tv Media Buzz FOX News February 8, 2016 12:00am-1:01am PST
it's hard to find time to keep up on my shows. that's why i switched from u-verse to xfinity. now i can download my dvr recordings and take them anywhere. ready or not, here i come! (whispers) now hide-and-seek time can also be catch-up-on-my-shows time. here i come! can't find you anywhere! don't settle for u-verse. x1 from xfinity will change the way you experience tv.
they're not afraid to mix it up with the candidates. mcquaid is in a war of words with donald trump and he joins me now in manchester. so you called donald trump a crude blow hard, a con man, a schoolyard rich kid bully. is that role of the newspaper publisher? >> yes. in return, i have low life, psycho. >> psycho is the latest one. i didn't know until recently that i was just a sleaze bag, a
liar, and my paper's got three months max to live. >> is it not uncomfortable for you to be mixing it up with a presidential candidate who doesn't like you or your paper? ? >> it's not uncomfortable at all for me to tell it like it is for a presidential candidate who has no business being a presidential candidate. >> you don't think he should be in the race? >> no sir. the media have done a terrific job. a.p. hill was a general in the civil war. the media for six months. trump, tlrump, trump, trump, trump. the night after iowa, they show him live for a half hour in new hampshire. it's all trump all the time. free media. he told me once that he didn't have to buy advertising because he was getting it all for free. >> right. >> but how can trump expect fair coverage in the news columns of your paper when you're denouncing him in such personal
terms? >> the same way that u jeeugene mccarthy got fair coverage in "the union leader" while my predecessor was calling gene a skunk and skunk's skunk on the fro front page. mccarthy cited the union leaders fair coverage in the news columns of his campaign which was a long shot at the time. >> so maybe you toned oit down since the days of skunk. now after the paper endorsed chris christie, you also got it into with the ""newark star ledger"" that says your paper knows nothing about his record in new jersey and he mentioned the bridgegate scandal. >> yeah. the paper did this with my young editorial page editor grant bossy who took up the coverage for our side on that. i think they were furious in new jersey that we dared endorse somebody that they don't like. >> now abc news dumped the "union leader" from the debate.
this is after you came out for christie and came out strongly against trump. you were not happy about that. >> i thought abc was spineless, just based on what trump was demanding. >> so you think that abc is a network was caving to pressure from donald trump because you, joe mcquaid, were criticizing him? >> yes. that's what trump said. i was shocked. abc called my editor at 3:00 on a sunday afternoon, not to discuss the issue, but to tell us we're out. that's real class. i was amazed at that. and i think they were also upset because we co-sponsored the democratic one with abc here, the months before. and they didn't like the fact that we were insisting on having new hampshire questions and new hampshire presence. i think trump was the tipping point. but abc knew that we would insist on all the major candidates. anybody but carly being on that stage. >> carly fiorina, of course.
the criteria that i didn't think was fair and excluding her from last night's debate. they endorsed since 1996. pat buchanan won the primary with your paper's endorsement. but is the printed press diminished? >> greatly. fwhut a very crowded feel with this many candidates, it can make a difference bigger than it's made some time in the past. the "union leader" hasn't had a great track record over the years. we nominated john ashbrook on the republican side. >> you had clufrnkers. nice to see you. >> nice to see you. >> up next, our media microxoen and did cnn blow it on the story about ben carson taking a break from the campaign. h
in our media microscope, how has the coverage changed since iowa? we had a company take a look at the top mainstream media outlets for the three days leading up to the debate. it's a blowout. look at that column. 21,000 mentioned for donald trump who was then bailing out on the debate and holding his own event. that is more than triple the coverage of ted cruz with more than 6300 mentions even though the senator went ton win the caucuses, marco rubio who surged in the final days just over 1400. and jeb bush, chris christie, john kasich, all obliterated in iowa, all under 1,000 mentions. now check out the coverage for this week. tuesday through thursday, once the spotlight shifted to new hampshire. we have a media horse race. trump still ahead. more than 8700 stories. but that is down by well over half. cruz right behind with 7300. well ahead of rubio with over 4800. the three governors who are treating new hampshire as a make or break state, bush, christie,
christ christie, kasich, still under 1,000 mentions apiece. i thought they were getting more attention. here is a striking element. tru trump's coverage, 10% less negative now that he's not feuding. rubio's coverage, 12% less negative now that he's getting or was getting upbeat reporting on momentum until last night's debate. here's a twist. when we look at the coverage just in the new hampshire media, trump, cruz, rubio, we're still one, two, and three. but a bump for jeb bush here on the local outlets, he trailed the top three but garnered twice the local media attention of christie and kasich. we'll see if that translates on primary night. i think the bottom line is that cnn didn't report anything inaccurate about ben carson taking that break. they didn't insinuate he was dropping out. i can't resist this story. i guess is all fair in love, war, and politics. a couple women had been kicked off continueder, the hookup app where if you swipe right if you
like somebody's profile picture, they say they're failing to burn and sthent dozens of men a message to detect a certain number in support of bernie sanders. that's right. the men came looking for some action and they got a political appeal. one of the women telling reuters if they said no or were on the fence, i would try to talk to them and persuade them to vote. fwhaut persuasion didn't include any dates. or it might have been a bit more effective. ahead from new hampshire, hillary clinton now in a tight race with bernie sanders. how did msnbc handle their debate with rachael maddow? but first, the campaign coverage is elevating insults over issues.
kind of a symbolic moment, brit, when abc held the debate last night and across the campus here, they had a little difficulty during the interductions. take a brief look. >> ben carson. >> texas senator ted cruz. [ applause ] >> businessman, donald trump. >> so, nobody quite knew whether to come out. what did you make of that? >> there is a guy coming around the curtain and giving him the signal to go. i'm talking to one of our senior directors here, great guy. and he told me, he said this is my worst nightmare. you know, the year he is the guy responsible for getting everybody in place and everybody positioned properly and so forth. and he looked at that. he said it made him wince and looks to me as it would happen is they needed somebody standing there the way you have --
>> at every high school football game, number 22, left tackle. yeah, go! >> yeah, someone tells them to go. ben carson said he couldn't hear anything back there. >> applause from other candidates were drowning out the names. >> turned out to be a solid debate. moderate bid david muir and martha and mary katherine hamm making a contribution. you look at this coverage of this whole campaign. at the beginning you had the press sort of mocking him. declaring jeb bush was the obvious front-runner. scott walker was a front runner in iowa for a while. bernie sanders was treating this as a joke. and only lately did the media establishment seem to notice, discover, almost anger and frustration out there. have you ever seen a worse performance? >> i must say, we are sailing in unchartered seas. and nothing, you know, in my experience as a reporter going back many years prepared me for what donald trump has been able to do. now i knew because i'm on twitter. twitter is a great early warning
system for journalism and anybody else looking for major sent. . i knew about the level of anger and distrust of the republican establishment, if you will, the senior republicans in washington and elsewhere. i never thought, for example, there was going to be an easy path for jeb bush because i didn't know if he could even get a hearing. i don't think he ever got a hearing. people say just another push. they want to purn the turn the page and move on. the trump phenomenon caught me by surprise. i can sense the celebrity and the fact you can't take your eyes off the guy, at least in the early going in particular when we never heard the speeches before and he would get up and say what seemed to us to be the most outrageous things and none of them hurt him. >> and they kept predicting his implosion. >> it was amusing. i didn't seem to be the thing we saw a politician benefit from and he has. i think most everybody missed that. >> okay. now you have these prognosticators who missed or minimized trump and thought scott walker was going to be a serious contender. but then they come on tv the next day and offer more
predictions based on polls that are often fluctuating or wrong. >> one thing that we as journalists get all the time when we're commenting on politics, the moderator or the anchor or whoever will say, who's going to win? >> yeah. >> how is this going to turn out? i try not to do it. the danger is so high. but people do. and, of course, we don't really have the ability to second-guess polls very easily anymore. so many of them, there used to be. >> yeah. >> and you really couldn't rely on them. they were space sod far apart. >> but is there pressure to do this? is there culture in the pretwitter era? >> i think there was. but i will say this. you used to come into a state to cover a primary. and there would be a poll or two. >> yeah. >> a lot of them were way out of date. you go on the trail and go to events and looking for size of the crowds, crowd reaction. you're looking for the demeanor
of the candidates. they can often sense momentum. sometimes there is internal polling that give a candidate a certain spring in his or her step. and, you know, you look for a sense of it or reporter's gut sense of it. it is almost by os moes is you pick -- us amoesies. but when trump and cruz are pounding each other, it really got nasty this week and christie is taunting rubio and so forth, do you have a sense that this just kind of sucks up the oxygen away from the issues that people care about? you talk to voters and the economy, jobs, terrorism. and we hear not necessarily in last night's debate, but we hear less and less of that as it becomes this sort of slugfest. >> well, there is absolutely nothing good about that. look, we're news people, first of all.
we want people to be serious about the issues as citizens. but there is nothing that makes -- conflicts strikes sparks. sparks make news. that's what we're looking for. if a couple of candidates gheet a brawl the way christie and rubio do d. in the debate last night, that -- i'm sorry, it's irresistible. that's news. >> a lot of people say it's ratings. >> who wants discussion of immigration and maybe not going to take you completely to the set. >> but this has always been the case. the horse race and brawling is going to beat out. >> roger ails said you have two candidates on the stage. one announces a great plan for solving problems in the middle east. the other falls into the orchestra pit. who is going to make news? >> can't argue with that. brit, stick around. next on "media buzz" in new hampshire, we're having a great time. the hillary coronation now on hold after bernie sort of won iowa. he is getting the scrutiny he deserves? and the woman that quit bloomberg news after she tried
bernie sanders who is way ahead in new hampshire keeps saying the media constantly urged him to attack hillary clinton. he doesn't like to do that. neither of them had any problem slamming the other this weekend. a heated msnbc debate or deflecting the questions from chuck todd and rachael maddow. >> you were asked about speaking fees and the amount of speaking fees you got from goldman sachs
speeches, you said that's what they offered. you have been too dismissive of voters concerns about this issue in you're own campaign? >> i think i may not have done the job i should in explaining my record. >> so can you reassure the democrats that somehow the e-mail issue isn't going to blow up your candidacy if you're the nominee? >> absolutely i can. you know, brit was eeps, i was benghazi. >> could you work with them? >> sure. >> you have made enemies of big business in this country with the way awe proechd them in this campaign? >> of course i can work with them. >> we're back with the panel. molly and anderson cooper in that cnn town hall brought up the $675,000 that goldman sachs paid hillary clinton. it came up again at msnbc. this is a defining issue of this campaign or a media obsession? >> it's interesting. the media is giving her a harder time over it than her opponents. bernie sanders certainly attacked her for the ties to wall street.
>> he brings it up all the time. >> but on some of the other personal issues, the e-mails in particular, he doesn't want to go there quite so much. he didn't call on her to release the transcripts in that debate this week. i do think it's a real issue. it's something that democratic voters care a lot about, something you hear a lot about from bernie sanders supporters this is the reason they don't trust her. it's because she's too close to big business and in bed with wall street and she hasn't come up to a good answer to this question. over and over, you hear her struggling to respond. >> they made clear that bernie sanders is pushing free college for everybody, free health care, raising taxes on the middle class. he says that will be more than offset by not having to pay insurance premiums. where is the media scrutiny of all this? it seems to me if a candidate everybody in ut press thought would win came out with the big government programs, there would be stories about how are we going to pay for it? >> i've seen him ask this in interviews several times. what are you going to do? he said if he gets a big enough
coalition of new voters and changes the electorate, he always says, it has to be a huge revolution that he gets enough people in the congress agreeing with him. that he could actually try eventually to make this change, affect this change. as you describe, people would ultimately pay less for more than they are now because health care costs. i'm not advocating for bernie sanders. i'm seen him answer the questions. but what is interesting with molly is bernie sanders' point. what the media is not covering this weekend is the demoin register reported on friday night the votes in iowa are still being counted. and bernie has been silent on. this the reason is the media is not paying attention to this. they were recounting ted cruz and carson's votes in iowa, we would be all over it. >> i think that's because the media have already given iowa to bernie sanders. whether he finished .3% or not. >> i that i would affect hillary clinton here. i do. >> just the fact that -- >> instead of winning by .2%, he
lost by .1%? >> i think if the thing driving around in iowa with a license plate for years, there is a bone for bernie sanders supporters to pick. >> think about what happened to rick santorum. >> that's true. but look, here's the point. if you spend your time fighting -- kblang about the outcome of the previous war, so close it could be a virtual tie any way you count it. you have to be getting to the people in the next state and giving them reasons to vote for you rather than looking back. >> exactly. let me come back to the msnbc debates. as abc had a solid debate, i thought, everybody was buzzing about the botch introductions. that created a lot of talk in social media. you commented on twitter. rachael maddow doing the following after the debate was over. play that tape.
>> here she is embracing the democrats. your thoughts? >> my thought about that was first thing is i've never seen a moderator do that before that i can remember. and people say about her that she's an extremely warm personable person and this is the kind of thing she does. but when we are involved in a debate, we journalists, we are acting a bit like the players in a trial before the court of public opinion. and, you know, advocates play a certain role, whatever the relationship with each other and with the judge outside the courtroom is set aside and their professional discipline comes into play. you maintain a certain proper distance as a journalist from the people you're covering, especially in the crucible of a debate. and whether she runs up and hugs these people afterwards, it conveys the impression that she loves them both and thinks the democrats are wonderful. >> right. i will not be hugging you after
this segment. >> i wouldn't mind if you did. >> all right. i thought she did a decent job. i thought it was a mistake for msnbc that was trying to brand themselves to move away with the left wing label to pair her with chuck todd. chuck todd was pressing hillary clinton about that. and she said she could 100% guarantee this is not going to cause an implosion in her campaign. i guess i have a version of the same question which is, of course this is a story. but has it reached a point where the media seems to be pushing this beyond the extent that voters care about, particularly democratic voters? >> first of all, there are still revelations coming out about the e-mails. in the last week we've had new information about the extent of the issues here. and second of all, she gets asked about this. and democratic voters bring it up. here she's been asked about it. i spoke to democratic voters at her events. people support her who say i'm nervous about. this i still worry that this is a ticking time bomb for her candidacy. so this is not the kind of thing
that democratic voters are on the fence about saying we don't care, we wish the media would move past it. no, what you hear from them is that they are worried about it. >> for the political reasons. >> they don't want a nominee who is a stink bomb that's about to go off. >> last point, i thought the media would jump on this. it slid by. hillary's denying being part of the establishment. she says i can't be part of the establishment because woi woulde first female president. that is a clumsy way of bringing up gender. >> i think her passionate female supporters and most of them are much older, as you know, want her to -- so important to them that they think that's going to be a really good weapon in her arsenal. they want her to talk that way. she's really pulling out all the stops to shave bernie sanders' lead on tuesday and close up the gap. she's trying to find ways continue to certificate the, you know, historic nature of her nomination. >> probably fair to bring it up. i thought it was the wrong spot
to bring it up. yes, no one thinks she'll win new hampshire but we'll look at the point spread and medial deliver their analysis as they always do. molly ball, brit hume, thank you very much for stopping by this new hampshire. after the break, a veteran reporter on why she had no choice but to quit michael bloomberg's news service. later, what happened to this year's super bowl hype?
>> why did you feel compelled to leave what was a good job at bloomberg? >> because i felt i couldn't do my job as a political editor. i thought it was time to -- as chuck noel of the pittsburgh steelers used to say, find my life's work. >> he had a situation where the new york times and other outlets were reporting on michael bloomberg actively exploring a presidential run, this was active, wasn't a subtle butt and you wanted to cover it, correct? >> that's correct. >> what happened? >> there has been a policy at bloomberg to not write about ourselves as they say. every time the mayor's name would come up, that would be a bit of an issue. >> a giant red flag? >> exactly. and i mean, in some sense that's understandable, at a big company, you would do the same thing at any company, you would want to check it out with bosses, but when it became clear that we wouldn't be able to pursue this to the extent i
thought we needed to, or should, with a sorry of this magnitude i got very uncomfortable. >> the company says we cuffed the speculation about mayor blockberg by aggregating stories from other outlets, but you felt that wasn't enough? >> i did not feel that was enough. i feel like when you are running a political operation as we were that you should follow every story aggressively, and i felt we weren't able to follow this story aggressively. and i thought compromised us as an organization. i certainly felt it compromised me as an editor you. >> write good journalism is easy, you just need to be willing to bite the hand that feeds you. but that of course can be risky. >> yes, it can. actions have consequences and i'm paying a price. >> did you wrestle with whether or not you should take this step? obviously you enjoyed it there, it is a bran name organization
and here you are walking out the door? >> i did wrestle with it. i have great colleagues, i cared a lot about the reporters, still do, who worked for me. and i had great editorial colleagues. >> but media companies sometimes have to cover themselves as fox did when donald trump blew up the fox news debate? why won't they let you report on the mayor. >> i'm puzzled by that myself. he news what it's like to be covered. has been covered in the toughest news organization in the world. his organization, both his company and fill an trope make transparency of prime value. to me, it's puzelling. i never got a straight answer. i think a, ma of maturity for the company will be being able to get there. and i hop they get there. >> kathie kylie thank you for joining us. >> you are welcome. >> still to come, a national
>> it's here. we are in the final 48-hours before the pivotal new hampshire primary. candidates looking for the states where the independent voter has a whole lot of power. what do they need to say to persuade voters ahead of tuesday. the republican side according to the university polling we want to show you. donald trump leading the pack with 28 percent support john kasich second at 14 percent and tied with marco rubio, jeb bush, ted cruz. the rest of the field in the low to low single digits there. the news there is no clear second place holder at this point. tough competition. >> carl cameron is live for us in