Latest / Question Everything / The High Stakes Game of Bargaining with the News

Transcript

The High Stakes Game of Bargaining with the News · Question Everything

• 0:06
  Speaker 1: From KCRW and Placement Theory, this is Question Everything. We
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: investigate how the truth gets buried, distorted, denied, and the
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: ways people are fighting to make it matter again. I'm
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: Brian Reed. This week, David Ellison took over Warner Brothers,
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: meaning he's now in charge of both CBS News and CNN.
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: Today... I'm speaking to.
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: One of the officials who tried to stop Ellison from
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: doing this, from gaining control of two of our country's
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: major news networks, and failed.
• 0:32
  Speaker 3: I said this to David on a Zoom. I said,
• 0:35
  Speaker 3: I don't trust you with news. I'm really angry.
• 0:40
  Speaker 2: We'll be back with that in a minute.
• 0:45
  Speaker 3: On Tuesday.
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: Paramount, which is newly owned by billionaire father-son duo David
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: and Larry Ellison, acquired another media behemoth, Warner Brothers Discovery,
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: for $ 111 billion. Meaning in addition to the Paramount and
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: Warner Brothers movie studios and a bunch of other networks
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: and streamers, the Ellisons are now in charge of CBS
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: News and 60 Minutes, which they got as part of Paramount,
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: and CNN, which was part of Warner Brothers. The new
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: combined mega company is called Skydance. This merger will surely
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: lead to thousands of layoffs, less competition for filmmakers, and probably.
• 1:23
  Speaker 2: Higher prices for consumers.
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: It's arguably creating a media monopoly, which is illegal. But
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: the antitrust division in the Department of Justice rubber-stamped the
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: deal to go through. There was a group that tried
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: to stop it. Earlier this year, the Attorney General of California,
• 1:39
  Speaker 1: Rob Bonta, led a collection of Democratic attorneys general from
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: New York, New Jersey, New Mexico, Arizona, Connecticut, and more...
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: 12 states in total, in filing their own antitrust suit
• 1:50
  Speaker 1: to kill the deal. A judge paused the merger, and
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: Paramount and the Ellisons seemed like they were over a barrel.
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: Because under their agreement with Warner Brothers, once it hit
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: October 1st, they were going to have to pay a
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: $ 7 million penalty for every day the deal did not
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: go through. The judge had set a trial date for March,
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: so that could have cost the Ellisons more than a
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: billion dollars, and they still could have lost a trial.
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: Feeling this pressure, at one point, David Ellison floated the
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: possibility that he would move Paramount's headquarters from California to
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: another state that wasn't suing him, maybe Tennessee, along with
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: its thousands of jobs, if Attorney General Bonta didn't settle
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: before October 1st. But in interviews, Bonta stood firm, said
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: that didn't scare him.
• 2:37
  Speaker 5: It seems like what a potential monopolist would do to
• 2:41
  Speaker 5: try to get their way, you know, to threaten a
• 2:42
  Speaker 5: state that is simply doing its job of enforcing the law,
• 2:47
  Speaker 5: It felt like a somewhat desperate, last-ditch effort to blackmail
• 2:51
  Speaker 5: the states into allowing an illegal merger to go through,
• 2:54
  Speaker 5: and that's just not going to happen. And this is
• 2:56
  Speaker 5: an illegal merger.
• 2:57
  Speaker 2: Period. Full stop. And then, two weeks ago, Bonta and
• 3:02
  Speaker 2: the other states caved.
• 3:04
  Speaker 6: I'm here to announce a settlement that our coalition of
• 3:07
  Speaker 6: attorneys general has reached with Paramount.
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: After a weekend of late-night negotiations, they agreed to let
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: the deal go through in exchange for what looks like crumbs.
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: They insisted Paramount release a certain quota of movies, spend
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: a certain amount on production in the U.S., but they
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: did not force the company to carve out CNN or
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: any other cable channels from the deal, which is what
• 3:26
  Speaker 1: some of the AGs had been pushing for. As one
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: longtime Hollywood journalist put it, Bonta folded like a cheap umbrella.
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: People in entertainment, free speech organizations, antitrust lawyers were furious.
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: The ticking fee was about to kick in. Why did
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: Bonta give up all that leverage? Even at his own
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: press conference announcing the settlement, he seemed tail tucked.
• 3:49
  Speaker 6: I want to be clear about something right up front.
• 3:53
  Speaker 6: This settlement is not a vote of support for this merger.
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: And then one of the other AGs involved in the
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: case put out a public statement that caught my eye.
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: The attorney general of Connecticut. His name is William Tong.
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: He's also head of the National Association of Attorneys General.
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: Tong wrote that his state had fought to the bitter
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: end for a different outcome. And specifically when it came
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: to news, the hill AG Tong had wanted to die
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: on was protecting journalism. He didn't want CBS and CNN
• 4:25
  Speaker 1: both going to the Ellisons, who, as we've talked about
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: a bunch here on the show, are close with Donald Trump.
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: And already there's been a lot of evidence that they've
• 4:32
  Speaker 1: pushed CBS's coverage in Trump's favor. Tong wasn't the lead
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: guy in this suit. Rob Bonta was. And he seemed
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: livid about the fact that they had all settled for
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: so little. You put out a statement that caught my eye,
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: and I was hoping you could read the.
• 4:47
  Speaker 2: Last half of it. Okay. This is Attorney General Tong.
• 4:51
  Speaker 4: We wanted to save ethical and independent journalism and news.
• 4:55
  Speaker 4: We fought aggressively for that remedy. I am deeply disappointed
• 4:59
  Speaker 4: that we could not do more. Connecticut will continue to
• 5:02
  Speaker 4: fight hard against the enormous corporate power and forces that
• 5:06
  Speaker 4: threaten America's free and competitive markets. And we will fight
• 5:10
  Speaker 4: even harder to defend American consumers that deserve quality products
• 5:14
  Speaker 4: at competitive and fair prices. And that includes ethical and
• 5:18
  Speaker 4: independent journalism.
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: Tong's intentions seemed in the right place. And yet he
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: failed and was admitting he failed. Not typical for a politician.
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: So I wanted to ask him, what happened? What went
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: wrong to get us to this frightening new state of
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: affairs for journalism? And does he feel he made any mistakes?
• 5:39
  Speaker 2: Stick around.
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: After Attorney General Tong read his statement for me, we
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: got right into it. I just want to know what happened.
• 5:50
  Speaker 2: Why did you guys cave?
• 5:52
  Speaker 3: I'm really angry. I'm really angry. And I.
• 5:57
  Speaker 4: Fought as hard as I possibly could for CNN and
• 6:01
  Speaker 4: CBS News. There were a lot of other forces at
• 6:05
  Speaker 4: work beyond Connecticut.
• 6:08
  Speaker 3: I'm involved in a lot of multi-states.
• 6:10
  Speaker 4: And as president of the National Association of Attorneys General,
• 6:14
  Speaker 4: I have a unique role and voice in trying to
• 6:18
  Speaker 4: hold states together, including not just Democratic coalitions, but Republican
• 6:22
  Speaker 4: and Democratic coalitions. And there were three states that were
• 6:26
  Speaker 4: differently impacted here than Connecticut, California, New York, and New Jersey.
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: Differently impacted because they have a lot of film and
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: TV production in particular.
• 6:35
  Speaker 3: Correct. They have Hollywood.
• 6:36
  Speaker 4: Yeah.
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: This is in large part about Hollywood. You all had
• 6:41
  Speaker 1: a good amount of leverage. Paramount would start having to
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: pay something like $ 7 million a day to Warner Brothers
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: every day that the deal was not consummated past October 1st,
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: which is a huge amount of money. So they really
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: had a lot of incentive if you were going to
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: do a deal to do a good deal.
• 6:56
  Speaker 2: It seemed like from the outside.
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: So I got to understand like what happened.
• 7:00
  Speaker 4: I don't want to be frustrating, but I remind you
• 7:04
  Speaker 4: I'm an attorney general and I'm a lawyer. And so
• 7:07
  Speaker 4: conversations between my fellow attorneys general are privileged.
• 7:12
  Speaker 3: But that being said, you're right. We had a ton
• 7:14
  Speaker 3: of leverage.
• 7:15
  Speaker 4: They were going to start paying a $ 7 million ticking fee.
• 7:20
  Speaker 3: And I thought.
• 7:22
  Speaker 4: That we could continue to push Paramount and the Ellisons
• 7:28
  Speaker 4: to do better on the antitrust terms, on the labor terms,
• 7:32
  Speaker 4: on news and on independent journalism. So it's deeply frustrating
• 7:40
  Speaker 4: that we didn't use that leverage more.
• 7:44
  Speaker 3: I remain angry about where we landed.
• 7:47
  Speaker 4: I told AG Bonta that I would not be shy
• 7:50
  Speaker 4: about expressing how I feel about this.
• 7:52
  Speaker 3: But this is a litigation.
• 7:55
  Speaker 4: The hard thing, I'm not making excuses, but the hard
• 7:58
  Speaker 4: thing about multi-state cases is they're multi-state, right? It's a
• 8:02
  Speaker 4: coalition of 12. And it's hard to litigate by committee.
• 8:07
  Speaker 4: I fought as hard as I possibly could, but other
• 8:10
  Speaker 4: states wanted to settle. And this is where this is
• 8:14
  Speaker 4: where it landed.
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: I understand there's certain privilege issues, but I do want
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: to kind of ask you again, like this is an
• 8:24
  Speaker 1: illegal deal. According to your own case, you filed this
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: antitrust suit on behalf of your constituents in Connecticut. of
• 8:32
  Speaker 1: which a lot of my family members are constituents.
• 8:34
  Speaker 2: They live there.
• 8:35
  Speaker 1: What can you say to explain this about the reasons
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: behind it to your own constituents, you know?
• 8:40
  Speaker 3: Well, let me just say this.
• 8:43
  Speaker 4: There was a ton of pressure, threats by Paramount to
• 8:46
  Speaker 4: leave California. I personally did not think that threat was credible.
• 8:52
  Speaker 4: To be fair to A.G. Bonta, they weren't threatening to
• 8:54
  Speaker 4: leave Connecticut.
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: Even though Rob Bonta said he wasn't spooked by David
• 8:58
  Speaker 1: Ellison's threats... other California politicians started to push him publicly
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: to settle, including the governor, Gavin Newsom, Javier Becerra, the
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: frontrunner to be California's next governor, and the mayor of
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: Los Angeles, Karen Bass. Be adults, Becerra said. Get this
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: done at the boardroom, not the courtroom, said Newsom. And
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: that's what Bonta ultimately did.
• 9:18
  Speaker 4: We resolved that lawsuit, but that doesn't mean that we
• 9:22
  Speaker 4: support this deal or think this deal is good for
• 9:24
  Speaker 4: the American people.
• 9:25
  Speaker 3: We don't.
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: And.
• 9:27
  Speaker 3: You know, this is true, frankly, about my.
• 9:30
  Speaker 4: Case against Purdue Pharma and the Sacklers, against the opioid
• 9:34
  Speaker 4: addiction industry.
• 9:36
  Speaker 3: You know, against Meta.
• 9:38
  Speaker 4: I still think in all of those cases that they're
• 9:42
  Speaker 4: doing things that are unlawful and hurt people. But there
• 9:46
  Speaker 4: is a certain point, not Purdue Pharma anymore, because I
• 9:49
  Speaker 4: put them out of business. But at a certain point,
• 9:53
  Speaker 4: you have to resolve a litigation if in your calculus
• 9:56
  Speaker 4: we cannot go any further.
• 9:58
  Speaker 3: I know that's frustrating. but there's no point at.
• 10:02
  Speaker 4: Which the conduct of a defendant somehow gets our full blessing, right,
• 10:11
  Speaker 4: in a blue ribbon.
• 10:12
  Speaker 3: Like, you guys are okay now.
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: So what was agreed to by Paramount in this deal
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: that resolved litigation? your concerns enough to agree to let
• 10:22
  Speaker 1: the deal go through?
• 10:23
  Speaker 3: I don't think they've resolved my concerns enough. I wanted
• 10:31
  Speaker 3: full independence for CBS News and CNN. That's obvious.
• 10:35
  Speaker 4: I wanted them spun out as freestanding, independent public companies.
• 10:39
  Speaker 4: And I said this to the Ellisons. You know, I
• 10:42
  Speaker 4: said this to David on a Zoom. I said, I
• 10:45
  Speaker 4: don't trust you with news. I don't trust you with news.
• 10:49
  Speaker 3: And I still don't.
• 10:52
  Speaker 4: And.
• 10:53
  Speaker 2: And explain why.
• 10:54
  Speaker 4: Because of what they've done to CBS News, because of
• 10:58
  Speaker 4: the leadership at CBS News and what they've done to
• 11:00
  Speaker 4: 60 Minutes, because of the.
• 11:03
  Speaker 3: Saccott story.
• 11:05
  Speaker 4: That that apparently the leadership at CBS News killed about
• 11:09
  Speaker 4: the Supermax prison in.
• 11:11
  Speaker 3: El Salvador because of, you know, what happened with Scott Pelley.
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: Scott Pelley, of course, is the correspondent at 60 Minutes
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: who was fired after challenging the new leadership there over
• 11:23
  Speaker 1: their staffing and coverage decisions. Here's a short list of
• 11:30
  Speaker 1: what Tong and the other AGs got Paramount to agree
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: to in exchange for dropping their suit. A commitment to
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: release 30 films a year for the first two years
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: and 32 films a year for the next three, with
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: the majority of those being wide releases, plus four indie
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: films each year. Apparently that's a lofty goal. In the
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: past 25 years, no studio has released 30 films in
• 11:50
  Speaker 1: a single year. And under this agreement, if Skydance wants
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: to stop producing movies altogether, in five years it can.
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: The company also committed to $ 1. 5 billion in additional production
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: spending in the U.S. over five years. They're putting $ 5
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: million a year in an indie film fund, another $ 9. 5
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: million a year in a fund to train affected workers
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: who might lose their jobs. They've agreed to certain limits
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: on the way they can negotiate fees for their cable
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: and streaming channels for the next five years to restrain
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: some of.
• 12:20
  Speaker 2: Their market power.
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: And what Attorney General Tong says he fought for, the
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: company will set up a new editorial independence board to
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: oversee CNN and CBS News, which employees can go to
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: if they fear political interference in their coverage.
• 12:34
  Speaker 4: We got a couple of key concessions. Number one, no executives, officers,
• 12:39
  Speaker 4: directors can be on this board. And so it'll only
• 12:43
  Speaker 4: be journalists. And also, they can't all be of the
• 12:46
  Speaker 4: same political persuasion or perspective. Now, I realize legit journalists
• 12:52
  Speaker 4: don't have a political persuasion or perspective. But also, like,
• 12:56
  Speaker 4: let's be real here, right? I didn't want Sean Hannity
• 12:59
  Speaker 4: and Laura Ingraham and David Ellison all to be on
• 13:02
  Speaker 4: this board together.
• 13:03
  Speaker 3: And they're not. That's not going to happen.
• 13:06
  Speaker 2: But who chooses them? Does the company really choose them?
• 13:09
  Speaker 3: They do. They do.
• 13:10
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 13:11
  Speaker 3: It's not great.
• 13:13
  Speaker 5: Yeah.
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean there's like a data point here. There
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: was a board that was put in place, I believe,
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: to oversee the Wall Street Journal when Rupert Murdoch bought it.
• 13:21
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Which ultimately kind of was a kangaroo situation. He
• 13:25
  Speaker 2: came to control it.
• 13:26
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: Is there anything– did you guys look at that and
• 13:29
  Speaker 1: put anything in place here to try and mitigate against
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: that to make this like real teeth?
• 13:32
  Speaker 3: I wanted more, Brian. Yeah.
• 13:36
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 13:36
  Speaker 3: I didn't get it. I took it as far as
• 13:39
  Speaker 3: I could take it.
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: What's the world we're looking at in terms of news? Like,
• 13:44
  Speaker 1: what do you think it'll be like?
• 13:48
  Speaker 3: I think it's going to be harder. I think it's
• 13:51
  Speaker 3: going to be harder.
• 13:52
  Speaker 4: I think they're going to be under one corporate umbrella
• 13:54
  Speaker 4: and we're going to have to watch them like hawks.
• 13:58
  Speaker 4: And if they violate the terms of their commitments on
• 14:01
  Speaker 4: the editorial board, we have to go into court under
• 14:04
  Speaker 4: the consent decree, which is stronger than a settlement agreement.
• 14:07
  Speaker 4: A consent decree is a court-sanctioned, court-ordered agreement and reopen
• 14:13
  Speaker 4: it and say, you guys are not living up to
• 14:15
  Speaker 4: your obligations under the News Editorial Independence Board.
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: I'd been hopeful about the antitrust approach the states were
• 14:25
  Speaker 1: taking against this merger, going after it as an entertainment monopoly.
• 14:29
  Speaker 1: Government officials trying to regulate news outlets is tricky territory, obviously.
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: And David Ellison effectively used that against the state.
• 14:36
  Speaker 2: AGs to try and discredit their case.
• 14:39
  Speaker 1: Shortly after you all filed this antitrust suit, David Elson
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: actually kind of called you guys out on that, saying
• 14:45
  Speaker 1: that this is really what the cases were about for
• 14:47
  Speaker 1: you and the other Democratic attorneys general, that basically you
• 14:50
  Speaker 1: were upset about the news coverage and who would get
• 14:54
  Speaker 1: to make it and the fact that he would get
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: to control these networks. And that basically that has nothing
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: to do with antitrust, that you not liking his coverage
• 15:03
  Speaker 1: decisions as CBS is not.
• 15:05
  Speaker 2: A proper use of an antitrust suit. Was he right?
• 15:09
  Speaker 3: No.
• 15:11
  Speaker 2: Why not?
• 15:11
  Speaker 3: He's wrong.
• 15:13
  Speaker 4: He would have acquired, and it looks like will acquire,
• 15:17
  Speaker 4: extraordinary market power. And this is market power not just
• 15:22
  Speaker 4: over studios and movies and streaming and television and cable channels,
• 15:28
  Speaker 4: but over news. And if he says that we cared
• 15:35
  Speaker 4: about news... And the quality independence of news at the
• 15:39
  Speaker 4: outset of this case, he's right.
• 15:41
  Speaker 3: I did. I won't speak for everybody else, but I care.
• 15:47
  Speaker 3: There's nothing wrong with that.
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: So this is just a couple lines from– Ellison wrote
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: an op-ed in the New York Times defending the deal
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: and criticizing your antitrust suit. And he said, I believe
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: this fight is not really about market share. I believe
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: a plainer worry sits beneath the briefs and the news releases.
• 16:04
  Speaker 2: The news.
• 16:05
  Speaker 1: The issue is whether I can be trusted as a
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: steward of Warner CNN.
• 16:10
  Speaker 3: Yeah, good question.
• 16:11
  Speaker 2: There's been speculation about my politics, my loyalties, and my intentions.
• 16:14
  Speaker 2: Good question.
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: I mean, it sounds like he could be referring to,
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: do you think he was like you saying to him,
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: I don't trust you with the news on a Zoom?
• 16:22
  Speaker 3: Let me take a step back. Okay. I represent the
• 16:24
  Speaker 3: sovereign state of Connecticut. Okay. As its lawyer and your
• 16:28
  Speaker 3: family as their lawyer.
• 16:31
  Speaker 2: Hi, mom.
• 16:32
  Speaker 3: Hi, mom, I could bring a case for whatever reason
• 16:38
  Speaker 3: we want, okay?
• 16:40
  Speaker 4: And almost always, 100% of the time, that case is
• 16:44
  Speaker 4: to protect the people of our state.
• 16:47
  Speaker 3: Whether or not, okay, it ends up being presented as.
• 16:53
  Speaker 4: A claim or a defense or whether we put on
• 16:57
  Speaker 4: evidence at trial about this issue is a different question, okay?
• 17:03
  Speaker 3: But all of these cases are always.
• 17:06
  Speaker 4: An instrument for the sovereign state of Connecticut to protect
• 17:10
  Speaker 4: our people. And so the fact that I have all
• 17:13
  Speaker 4: these concerns is not controversial.
• 17:16
  Speaker 3: And of no moment.
• 17:17
  Speaker 4: Let me just jump ahead to your, what I suspect
• 17:20
  Speaker 4: is your ultimate question. It is entirely appropriate for me
• 17:25
  Speaker 4: to raise that in settlement discussions. All of those concerns,
• 17:30
  Speaker 4: that being, well, about news, CBS News and CNN. It
• 17:34
  Speaker 4: is entirely appropriate for me to raise concerns, all of
• 17:38
  Speaker 4: these concerns, and to ask for agreement on those issues.
• 17:43
  Speaker 4: Because in a settlement discussion, that's not a trial. That's
• 17:46
  Speaker 4: not a case. They can agree to anything. They can
• 17:49
  Speaker 4: agree that Brian is the best podcaster on earth. They
• 17:51
  Speaker 4: can put that in writing. They can consent to whatever
• 17:54
  Speaker 4: they want.
• 17:55
  Speaker 1: Just to bring inside my thinking, my concerns about this
• 17:57
  Speaker 1: merger have to do with media capture. You know, I
• 18:00
  Speaker 1: have been reporting on that and talking to experts on
• 18:03
  Speaker 1: it over the last couple of years. In particular, there's
• 18:05
  Speaker 1: one expert, Marius Dragomir, who lived in Hungary for years,
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: which is a textbook case of media capture. Media capture
• 18:12
  Speaker 1: basically being when the leadership of a country is able
• 18:16
  Speaker 1: to really bend what was an independent media towards their
• 18:21
  Speaker 1: will and use them more as a megaphone. And this researcher,
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: Marius Dragomir, has studied how media capture took hold under
• 18:27
  Speaker 1: Orban in Hungary and also in countries around the world.
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: He's laid it down into four repeatable steps that leaders
• 18:33
  Speaker 1: use to do this. And this is stage four, the
• 18:37
  Speaker 1: final stage of media capture, which is allies of the
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: leadership of the president buying up private media organizations and
• 18:46
  Speaker 1: then exerting control over them that can bend them towards
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: the leadership's point of view and will.
• 18:52
  Speaker 2: And squash out independent reporting.
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: And he, Marius, this expert, says this is the hardest
• 18:58
  Speaker 1: stage to enact and should take the longest. And he
• 19:02
  Speaker 1: was flabbergasted at how fast it's happened here in the
• 19:05
  Speaker 1: second Trump term. That's his word. And so that was
• 19:08
  Speaker 1: always my concern about this deal. That said, the antitrust
• 19:14
  Speaker 1: concerns don't seem to encompass news coverage. And in fact, like,
• 19:19
  Speaker 1: state attorneys general trying to influence editorial control of news
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: seems like it gets into some dicey First Amendment issues.
• 19:24
  Speaker 1: And so I wonder if you think it was a
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: mistake to bring that into it.
• 19:28
  Speaker 3: All of that is nonsense.
• 19:30
  Speaker 4: And I'm sorry, I'm going to push back really hard.
• 19:34
  Speaker 2: Okay, do.
• 19:35
  Speaker 4: You just encapsulated in a minute exactly why you and
• 19:41
  Speaker 4: I are having this conversation.
• 19:43
  Speaker 3: To everything that you just said, yes, I stipulate to
• 19:47
  Speaker 3: all of that. I agree with all of that.
• 19:50
  Speaker 4: But I'm here and we're having this conversation because I
• 19:54
  Speaker 4: fought tooth and nail, okay? If you are indicting me
• 20:01
  Speaker 4: for not being able to do more, I accept that.
• 20:08
  Speaker 3: I wanted to do more. I tried to do more.
• 20:10
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 20:11
  Speaker 4: And before I got in this fight, we had nothing.
• 20:15
  Speaker 4: And then post-settlement, there will be an editorial board at
• 20:20
  Speaker 4: CNN and CBS News. We can talk about the quality
• 20:23
  Speaker 4: and the effectiveness of that, but we had nothing. And
• 20:26
  Speaker 4: now we have this editorial board. And I wake up
• 20:31
  Speaker 4: every day. I'm still frustrated, wishing I could have done more.
• 20:35
  Speaker 5: Okay.
• 20:36
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 20:37
  Speaker 4: And so if you're saying that you are worried about
• 20:42
  Speaker 4: these concerns and you wanted us to fight more and
• 20:47
  Speaker 4: fight harder, but at the same time, it was improper
• 20:50
  Speaker 4: to do so because somebody said there's some frankly cockeyed
• 20:56
  Speaker 4: First Amendment argument that doesn't really work, number one.
• 21:00
  Speaker 3: Or number two, it didn't fit neatly in this.
• 21:03
  Speaker 4: Antitrust lane or that antitrust lane. I would say cut
• 21:07
  Speaker 4: the let's cut the crap here. OK, we need to
• 21:10
  Speaker 4: be street fighters.
• 21:12
  Speaker 3: In this battle.
• 21:13
  Speaker 4: And I tried as hard as I could to take
• 21:16
  Speaker 4: this to the streets. And that's why in this fourth
• 21:20
  Speaker 4: stage of media capture, the president in some quarters is
• 21:25
  Speaker 4: winning because they're street fighters. They're willing to do whatever
• 21:29
  Speaker 4: it takes. Let me tell you why it doesn't implicate
• 21:32
  Speaker 4: First Amendment. A First Amendment challenge requires two things, state action, right?
• 21:38
  Speaker 4: That means a government needs to take action against somebody
• 21:40
  Speaker 4: to restrict their speech. And then somebody has to file
• 21:43
  Speaker 4: a lawsuit to vindicate their rights, okay? If they agreed
• 21:49
  Speaker 4: to divest CNN and CBS News the way I wanted
• 21:53
  Speaker 4: them to, there's no state action.
• 21:55
  Speaker 2: They agreed.
• 21:57
  Speaker 3: They can agree to anything. And if they don't bring
• 22:00
  Speaker 3: a lawsuit, it never gets adjudicated.
• 22:03
  Speaker 4: So let me just go back to this contradiction and
• 22:07
  Speaker 4: your line of questioning. Did you not want me to
• 22:09
  Speaker 4: take on this fight to fight media capture?
• 22:14
  Speaker 1: No, I want to fight media capture, but I want
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: to feel like we're winning against it.
• 22:17
  Speaker 6: Okay.
• 22:19
  Speaker 3: Tell me, tell me how I get the catch 22.
• 22:21
  Speaker 2: I'm engaging with it. I'm engaging with, tell me.
• 22:23
  Speaker 3: How you want me to do that. Tell me how
• 22:25
  Speaker 3: you want me to do that.
• 22:26
  Speaker 4: This is a, with all due respect to contradiction.
• 22:30
  Speaker 3: Okay.
• 22:31
  Speaker 4: You're saying you guys didn't do enough. which you shouldn't
• 22:34
  Speaker 4: have done in the first place.
• 22:35
  Speaker 3: Come on. But we have to get out of our
• 22:37
  Speaker 3: own way in these fights, okay? Like this whole First
• 22:41
  Speaker 3: Amendment thing, sure.
• 22:44
  Speaker 4: We can have some ivory tower academic discussion about whether
• 22:49
  Speaker 4: this somehow implicates.
• 22:51
  Speaker 3: Their First Amendment concerns. We just, we got to call.
• 22:55
  Speaker 4: It for what it is, enormous market power that was
• 22:59
  Speaker 4: going to and may yet still greatly impact the quality
• 23:03
  Speaker 4: of news and enable and empower media capture, which ultimately
• 23:09
  Speaker 4: will greatly damage our republic and our democracy. So if
• 23:13
  Speaker 4: you're indicting me or if anybody's criticizing me for undertaking
• 23:17
  Speaker 4: that fight, I make no apology at all.
• 23:25
  Speaker 2: That's William Tong, Attorney General of my home state, Connecticut.
• 23:31
  Speaker 4: I appreciate your questions and I appreciate the spirited discussion.
• 23:35
  Speaker 3: You can tell I'm frustrated.
• 23:37
  Speaker 2: That's why I wanted to talk to you. I could
• 23:38
  Speaker 2: tell in your statement you were frustrated.
• 23:40
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 23:41
  Speaker 3: I wanted to do more. That's all I can say.
• 23:43
  Speaker 3: I fought as hard as I could.
• 23:49
  Speaker 2: Thanks for listening.
• 23:50
  Speaker 1: As always, I'm on signal at brihreed. 45, B-R-I-H-R-E-E-D.45 for tips
• 23:57
  Speaker 1: or venting, whatever you want to tell me. Our newsletter, questioneverything.substack.com.
• 24:03
  Speaker 1: And we're on Instagram, at questioneverything.podcast. Today's show was produced
• 24:11
  Speaker 1: by Sam Egan and edited by Robin Simeon. Robin and
• 24:13
  Speaker 1: I are the executive producers of Question Everything. Our team
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: also includes producers Tracy Hunt and Zach St. Louis, executive
• 24:19
  Speaker 1: editor Kevin Sullivan, contributing editors Neil Drumming and Jen Kinney,
• 24:22
  Speaker 1: and associate producer Kevin Shepard. This episode was fact-checked by
• 24:26
  Speaker 1: Annika Robbins, mixing and sound design by Brendan Baker. Our
• 24:29
  Speaker 1: music is by Matt McGinley. Evie Kwong runs our social media.
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: Our partners at KCRW include Arnie Seipel, Tejal Ajmera, Natalie Hill,
• 24:36
  Speaker 1: and Jennifer Farrow.
• 24:37
  Speaker 2: We will see you next time.