Popular in Political Science

American Politics

Keeping the Republic

Boston College Marc Landy

British Politics

Entrepreneurial thinking: the politics and practice of policy impact

University of Sheffield Matthew Flinders

Canadian Politics

Parties and Elections: An End to Canadian Exceptionalism?

St. Francis Xavier University James Bickerton

Asian Politics

The Politics of Knowledge in Development

University of Delhi Madhulika Banerjee

American Politics

Fifty years of declining confidence and increasing polarization in trust

University of California Berkeley Henry Brady

American Politics

The Opening Dilemma

Cornell University Richard Bensel

Political Economy

Wait and See?

University of Liverpool Mariaelisa Epifanio

24/7 Politics: Cable Television and the Fragmenting of America from Watergate to Fox News

View more insights in Books - Social Sciences - Political Science - American Politics

View more figures from Purdue University

View the page of Kathryn Brownell

Read the Study

Kathryn Cramer Brownell discusses how cable television upended American political life in the pursuit of profits and influence

Image courtesy of interviewee. November 27, 2023

Generating Workspace

Export as PDF

The speaker discusses their motivation for writing a book on the evolution of media, particularly focusing on the changes in the cable television landscape from the 1960s through the 1980s. Initially intending to frame the narrative around Ronald Reagan and his deregulation policies, they uncover deeper historical roots dating back to the Nixon administration, which shaped regulatory approaches to cable. Nixon's dissatisfaction with network television bias led to efforts to develop cable as a competitive alternative, fostering a symbiotic relationship between cable operators and political figures.

The speaker highlights a significant political workshop from March 1984 where cable lobbyists promoted cable as a democratic solution to broadcasting's limitations. This video video push coincided with deregulation debates and aimed to showcase the advantages of cable's technological capabilities, which could offer more diverse programming.

They address how the emergence of channels like CSPAN and CNN transformed political communication, allowing for greater access and visibility for fringe political voices and third-party candidates, exemplified by Ross Perot's successful use of CNN in the 1992 election. The speaker notes how Bill Clinton leveraged unconventional media appearances to connect directly with voters.

The conversation shifts to the role of cable news in contemporary politics, particularly during Donald Trump's presidency, where outlets like Fox News became instrumental in shaping narratives and misinformation. The speaker emphasizes the importance of understanding the power dynamics and business strategies within the media landscape to navigate political discourse effectively.

Ultimately, they point out that while they do not have solutions to current political and media divisions, increased awareness of the interplay between media, politics, and profit can empower individuals to critically assess the information they consume.

Language:

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.025 --> 00:01.365
So I started writing this book

00:01.365 --> 00:04.565
because I was really interested in the changes in the media

00:04.595 --> 00:07.605
landscape that really become clear in the 1980s.

00:08.185 --> 00:11.045
I'm a historian, really interested in the intersections

00:11.045 --> 00:12.365
of media and politics,

00:12.745 --> 00:14.125
and I noticed that, you know,

00:14.125 --> 00:16.005
cable television comes on the scene

00:16.005 --> 00:18.245
and seems to explode in the 1980s,

00:18.505 --> 00:22.685
and historians frequently talked about it as a result

00:22.685 --> 00:24.685
of Ronald Reagan, the great communicator

00:24.745 --> 00:26.405
and his deregulatory agenda.

00:26.825 --> 00:29.445
And so I thought this was gonna be a book about Reagan,

00:29.945 --> 00:32.285
but in fact, when I started digging, I found

00:32.285 --> 00:35.005
that the origins of some of these political changes,

00:35.385 --> 00:37.245
new political attitudes about how

00:37.245 --> 00:40.525
to structure cable television as a business,

00:40.835 --> 00:43.125
were actually rooted in the 1960s

00:43.705 --> 00:46.925
and significantly in the Nixon administration as well.

00:47.255 --> 00:49.365
There are major changes in

00:49.925 --> 00:52.005
regulatory policy towards cable television

00:52.005 --> 00:53.165
that happened under Richard Nixon.

00:53.745 --> 00:56.005
To me, this was really interesting.

00:56.215 --> 00:58.445
There was always a line in the literature

00:58.475 --> 01:01.805
that talked about the anti-media agenda of Nixon

01:02.025 --> 01:04.525
as shaping cable, but that was really it.

01:04.625 --> 01:07.005
And, I wrote my first book about

01:07.155 --> 01:08.445
that ended with Richard Nixon.

01:08.845 --> 01:12.285
I knew his obsession with the politics of the media.

01:12.605 --> 01:14.805
I knew his obsession with controlling the image.

01:14.865 --> 01:18.085
And so I started digging into his administration

01:18.345 --> 01:21.885
and in particular his office of Telecommunications policy.

01:22.585 --> 01:26.325
And I found that, you know, these new regulatory approaches

01:26.585 --> 01:28.005
to cable television

01:28.155 --> 01:31.965
that are taken under the OTP under Nixon,

01:31.985 --> 01:35.245
are really connected, to his anger at the,

01:35.265 --> 01:37.645
the network televisions his, belief

01:37.645 --> 01:40.245
that the networks were biased and not to get 'em.

01:40.245 --> 01:43.565
And he wanted to spur cable, which had previously only

01:44.445 --> 01:47.045
expanded the reach of broadcast television

01:47.145 --> 01:48.325
by regulatory design.

01:48.705 --> 01:52.285
He wanted to introduce this concept of cable as a competitor

01:52.825 --> 01:55.245
to network television that could really kind

01:55.245 --> 01:56.565
of challenge the dominance

01:56.565 --> 01:59.285
that they had over the information people received on their

01:59.285 --> 02:01.365
television screens, every day.

02:01.825 --> 02:05.205
One of the key archives that I relied on, was the,

02:05.205 --> 02:06.485
the CSPAN Video Library.

02:06.955 --> 02:09.805
It's an incredible archive. It's free to access.

02:09.985 --> 02:13.365
Um, and so I strongly encourage anyone interested in media

02:13.505 --> 02:15.925
and politics in modern America to check it out.

02:16.425 --> 02:17.925
And as I was digging into this,

02:18.165 --> 02:21.965
I found this really fascinating, political workshop

02:21.965 --> 02:24.445
that was launched on March 1st, 1984.

02:24.825 --> 02:27.805
And in the workshop, it really encapsulated the themes.

02:28.005 --> 02:31.165
I saw time and time again in my research,

02:31.195 --> 02:34.565
that cable operators and lobbyists are coming to DC

02:35.065 --> 02:38.525
and they're pitching to white or White House

02:38.525 --> 02:40.005
and congressional staffers

02:40.225 --> 02:42.805
and campaign advisors,

02:42.855 --> 02:45.885
about why they should use cable rather than broadcasting.

02:46.355 --> 02:50.085
They highlighted that the problem that democracy faced was

02:50.085 --> 02:53.405
that broadcasting was too powerful, too exclusionary,

02:53.405 --> 02:56.885
because again, at this time, broadcasting only allowed,

02:57.025 --> 02:58.645
the three networks to really dominate

02:58.745 --> 03:01.285
The information that people receive cable

03:01.285 --> 03:03.565
because of the technological reach of cable,

03:03.665 --> 03:05.725
you could have more channels on the dial.

03:05.795 --> 03:09.605
They could, they could actually, go all night long.

03:09.825 --> 03:12.125
Um, cable could really exceed the boundaries,

03:12.125 --> 03:14.285
those limitations set by network broadcasting.

03:14.305 --> 03:17.965
And so operators are saying that this is the solution,

03:18.185 --> 03:20.725
to this, mass mediated world that's so limited

03:20.865 --> 03:23.165
by broadcast, and they, they highlight it

03:23.165 --> 03:24.565
as a democratic solution.

03:25.145 --> 03:28.285
But in fact, this was very much a lobbying strategy at the

03:28.285 --> 03:30.685
time, Congress was debating deregulatory

03:30.715 --> 03:32.405
legislation about cable television.

03:32.625 --> 03:35.485
And there's even references to this that, you know,

03:35.615 --> 03:38.045
we're aware that this re legislation's on the table

03:38.145 --> 03:39.765
and we look what we can do for you.

03:39.825 --> 03:41.125
Why don't you do something for us?

03:41.545 --> 03:43.965
And so it's this symbiotic relationship

03:43.995 --> 03:48.365
that Cable Operators worked really diligently to create

03:48.755 --> 03:49.925
with elected officials.

03:50.425 --> 03:51.925
Uh, that is at the core of my book.

03:52.265 --> 03:55.485
Um, and it, you know, this, this meeting really,

03:55.635 --> 03:59.925
reflected this broader political strategy by the late 1970s,

04:00.305 --> 04:03.765
thanks to satellite technology that allowed capable

04:04.285 --> 04:08.125
operators to disseminate their programming across the

04:08.125 --> 04:12.205
country quite cheaply, compared to having relied on,

04:12.265 --> 04:13.685
the wires of,

04:13.745 --> 04:16.805
or, microwave systems of network broadcasting.

04:17.225 --> 04:19.845
Um, all of a sudden there is just this explosion

04:19.865 --> 04:22.885
of the cable dial where, operators

04:22.905 --> 04:26.085
and pro are looking for different types of programs, ones

04:26.085 --> 04:29.765
that they can sell to, potential subscribers to say,

04:29.825 --> 04:32.125
you can't get this on traditional television,

04:32.225 --> 04:34.485
but you can if you subscribe to, to cable.

04:35.105 --> 04:39.045
And so HBO really is transformative,

04:39.105 --> 04:42.005
in offering entertainment, nonstop sports,

04:42.025 --> 04:43.205
or live sporting even.

04:43.345 --> 04:44.405
And, and movies.

04:45.065 --> 04:47.205
Um, ESPN comes out,

04:47.265 --> 04:50.085
but for the political agenda of cable operators

04:50.325 --> 04:53.765
and lobbyists, the two most consequential channels

04:53.795 --> 04:55.885
that are introduced in 1979

04:55.885 --> 04:58.845
and 1980 respectively are cspan, which

04:59.205 --> 05:02.965
provided televised, coverage of legislative proceedings,

05:03.265 --> 05:04.725
in the House of Representatives

05:04.945 --> 05:07.325
and CNN, which provides, you know,

05:07.555 --> 05:09.765
nonstop 24 7 news coverage.

05:09.995 --> 05:12.205
It's one of the things, that kind of goes to

05:12.205 --> 05:15.365
that broader political strategy of cable operators,

05:15.425 --> 05:18.565
of trying to become part of the political establishment

05:18.565 --> 05:21.165
because they understood that if they became part of

05:21.165 --> 05:24.085
that establishment, then, those people

05:24.085 --> 05:27.685
who benefited from exposure on cable would work

05:27.685 --> 05:29.205
to expand cable's reach.

05:29.505 --> 05:31.485
And so it's a business strategy as much

05:31.485 --> 05:32.925
as it's a lobbying strategy.

05:33.065 --> 05:35.245
And so this is part of what Cable News does.

05:35.665 --> 05:38.445
Um, it affords new opportunities,

05:38.865 --> 05:41.165
for political activists across the,

05:41.385 --> 05:43.685
the ideological spectrum to come in

05:43.905 --> 05:47.325
and share their views as punts or commentators.

05:47.825 --> 05:50.925
It affords opportunities for perhaps more fringe members

05:51.025 --> 05:52.445
of Congress,

05:52.585 --> 05:55.005
or third party candidates to have an opportunity

05:55.145 --> 05:59.765
to come on a news program because it extends 24 hours a day.

05:59.795 --> 06:01.605
It's not the 22 lim or,

06:01.625 --> 06:05.485
or maybe even an hour news broadcast of, of, of the,

06:05.485 --> 06:06.805
of the television networks.

06:07.225 --> 06:10.845
Um, and so this really, becomes a way to, and,

06:10.845 --> 06:12.605
and, you know, Ted Turner recognizes

06:12.755 --> 06:14.485
that the business potential

06:14.945 --> 06:17.205
of showing the political credibility

06:17.225 --> 06:20.125
and the political value of CNN, works

06:20.225 --> 06:24.205
to ingrain it in different campaigns and operations.

06:24.225 --> 06:26.485
And by 1992, that's exactly what happens.

06:27.065 --> 06:29.085
Um, and, and it's, you know, it's people

06:29.145 --> 06:32.005
who are normally desperate for media attention

06:32.005 --> 06:34.805
that are willing to gamble on a news strategy like cable.

06:35.265 --> 06:37.125
And that's exactly what happens in 92.

06:37.145 --> 06:39.565
You have someone like Ross Perot that,

06:39.665 --> 06:42.365
is a third party candidate, doesn't have a political party

06:42.425 --> 06:46.045
to back him, uses CNN to make an appeal to voters

06:46.105 --> 06:48.805
to write him in as a, as the third party candidates.

06:49.225 --> 06:51.885
And then, it's, bill Clinton, who's desperate

06:51.985 --> 06:56.085
for media attention in, the summer of 1992

06:56.355 --> 06:59.165
that will accept any media invitation that co

06:59.165 --> 07:01.685
that's coming his way, including something

07:01.685 --> 07:04.365
that's very unconventional from MTV.

07:04.745 --> 07:08.205
Uh, president HW Bush, said that he wouldn't go on

07:08.205 --> 07:10.725
what he called a teeny bopper network,

07:10.725 --> 07:12.365
because he thought it was undignified.

07:12.865 --> 07:15.045
But in fact, bill Clinton recognized

07:15.275 --> 07:19.605
that going on MTV would allow him to directly communicate

07:19.605 --> 07:21.005
to a particular demographic

07:21.025 --> 07:22.725
around issues that interested them.

07:22.905 --> 07:24.565
So younger voters,

07:24.625 --> 07:26.685
he talked a lot about student loan policies.

07:27.105 --> 07:28.885
He also controlled,

07:28.885 --> 07:31.485
really dominated the parameters of the conversation.

07:31.485 --> 07:34.485
There were no hard hitting questions. He was in control.

07:34.545 --> 07:36.765
He kind of shaped the, the information

07:36.765 --> 07:39.125
that they were getting, and he was actually able

07:39.145 --> 07:40.685
to use going on there

07:40.705 --> 07:44.445
and speaking to quote unquote, the people directly as a way

07:44.445 --> 07:47.085
to criticize the Washington Press Corps

07:47.085 --> 07:49.325
that had been hammering him about all

07:49.325 --> 07:50.365
of these questions of scandal.

07:50.665 --> 07:53.525
And so he is able to bypass the Washington Press Court

07:53.865 --> 07:56.685
and appeal directly to voters in a way that allowed him

07:56.705 --> 07:59.925
to present his message in a very unfiltered, manner.

08:00.415 --> 08:02.285
Cable news is as powerful

08:02.465 --> 08:05.085
as the political establishment really makes it.

08:05.585 --> 08:07.965
Um, and that's one of the one things, you know, when,

08:07.965 --> 08:10.565
when people like, during Donald Trump's

08:11.565 --> 08:14.565
campaign in 2016 during his presidency,

08:15.065 --> 08:16.645
he relied on Fox News.

08:16.825 --> 08:19.565
Uh, he relied tremendously on them

08:19.585 --> 08:21.685
to get his message out there to,

08:22.145 --> 08:26.165
to manipulate information, to advance misinformation,

08:26.225 --> 08:29.165
to advance conspiracy theories, about the,

08:29.165 --> 08:30.325
the 2020 election.

08:30.825 --> 08:35.045
And so, because Donald Trump elevated the role

08:35.105 --> 08:39.125
of Fox in his communication strategy, Fox then used

08:39.125 --> 08:41.925
that political prestige as a way to rake in profits.

08:42.105 --> 08:43.965
Um, and so political power

08:44.065 --> 08:45.925
and profits have gone hand in hand.

08:46.545 --> 08:48.325
Now, I think you see, that

08:48.325 --> 08:51.725
because, you know, Fox News ended up reporting the results

08:51.945 --> 08:54.765
of the 2020 election because of the

08:55.005 --> 08:58.005
Dominion lawsuit that shows they knew they were selling

08:58.005 --> 09:01.005
these lies, but they were scared to offend their,

09:01.135 --> 09:03.805
their viewers, and notably, president Trump.

09:03.985 --> 09:05.725
Now all of that has come out into the open

09:06.145 --> 09:07.765
and the relationship between Trump

09:07.785 --> 09:09.085
and Fox has been suffered.

09:09.505 --> 09:12.485
And so I think the question is, how does Fox,

09:12.585 --> 09:13.645
but how do any

09:13.645 --> 09:16.565
of the cable news channels show their relevance?

09:16.785 --> 09:19.245
Um, in the, the 2024 election?

09:19.555 --> 09:23.765
Traditionally, candidates have relied on cable news

09:23.945 --> 09:25.405
to get their information out there.

09:25.405 --> 09:28.805
They've relied on them to host debates, to host town halls,

09:29.225 --> 09:30.845
to, you know, to have some

09:30.845 --> 09:34.165
of these really important events that have been central

09:34.345 --> 09:35.845
to mobilizing voters.

09:36.265 --> 09:38.085
Um, and whether

09:38.105 --> 09:41.125
or not they turn to the cable news networks,

09:41.225 --> 09:42.725
is going to be really significant.

09:42.945 --> 09:44.685
And I think on the flip side,

09:44.905 --> 09:48.565
how cable news networks actually approach this election,

09:49.225 --> 09:52.565
how they, they do investigative journalism, right?

09:52.705 --> 09:55.525
Are are they actually trying to hold candidates accountable

09:55.545 --> 09:58.045
or are they allowing them to just advance some

09:58.045 --> 10:00.445
of this misinformation, these conspiracy theories

10:00.595 --> 10:03.045
that will then determine whether or not voters

10:03.265 --> 10:05.285
and then viewers value them enough to pay

10:05.285 --> 10:06.405
for the subscription fees?

10:06.785 --> 10:09.245
As a historian, my goal is

10:09.505 --> 10:12.285
to make people understand the power dynamics,

10:12.425 --> 10:13.725
of our media landscape.

10:14.345 --> 10:17.365
And, and I think that it's designed, one of, one

10:17.365 --> 10:21.005
of the things I chart in the book is that it is designed to

10:21.525 --> 10:22.925
distract and divide people because

10:22.985 --> 10:25.965
of the very particular regulatory course that it took,

10:26.805 --> 10:30.125
emphasizing market metrics rather than serving democracy.

10:30.985 --> 10:32.485
And I don't have the solution

10:32.585 --> 10:36.245
to the challenges we face in our contemporary political

10:36.425 --> 10:40.405
and media, divides that are very much,

10:40.525 --> 10:42.325
a challenge for American democracy today.

10:42.705 --> 10:45.565
But I do think that if people understand the power dynamics

10:45.565 --> 10:48.045
behind them, they understand the,

10:48.145 --> 10:50.165
the political calculations that are at play

10:50.165 --> 10:53.245
and what in how information is presented, how it's used,

10:53.465 --> 10:56.405
and they understand the business, dynamics

10:56.405 --> 10:59.085
that are there as well, that they'll better be able

10:59.085 --> 11:00.525
to navigate and understand

11:00.525 --> 11:03.405
and dissect the information that they receive,

11:03.675 --> 11:05.325
from their television screens.

11:05.325 --> 11:07.925
But also, you know, from their, their, their phones

11:08.225 --> 11:10.045
and their social media feeds.

00:00 - So I started writing this book because I was really interested in the changes in the media landscape that really become clear in the 1980s. I'm a historian, really interested in the intersections of media and politics, and I noticed that, you know,

00:14 - cable television comes on the scene and seems to explode in the 1980s, and historians frequently talked about it as a result of Ronald Reagan, the great communicator and his deregulatory agenda. And so I thought this was gonna be a book about Reagan, but in fact, when I started digging, I found that the origins of some of these political changes, new political attitudes about how to structure cable television as a business,

00:40 - were actually rooted in the 1960s and significantly in the Nixon administration as well. There are major changes in regulatory policy towards cable television that happened under Richard Nixon. To me, this was really interesting. There was always a line in the literature that talked about the anti-media agenda of Nixon as shaping cable, but that was really it. And, I wrote my first book about

01:07 - that ended with Richard Nixon. I knew his obsession with the politics of the media. I knew his obsession with controlling the image. And so I started digging into his administration and in particular his office of Telecommunications policy. And I found that, you know, these new regulatory approaches to cable television that are taken under the OTP under Nixon, are really connected, to his anger at the, the network televisions his, belief

01:37 - that the networks were biased and not to get 'em. And he wanted to spur cable, which had previously only expanded the reach of broadcast television by regulatory design. He wanted to introduce this concept of cable as a competitor to network television that could really kind of challenge the dominance that they had over the information people received on their television screens, every day. One of the key archives that I relied on, was the,

02:05 - the CSPAN Video Library. It's an incredible archive. It's free to access. and so I strongly encourage anyone interested in media and politics in modern America to check it out. And as I was digging into this, I found this really fascinating, political workshop that was launched on March 1st, 1984. And in the workshop, it really encapsulated the themes. I saw time and time again in my research, that cable operators and lobbyists are coming to DC

02:35 - and they're pitching to white or White House and congressional staffers and campaign advisors, about why they should use cable rather than broadcasting. They highlighted that the problem that democracy faced was that broadcasting was too powerful, too exclusionary, because again, at this time, broadcasting only allowed, the three networks to really dominate The information that people receive cable because of the technological reach of cable,

03:03 - you could have more channels on the dial. They could, they could actually, go all night long. cable could really exceed the boundaries, those limitations set by network broadcasting. And so operators are saying that this is the solution, to this, mass mediated world that's so limited by broadcast, and they, they highlight it as a democratic solution. But in fact, this was very much a lobbying strategy at the time, Congress was debating deregulatory

03:30 - legislation about cable television. And there's even references to this that, you know, we're aware that this re legislation's on the table and we look what we can do for you. Why don't you do something for us? And so it's this symbiotic relationship that Cable Operators worked really diligently to create with elected officials. that is at the core of my book. and it, you know, this, this meeting really,

03:55 - reflected this broader political strategy by the late 1970s, thanks to satellite technology that allowed capable operators to disseminate their programming across the country quite cheaply, compared to having relied on, the wires of, or, microwave systems of network broadcasting. all of a sudden there is just this explosion of the cable dial where, operators and pro are looking for different types of programs, ones that they can sell to, potential subscribers to say,

04:29 - you can't get this on traditional television, but you can if you subscribe to, to cable. And so HBO really is transformative, in offering entertainment, nonstop sports, or live sporting even. And, and movies. ESPN comes out, but for the political agenda of cable operators and lobbyists, the two most consequential channels that are introduced in 1979

04:55 - and 1980 respectively are cspan, which provided televised, coverage of legislative proceedings, in the House of Representatives and CNN, which provides, you know, nonstop 24 7 news coverage. It's one of the things, that kind of goes to that broader political strategy of cable operators, of trying to become part of the political establishment because they understood that if they became part of that establishment, then, those people

05:24 - who benefited from exposure on cable would work to expand cable's reach. And so it's a business strategy as much as it's a lobbying strategy. And so this is part of what Cable News does. it affords new opportunities, for political activists across the, the ideological spectrum to come in and share their views as punts or commentators. It affords opportunities for perhaps more fringe members

05:51 - of Congress, or third party candidates to have an opportunity to come on a news program because it extends 24 hours a day. It's not the 22 lim or, or maybe even an hour news broadcast of, of, of the, of the television networks. and so this really, becomes a way to, and, and, you know, Ted Turner recognizes that the business potential of showing the political credibility

06:17 - and the political value of CNN, works to ingrain it in different campaigns and operations. And by 1992, that's exactly what happens. and, and it's, you know, it's people who are normally desperate for media attention that are willing to gamble on a news strategy like cable. And that's exactly what happens in 92. You have someone like Ross Perot that, is a third party candidate, doesn't have a political party to back him, uses CNN to make an appeal to voters

06:46 - to write him in as a, as the third party candidates. And then, it's, bill Clinton, who's desperate for media attention in, the summer of 1992 that will accept any media invitation that co that's coming his way, including something that's very unconventional from MTV. president HW Bush, said that he wouldn't go on what he called a teeny bopper network, because he thought it was undignified. But in fact, bill Clinton recognized

07:15 - that going on MTV would allow him to directly communicate to a particular demographic around issues that interested them. So younger voters, he talked a lot about student loan policies. He also controlled, really dominated the parameters of the conversation. There were no hard hitting questions. He was in control. He kind of shaped the, the information that they were getting, and he was actually able

07:39 - to use going on there and speaking to quote unquote, the people directly as a way to criticize the Washington Press Corps that had been hammering him about all of these questions of scandal. And so he is able to bypass the Washington Press Court and appeal directly to voters in a way that allowed him to present his message in a very unfiltered, manner. Cable news is as powerful as the political establishment really makes it.

08:05 - and that's one of the one things, you know, when, when people like, during Donald Trump's campaign in 2016 during his presidency, he relied on Fox News. he relied tremendously on them to get his message out there to, to manipulate information, to advance misinformation, to advance conspiracy theories, about the, the 2020 election. And so, because Donald Trump elevated the role

08:35 - of Fox in his communication strategy, Fox then used that political prestige as a way to rake in profits. and so political power and profits have gone hand in hand. Now, I think you see, that because, you know, Fox News ended up reporting the results of the 2020 election because of the Dominion lawsuit that shows they knew they were selling these lies, but they were scared to offend their, their viewers, and notably, president Trump.

09:03 - Now all of that has come out into the open and the relationship between Trump and Fox has been suffered. And so I think the question is, how does Fox, but how do any of the cable news channels show their relevance? in the, the 2024 election? Traditionally, candidates have relied on cable news to get their information out there. They've relied on them to host debates, to host town halls,

09:29 - to, you know, to have some of these really important events that have been central to mobilizing voters. and whether or not they turn to the cable news networks, is going to be really significant. And I think on the flip side, how cable news networks actually approach this election, how they, they do investigative journalism, right? Are are they actually trying to hold candidates accountable

09:55 - or are they allowing them to just advance some of this misinformation, these conspiracy theories that will then determine whether or not voters and then viewers value them enough to pay for the subscription fees? As a historian, my goal is to make people understand the power dynamics, of our media landscape. And, and I think that it's designed, one of, one of the things I chart in the book is that it is designed to

10:21 - distract and divide people because of the very particular regulatory course that it took, emphasizing market metrics rather than serving democracy. And I don't have the solution to the challenges we face in our contemporary political and media, divides that are very much, a challenge for American democracy today. But I do think that if people understand the power dynamics behind them, they understand the, the political calculations that are at play

10:50 - and what in how information is presented, how it's used, and they understand the business, dynamics that are there as well, that they'll better be able to navigate and understand and dissect the information that they receive, from their television screens. But also, you know, from their, their, their phones and their social media feeds.

Faculti AI can make mistakes