divide a nation." mr. deggans, what's a race baiter? [laughter] >> guest: good question. i'm actually trying to redefineg the word, race baiter, because what i've found is you try toou have discussions aboute controversial issues centered on racial prejudice, other than trying to shut down a discussion by calling you the race baiter. e conversation, trying to get some power by accusing someone else of being insensitive. my whole point is as a nation becoming much more diverse, becoming -- we're seeing a greater impact from people of color, we're going to have these conversations more and more often and we should feel free to talk about our differences in a way that's open and nonjudgmental and aimed at making progress on these issues instead of trying to pretend they don't exist. >> host: where did the name come from? >> guest: from my good friend, bill o'reilly on fox news

channel. he called me a race-baiter in 2008. >> host: whoa? >> guest: i'm november sure why. he cited i am the in a group we give people on suggestions how to better cover issues involving race and prejudice. when cnn, for example, said that one of the boston bombing suspects was a dark-skinned male we reminded folks we have a whole set of guide licenses, baited on the "associated press," about when to use race, how to identify people of color, people in general when they're criminal suspects and that's the stuff we work on. we try to advance training. try to point out when people make mistakes and say, there's a better way to do this stuff. i'm not sure how that make mess a race-baiter but i imagine what bill is upset about i have been critical how he talks about race on the show. i feel like on fox news channel, especially, they reflecting the fears of the audience, quite

often, and their audience is mostly white, mostly older, mostly more conservative, obviously, and a high concern that white people are being marginalized and sidelined as people of color get more power in society. so he reflects that in what he talks about when he talks about race. sometimes that leads to not being as fair as you can be and echoing stereotypes, and i've called him out at times, and so i wrote a piece for the huffington post and for my own newman, the tampa bay times, and i talked about if bill o'reilly is calling me a race-baiter maybe i'ming too something right. i told that store to some friends and they said you should rite a book about how when you want to talk about issues of race, people dahl you a race-baiter and try to shut you down. i thought that was a good idea. so i took tenneers of writing i've done on race, prejudice,

exterior types and media, and pulled it together in one book and used the unfortunate second of the race-baiter comment by bill o'reilly how to overlay it all. >> host: you write this book is an attempt to decode the way media outlets profit by segments americans. you call it the tyranny of the broadcast. what happenses a biggest pieceses of an increasingly fragmented audience are courted at the expense of many others. >> guest: yeah. there's this idea of once upon a time, we remember when there were three or four networks and people, made use made money by drying together huge audiences and then selling advertisers access to them in our modern media environment it's so fractured that people are targeting small niches. how do i get young males or middle aged women or black people, and unfortunately i think some media outlets decided to use pledge dirks stereo type, even close to racism to draw in

an audience and keep the audience on their platform rather than going to others. so what i try to do in this book, i try to explore that a little bit. try toy describe why that is happening and help people diffuse these things so they can recognize it when they seive it on fox news channel, on msnby, on the drudge report, they have a sense of what is going on, and they're made more media literate and they can response in a way that makes sense. >> host: eric

something they agreed with. so we see even now politicians can use this coded language. the people that they want to reach a reached among but also deny that they're using the tactic because there is another meaning to the word poem. >> host: book tv coverage recently at indiana university, and is seen to be primarily an african-american audiences into your presentation. and when you were talking about some conservative republicans such as herman cain and been carson to one of the question is used the term uncle tom. is that of their turn to use when talking about conservative republicans?

>> guest: i don't like that term. i understand why some people get angry. but i feel like that kind of conversation is counterproductive. i have often said, and i am sure every niche in the book, trying chair region dec. said to figure out whether they're racist and not, whether their an uncle tom and not is counterproductive. you can never really know. all you can do is look at what they say, let's get the impact of the words, and looking thery history of what they assert. so what i say let herman cain is that a lot of conservatives seee to like herman cain because it talks about race in a way thatao they touch of a race. a lot of conservatives are verye sensitive about being couldboutb accuse of being racist, but they have beliefs about how race works in society that other people find objectionable so, if you are going to go and say, well, racism doesn't hold back people back anymore, or if you say that black people have

been brainwashed into voting for the democratic party. herman cain said those thing, so if you're a white conservative and believe those things you can say, well, there's a black conservative who thinks these things, too. he can't bay racist. how i can be racist? i don't like using the term racist because that's too extreme. i think prejudice, bias, words are a little softer, describe terms dealing with stereo types and bias as opposed to outright racism where you're a bigot, i think we reached a point in this conversation where we have to figure out how to talk about buyees or stereo type that don't ride to outright racism,. >> host: eric deegans is our guest. he is the author of "race-baiter" and patrick in new jersey, you're the first caller. >> caller: thank you very much.

mr. deegans, i think your book is pertinent and america unfortunately -- i don't know why we avoid having this conversation about race. it is a troubled part of american history, unfortunately, but we need to talk about and it instead of saying somebody is completely a racist or i have no biases at all we have to have national dialogue how to get past this and learn from each other and grow, because america is a wonderful country that can build on ideas and not be solely about one race against another or biases or troubled pasts. what are your thoughts on this? >> guest: well, i totally understand what you're talking about. i agree with you. there is too much of a hesitancety -- hesitancy to have these conversations. but people are afraid of being accused of being racist, and so -- especially white people are afraid of being accused of being racist, and one of the things i try to talk about in my

book is stereotypes is productive. prejudice can be very productive. if explains the world in ways that are comforting. gives you a sense you understand people and situations before you even walk into them. you feel like you can walk interest a room and you know what everybody is about before you even talk to them. so, i understand why some stereotypes can be seductive. what we have to do is say, even people with a good heart or who are not racists or bigots can fall prey to stereotypes. so let's talk about the ideas and make sheer -- sure we're considering the full scope of the argument and understanding the person next to us, and if we can have those conversations -- that's why i don't like the term uncle tom. i feel like that term, you're automatically denigrating someone, and you're slapping a pejorative term on him. i'd rather you've say i disagree with your ideas. let's talk about it.

and we can have a discussion in that space, then people will be less hesitant to have a conversation. >> host: you talk about nbc news after katrina. >> guest: sure. i was lucky enough to interview brian williams, the top anchor at nbc news, few days after katrina hit. he had made covering katrina a priority. he was there for weeks and weeks. did a lot of great work and was really passionate about trying to start a national conversation on race and poverty in america. and thin talked to him five years later and he had to admit, that national conversation didn't happen because people would rather watch entourage, and i understand his point, which is that it's an uncomfortable conversation, and media doesn't cover poverty enough. i think one of the reasons why we saw candidates like mitt romney and even people like -- other g.o.p. stalwarts say that

there's 47% of the country that once they get things for free, and wants government handouts. i feel the media has not done a great job describing who the poor are. what is poverty like in your community? what are poor people like? when there are people out there who are working at wal-mart, working at mcdonalds, ups, not necessarily making enough money to make ends meet, many have two jobs, taking the bus, riding a bureaucrat. there are people who are poor who are working very hard and i feel like if we told their story better in the news media, perhaps people would understand that 47% better. >> host: marie in sugar grove, north carolina, good afternoon. you're on booktv on c-span2 with eric deegans. >> caller: high, how are you? >> host: hi. >> caller: i just want to -- can you hear me okay?

>> host: yes, go ahead. >> caller: okay. i just want to convey my experience. i grew up in the greater cincinnati area, and in may of 2008, i went to dinner with some friends. i'm white. two others were white. a dear friend of ours who is african-american. and we got our meal and all of ours, the white women, all our meals were served on a plate and her was served in a to-go box, and it was just devastating, and i'm -- i was born in '55. all my friends are in that area of age, and my african-american friends have say you have to pick your battles. and i grew up in that area and i lived in the -- i'm telling you, this is just horrendous, and i have been really -- planning on getting your book and looking at the situation from your angle the and see what you have to say. thanks for taking my call.

>> guest: thank you for speaking up. i know talking about these incidents can be difficult and emotional, and i feel really sorry for your friend and i'm sorry to hear what you went through. i think it's important when we see stereo types and prejudices and bias rear its ugly head in conversation that those of us who are not the subject of that prejudice speak up because sometimes that can be the most powerful action. for example, if i'm in a group and i hear someone say something awful about someone who is gay or i hear someone say something that is awful about women, i will speak up and say, i know you think i'm part of the audience for this awful joke and this awful comment but you know what? that's not part of who i am, and i don't tolerate that kind of talk around me. and i'm not suggesting that you guys didn't do everything you could in that situation, not at all. but my recommendation for people who find themselves in a circumstance is find a way to

politely but firmly say our friend got a to-go box. what was the meaning of this? when they understand that the white people at the table have a problem with how the black person is being treated, they understand, wait a minute, people who are like me have a problem with this. and that's one of the best ways to sort of combat this issue. be firm, polite, but show even though you think you think i'm part of this, i'm not part of this. >> host: next call from james in sacramento, california. james, please go ahead. >> caller: yes, just want to let you know i am concerned about my president, i voted for him twice. and i'm still trying to figure out-mr. deegans, what is the situation why we cannot get our president to be more inclusive with many of the blacks in our neighborhoods. we don't get a chance to ask

questions. some of the men like stockton and jesse jackson, we don't get the kind of leverage and power in our neighborhoods like we should with our president. i love him. and i want to see more of him dealing with a lot of the back issues. we did our part. >> guest: i talk about that in the book. i feel as if barack obama is in a position where, whenever he talks about race, his unfavorable ratings with white voters go up precipitously. and we saw that when henry lou guess gates, the noted professor at harvard got arrested inside

his team when neighbors thought they saw burglars. he talked about it during a press conference and his unfavorable rate went up with white voters and in a sense he was pressured to find another way to talk about that issue, and of course we remember the infamous beer comment. the same thing happened when he talked about trayvon martin. he said this young teen, trayvon martin, unarmed black teen, killed in a subdivision by a neighborhood watch volunteer, he said if i had a son he would look like trayvon, and that helped ignite a conservative backlash to that situation simply because the president spoke in terms that could be related to race. i think he has quite rightly sort of intuited they're not a lot of upside to him talking about race when hi is president and there's a lot of down side for democrats and himself, and is a say in the book i cannot wait to read the book that barack obama writes about race when he gets out of the white house. >> host: is that fair to the

country? >> guest: i don't know if it's fair to the country but in a weird way we're at a point where consumers and the public have more control over these situations than they realize, and if he talked about race and it was accepted by most of the people in the country, he would do it. but what hi is finding is when he talks about race, it spikes his unpopularity with white voteres. and so he has to take his shots, and frankly, i would rather see our president, whoever he is, focus on the issues he can make a difference on, and if talking about race is going to make it harder for him to make progress on the pressing issues of the day, almost feel like that might be a subject he can better address when he is out of the white house, when he has more freedom. he doesn't have to worry about public opinion, and when can really zero in on a subject in a way he can't do when he is president and has to deal with every crisis that comes across the desk. >> host: if the first black

president of the united states can't talk about race, how can we have that conversation? >> guest: folks like me and my book. we found -- i mean, we looked at the surveys that talked about the gun debate, for example, and we found huge percentages of people favored background checks, but because of the political realities of the moment, it wasn't able to pass even in a democratically controlled senate. so i think even though we know we need to have this conversation about race, our president may not be in a position where he can have that conversation just yet. and it won't be long before he will be out of office and we already know he is a great writer, written two books already, so i can't wait to see what he has to say when he is in bill clinton's position and he is out there speaking on his own. >> host: shane is in wilmington, delware, shane, this is booktv on c-span2. you're talking with author eric deegans. >> caller: so happy to get on c-span after seven years of trying. >> host: you're william.

>> caller: yeah, seven years of trying. but the author, i have to thank you for this because i was listening to cnn when they talk about they dark skin, and i'm a retired teacher and i used to hear those comments in the faculty lounge or going through see dee segregation, they would say, oh, the city kid, and you knew exactly what meant. and fit i have to calm myself down. and then try to figure out a way to introduce the concept without them feeling attacked. but you had a previous caller that said something to the effect of, if white folks could put white folks in check, because the white folks can't hear it from black folks. something about that dynamic that just won't work. unless you have had an opportunity to build a friendship, and that is so hard to do because the gulf between the cultures seems to be getting greater. but i certainly do appreciate and i basically think of writing

to my local news stage this must have been 15 years ago. the observation was if someone did something who was black, you'd hear a black male. a black foe me. -- black female but they never identify any other race. i didn't hear the white guy or the white. who i would just only hear if it reflected people of color. it's such a pleasure to be on with you and i'm looking at you and saying, yay, you, and i'm going to get the book for my nieces and nephews, thank you. >> guest: thank you so muff. >> host: before you respond i want to include sharon's comment on facebook because you mentioned it and a couple caller asked viewerrers mentioned it. please give more thoughts on the current slap from the bombing photos, dark-kinked man, even when said with obviousey hesitance sis their used as striptors to give an accurate identity but are immediately

followed with the disclaimer about, nothing racial or ethnic intended. >> guest: well, i call it the cable news two-step. what they do is they say, now, we're not speculating here, and then they go on and speculate. what they did with that description was, john king from cnn said, i know people will find this sensitive but i'm going to good ahead on and say this incredibly inaccurate and vague description anyway. i think there's a reason why journalists and journalism organizations -- i teach at the pointer institute offer, as i said i'm on the media monitoring committee for the national association of black journalist. there's reason why we tell nut outlets not to use this scrip tore because when we found the try identities of the suspects they weren't darked skipped. they were from an area of unthat were the caucuses mountains, and that's where caution indications

came from. it encouraging racial profiling and we want descriptions to be accurate. we want people to have the accurate information they need to identify. threats in their neighborhood to help the police and to help themselves, and if you're passing along a description so vague and misleading it leads people to focus hone wrong suspects anyway, what's the point. and so it's not about hurt feelings. it's not about doing the right thing. it's not about social justice. it about being accurate, and that is one of the things that gets lost in this conversation. people think we're advocating for some kind of -- we don't deserve to have our feelings hurt, or black people don't want to have to deal with feeling badly. and it's not about that. at it about wanting accurate news coverage, about wanting a description that helps people find people instead of misleading them to focus on people who don't deserve to be profiled and missing the people who need to be seen.

>> host: larry in centralia, washington, go ahead with your question or comment. >> caller: what a pleasure, mr. deegans. can you hear me? >> host: please go ahead. >> caller: going back a few years. the republican party to me has lots of racial overtones over the year, especially after the right to vote act and all of those passed by johnson when the -- become republicans. ronald reagan opened up his presidential campaign in philadelphia, mississippi, and i wondered if the -- town happened to be where the three civil right workers were killed, three white and one black. was that a coincidence or was that a overtone to the people

who seemed to connect with the dots? >> host: thank you, sir. >> guest: thank you for the question. i have not studied that particular incident so i can't tell you for sure what was going on there i do remember the press coverage at the time and there was a lot of turn about that in certain quarters. i'd like to think it was a coincidence, and i'd like to think that what reagan really was doing, though, was definitely trying to appeal to disaffected white voters in the south, who he knew would be key to his campaign as president. and a key component of that appeal has often been, since the 1964 signing of the civil rights act by a democratic president, key component has always been saying we're the party that is going to stand up for white people as opposed to being a party that grant all these rights to black people. and it's an unfortunate chapter and it's one reason why our poll

particulars have used code words, because we have increasingly come to a point where they can't say such things directly, and while we have to stay vigilant because we saw in the last presidential contest there were candidates who edged close to that language even in the 21st century. >> host: pat trish sharks you're the last caller for eric deegans go ahead. >> guest: the pressure is on. >> caller: thank you for taking my call. i would like to hear you comments on race-baiting from the left, and in particular, jesse jackson. i'd like to hear what you have to say about that. thank you so much for taking my call. >> guest: there's a bit in my book about al sharpton and his dual roles as a spokesman for the family of trayvon martin and an anchor on msnbc, and i've

always criticized it that and felt it was inappropriate for have someone as a major anchor on a news channel who is also representative of someone at the center of one the most covered news stories in 2012. i think there's room to criticize the way some people on the left talk about race. i do sort of feel -- i don't want to do what we call false equivalency. i don't want to look at what happens on the left and equate it to the right. unfortunately i think what has happened in the conservative media sphere is much more negative and intense and much more problematic, so i do have some trouble with in of the things on the left and i have talk about al sharpton in the book. but i do focus a lot on the conservative media sphere because there's a lot of troubling things. >> here's t

>> visit book tv -- booktv.org to watch any of the programs to see here on line. type the author a book title in the search bar and the upper left-hand side of the page and click search. you can also share anything you see on booktv.org easily by clicking share on the upper left side of the page and select the format. book tv strains live on line for 48 hours every weekend with top nonfiction books and authors. booktv.org. here's a look at some of the upcoming book bears and pistols happening around the country.

>> and now on book tv the support given to jews in israel by american presidents going back many decades. this lasts about an hour. [applause] >> thank you very much. my publisher's name is geffen, gefe and.

and the headquarters are in jerusalem. and when i finished the manuscript of this book i sent it hoping that he would give a brief comment. instead he wrote complete preface, and part of it was that he was shocked having read my book because he believed he was widely read in american history and jewish history, and yet he found some much in this book that he had no idea about before . incidentally, he is writing his autobiography at the moment, which should be fascinating. i will be using my notes a lot because i want to make sure i get the facts absolutely right. i would be leaving the net behind after words. anybody who is interested in check up on it. with rooms founding fathers, moses and joshua, his second-in-command