching up and you're seeing, you know, network and uh local even reporters even. though so many local newspapers like. 2500 do 2500 have closed since I think. 2004. But you're seeing them adapt to.

these new platforms where people are. getting their information. And by the. way, I listen on Instagram to somebody. from the New York Times. Even if it's a. it's a reporter, an opinion person, I. listen to somebody from ABC News online. I I still pay attention and consider the. source of the information. And that's. what I mean about media literacy. You. know, people need to understand there. are certain standards from different. news outlets and organizations that are.

adhered to, you know, where information. is vetted and sourced and edited and, you know, verified. >> There's accountability. >> Yeah. And I think that it's been very. hard with this flood of people just kind. of giving information, influencers, it's. like, I'm sorry, where did you get that. information? Why are you saying this? Where did this come from? But people. can't. It's hard to discern who is. legitimate and who's not when there's a.

sea of people all kind of talking to you. on your phone. >> Yeah. >> No. Well, I mean, like I say, it's it's. one it's literally it's one step at a. time. It's one challenge at a time. I. love how much vigor you have for it, by. the way. Cuz like a lot of people would. be like, I've done my time. I'm done. But you still have like the. >> I love it. >> That's what I mean. I can see you know. why it's selfish? Because I love. learning about the world. I love. understanding. So when I'm talking to. somebody about a subject, if I'm talking.

to a former military person about the. challenges of the war in Iran and drone. war warfare and what's changed, like I. want to I want to learn that, you know. So I feel like selfishly. >> I'm learning something every day. And if. I then can help by my ignorance or my. desire to to become more knowledgeable. can then help someone else be like, "Oh, wow. I didn't know that. That's. interesting." Or whatever. I feel like.

I'm I I'm serving myself and hopefully. other people at the same time. If that. makes sense. >> That makes complete sense. That's how. you know you've you've reached your your. ultimate purpose. You first. Don't you I. I in the same speech last night I said I. became a journalist because I love to. write and I'm very nosy and I am sort of. insatiably curious and I it's hard cuz I. feel frustrated. I think about God all. this stuff I don't know and understand.

>> but if I can carve out a little bit. every day and learn something new or. understand something more deeply. >> that's that's so great. >> It's the greatest gift, >> isn't it? I mean. And I think people people need to to be. open to new information and knowledge. and. it's just and then when you have an an. opinion about something, you know, and I. like some of the stuff that we've talked.

about, I don't know, right? And I and I. have to go and study something before I. have an opinion and talk to legitimate. experts and really learn about. something. podcaster. Katie, [laughter]. you can't you can't go study the things. We just need opinions now, Katie. >> But do you know what I mean? >> No research required, Katie. This is. podcasting, [laughter] Katie. Someone. asks you a question, you go, this is the. answer. This is podcasting, Katie. Trying to be informed here. What are you. trying to do? Take your Jean's job. [laughter].

But right, I mean I don't want to give. an opinion like when when you were. asking me about national security versus. the public's right now. >> Yeah, I saw. >> Well, I would like to go back and really. identify incidents where that happened. or didn't happen. >> so I could talk more intelligently about. it. Can I tell you that is probably one. of the greatest learnings we've had on. this show over time.

is that the people who often times have. the most expertise and the people who. are often times the most well-versed in. any particular discipline also operate. with higher levels of doubt than. everyone else. It's it's a it's a it's a. powerful and beautiful humility to see. doctors, scientists, journalists, but I. mean at the top of their game going, I. don't know. I need to. >> Yeah, I'm not sure about that. Let me I. actually don't know on and you you go.

like wow. Oh, this this is in a strange. way. It's like going an expert is. somebody who knows so much that they. know how little they know. >> Yeah. >> Right. Okay. >> Do you know what I mean? They truly like. they go, >> "Yeah, I don't." And then the rest of us. are genuinely like, "I'm an expert in. this." It's like, "What do you what do. you know?" I mean, I've watched a few. videos. I've seen a few things. I know. But that that thing there is a gift that. I hope you don't ever take for granted. >> That doubt cuz in your position, I'm not. going to lie. If I was in your I would.

be like, "Yo, let me I tell you. everything about the news. I know. everything about everything. You can't. tell me nothing." But for Katie Carrick. to go, "I don't know. Let me go and read. up on this. let me go and even for me. just in that moment it inspired me to be. like oh yeah don't forget that you can. always go back and read you can always. go back and learn and you can always. admit that you just don't know. >> I mean I think that I've been doing this. long enough and I'm old enough to have. the confidence you know I'm sure there. was a time where I would have just like. been blah blah blah you know um and even.

now I think oh gosh am I going to sound. dumb or uninformed or uneducated about a. certain thing like what would David. Sanger, the national security. correspondent for the New York Times say. about this? What examples would he give? But I'd rather admit that I don't know. than to say something that's wrong. >> All great debates are felled by the risk. of being wrong. That's what I think. You're a real one. >> You've just proved it, Katie. >> I don't know. >> No, you have. You You're a real one.

Thank you for joining us. >> No, this was really fun. So nice to meet. you. >> [laughter]. >> really enjoyed talking to you in your. new turquoise Sarah jacket. Thank you. >> Um and this was very interesting, you. know. Um you [music] guys raised a lot. of issues, asked a lot of questions, uh proposed a lot of interesting [music]. ideas, >> interesting, >> uh challenged sort of the status quo and. the way things are done and made [music]. me think a lot. So, thank you. >> Thank you, Katie Kirk. This was.

genuinely a joy. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Thank you so much for watching the. episode. If you enjoyed it, pass it on. to a friend. If you didn't enjoy it, pass it on to your friend still. Let. them suffer for a change. And don't. forget to engage with us in the. comments. Uh if you want to suggest a. guest, maybe there's [music] questions. you want, maybe there's ideas that you. have. You can chat to us. We will read. through the comments and we'll get into. it. Either way, I appreciate [music] you. taking the time. Thank you for hanging. out with us on What Now. And remember, we do this for you, [music] so we would.

like to hear from you. Till next time. Thank you. [music].