>> he catapulted to first place the moment he opened up on the media. he did it twice. and that wasn't spontaneous. nothing that newt gingrich does

is spontaneous. he's a master strategist, and it was the right thing to do, and it catapulted him into first place. look, everybody talks about how unpopular the congress is. the media are even more unpopular than congress. their approval rating is about 8%. that's nothing to write home about. it's not a very wise thing to go out to middle america and say, hi, i'm a reporter for "the washington post". that's going to win you friends. it should be. it should be the position of a candidate running to give them one chance to say at the outset i'm going to give you one chance to be fair and balanced. if you're not, i'm coming after you. i'm going to make you the issue in this campaign. and it will take no effort whatsoever to do that. but i always believe to give them an opportunity, always give them the first opportunity, then eviscerate them. [laughter]

yes, sir. >> jordan hess, i'm a senate staffer. where does social media fit into this? is that a way around the tv and the news? is that a way that we can kind of -- because it looks like a lot of what is getting done from the conservative standpoint our message seems to be working via facebook and twitter and those avenues. where does that fit into all of this? >> very good point. social media and the internet, digital media as a whole present a tremendous opportunity for conservatives to communicate with one another. kind of feel like sometimes the early christian church i have to make the sign of a fish when i'm talking to a fellow conservative. [laughter] you can do that now and nobody can get in your way and "the

washington post" can't distort what you say, you can communicate directly with your fellow man. it is an awesome weapon that we have. their days, their monopoly is broken, there's no question about it. they're still powerful. they still command audiences of millions, but their numbs are going down -- numbers are going down, down, down every day. you just saw what happened. the new york times sold "the boston globe" at a 97% loss. i mean, france does better business deals than that. [laughter] >> they overpaid. >> they overpaid, probably. the washington post, $250 million. that's chump change compared to what it was worth ten years ago. so the writing's on the wall for them. but the equally good news is we now have a vehicle to communicate. why so many people don't understand that. those who do are doing very, very well. but i will caution you, we have the, i mean, i i think we have the largest social media army in

the movement now, we have three and a half million with for america. but i will caution you something about the internet and about social media. we have to be very careful. we are very critical of liberals in the old media who don't follow the rules. in the new media, there are no rules. it's the wild, wild west. and some pretty nasty things can happen on both sides, much more so by liberals. the way stories are spread, the rumors that percolate out there, the damage today do is enormous. conservatives, be careful. because i've seen that too. i've seen the black helicopter stories. i've seen the stories where they go with one source, that being my crazy cousin, and it gets you eyeballs, readers, advertising. not a good thing to do for the

movement. so it is a vehicle. it's the future, by the way. old media days are numbered. it is the future. but we have to be as responsible as we possibly can be. because if that medium is abused, then we lose all credibility. yes, sir. [inaudible conversations] >> in addition to actually attacking the media, how else can we stop them in 2016 without giving away your whole book? any other pearls of wisdom? >> el, you know -- well, you know, i believe that i would like to have a maserati in my driveway. i would also like to believe that the media will do a good job in 2016. neither is going to happen. so long as i continue being blinded by that reality, so too

am i going to suffer. i was so pleased to see what reince priebus did, stand up to nbc and cnn and say you're doing kind of one-sided -- doing a miniseries on hillary clinton, for god sakes. we're not going to play. and you know what? they don't need to play. they don't need to do an interview. even barack obama plays that game. he goes on leno, but just in the wild case that someone will ask him a tough question, he just doesn't do the interviews. republicans don't need to either. why do you go on there? what i tell my republican friends is if you go on a national interview, one, make it live. don't do anything taped. i don't trust the s.o.b.s. number two, if a reporter distorts something, it's live. call 'em out on national television.

mr. so and so, what you just said is incorrect. here's the fact. please look at the camera and correct it the your millions of listeners and viewers. these are the facts. make them sweat. make them tell the truth. put them on the hot seat. they're going to put you on the hot seat, put them right back on the hot seat. it can be a smash mouth interview. it can be whereas knuckles. i don't have a problem with that so long as it's honest and honorable and you do it to the other side as well. but if they're not going to play by the rules, why do you participant? stand up to them and be choosy about who you talk to. you don't need them. they need you. yes, sir. >> jeff -- [inaudible] council for america. you alluded how candy crowley

threw a lifeline to barack obama during the presidential debates, and i wonder how the debates in 2016, if they have them, how this should be structured. even the primaries with george stephanopoulos cornering mitt romney on the -- >> sure. lots of gotcha moments. and what george stephanopoulos did was shameful. boy, there's another news flash. [laughter] i mean, contraception was never a part of in this campaign, but it was what barack obama wanted. barack obama kept bringing it up. now, you expect a politician to do those kind of shenanigans. but for a journalist to have given him oxygen that way is beyond the pale. so i have a lot more be problem with george stephanopoulos doing this than barack obama doing this. so moving forward to the other debates, i don't know that i want to get involved in the debate about debates, about the

number of debates. that's somebody else's game to play, not mine. but i think republicans have to be much, much choosier about these debates. you know, after every election republicans complain about the debates when, in fact, they agreed to everything in the debates. you know? there's just so much blame you can cast on the other side before you start taking some responsibility yourself. why were there no presidential debates hosted by fox? democrats said they wouldn't participate in one with fox. republicans should have said, fine, we're not going to participate with cnn, msnbc and nbc. how do you like them apples? republicans could win that debate. republicans could say we're going to go on breitbart. we're going to do a debate with newsmax. guess what? you can reach just as many

people that way too. i mean, they've got to be choosier on what they do. when you pick a network, pick a reporter that has a history of being fair and balanced. judy woodruff don't. [laughter] does that help? yes, sir. i'm being unfair to judy woodruff. i just threw out her name. there are plenty who don't. >> adam -- [inaudible] former cbs news intern. i watch a lot of international news, and the first person whoever got taken down by the sorts of smear tactics was

stockwell day in canada, and by the end of the campaign they were singing meet the flintstones when it drove off. you're reading all sorts of things in the australian media about how they're um porting obama campaign -- importing obama campaign strategist in attempts to turn tony abbott into a misogynist. so has anyone looked at how this is really just proliferating all over? >> well, i think that it feels different overseas because in so many of these countries because of the nature of governments the people know the nature of the media. in nicaragua during the 1980s you had two newspapers.

one was the mouthpiece of the and misthats -- sand nice thats -- sandinistas. they knew they were getting a communist position here and the a conservative position there. so that wasn't too problematic. it's not too problematic, i think, in too many places -- i think it's more problematic where you don't have a media, in countries with a dwindling free press like russia. the problem is when their media come on our shores because we're so gullible. and there's a reason why russian times has got -- it's got a television station in the united states. it isn't because they want to be a news operation for the united states. it is because they have a mission in the united states. there is a reason why al-jazeera is in the united states. it's not because they want to

come alongside fox. it's because they have a mission in the united states. too many of our citizenry are to police officer yous to this. they're to oblivious to the agenda of bbc. so i worry about the impact it has on them. i don't worry so much about the impact these outlets have on their own people. i think their own people understand where they're coming from. yes, sir. >> al milliken, a.m. media. do you see the current new york city mayor race impacting the 2016 national elections, and would you suggest or have any ideas for media strategies for those political to appointments of anthony weeper, his wife -- wiener, his wife and those in their political orbits? >> must i? [laughter]

i mean, this really just points to the triteness of journalism today. how embarrassing that they have to report it the way that they're reporting it. the people of new york deserve what they get when they allow someone like wiener or spitzer back into the public arena. they deserve it. but for the news media to cover that with nonstop shock and awe while ignoring everything i just talked about, for them to do 193 stories -- i could be wrong on this, i think it's 193 stories in one week, christian, or less than that? on the birth of a baby in england, you know, god love the

couple. [laughter] after one story, i was done. 193 stories. but irs, benghazi, nsa wiretapping? what is it, too difficult? so when they do the wiener stuff, i don't know. where republicans are concerned it is such a double standard. we've covered this. it is amazing. i don't have the numbers here, but we have them back in the office. and we come out with reports on this. when there is a scandal involving a democrat, it is stunning to see the degree to which they'll go to not say it was a democrat. now, the abcs of journalism, if you're doing a story on an elected official and, you know, the next thing as important as this first name and his last name is his party affiliation. and story after story after story. and we've seen it with one

scandal after another whether you're the mayor of detroit going to jail, whether you're the governor of illinois, you know, it just goes on and on and on. they just obliterate the label. but if you're a republican, it leads with republicans. republican larry craig today. and you see that coverage. it is stunning, the double standard. this is something republicans have to live with. but republicans are treated this way because they allow the media to treat them this way. this is why the republican party has to stand up, which is why i applaud the chairman of the party for having done that. it's the first step. there's a lot more to do. but these candidates and these party leaders have to stand up to the press and say, no more of that. we're not asking for favoritism. we're asking for fairness. and if not, we're going after your stockholders, we're going to go to