so race is one part of it and the idea that obama validated and was addressing whatever path took place now he has done away with this idea that they should have affirmative action, civil rights but it's not limited to race. it's just one issue that he uses. >> host: you may regard him as a socialist, but you don't really know his views on race, do you? >> guest: i'm addressing the notion that he said obama's presidency means we don't have to have a civil rights movement anymore. this is not an issue of black versus right. it's a view about the politics. the idea that as a country we should have sensitivity.

if you look at the history around the time of the 2008 election -- we are short on time but fox was aggressively pushing the blog panther story, the idea that the obama white house wasn't going to punish groups that were breaking the law because not because they were giving favorable treatment. >> host: that is going to have to be the last one to read we are going to come back and talk about this biography. i want to ask you what you learned that makes you see him clearly.

>> more of the discussion about fox news with gabriel sherman with his book "the loudest voice in the room" on after words. >> host: i want to ask you given that a lot of people were afraid to talk to you because they didn't think it was viewed as anything other than a betrayal. but what did you learn about his growing up? i don't think much viewers know much about the background. what was his childhood like, what was he dealing with and what connection if any do you make about how he goes on to fox news? >> guest: it's important to point out that he said he told fox news from his life experience, and that really

resonated with me if i wanted to understand what was that life experience that we see manifested on the screen. so i went back to war in ohio, a factory town in northeast ohio on the outskirts of youngstown more well-known factory town in that area and it is essential to understanding. he was at the packard automotive plant, blue-collar job. his mother was a very ambitious woman and didn't have an education but she pushed the boys to take acting and piano lessons. she really wanted them to xl and it's interesting to note that at that time it was a time of limitless us abilities for blue-collar america. the factories were booming and general motors was employing thousands upon thousands of people.

union jobs were plentiful. there was healthcare and benefits. it was a city onto itself. there was a social cohesion in the blue-collar towns like warren that we see lost today. we would go back and see a ronald reagan picture with his brother. and so that sense of civic pride defined his childhood. the other thing that defined his childhood was his struggle with hemophilia that prevents the blood from clotting when someone gets cut. so he suffered from this debilitating condition at the time of the average life expectancy for the severe hemophiliacs was about ten or 11-years-old. it was a serious medical condition into this defined his childhood because he lived with a fear and he said in interviews he didn't know how long he would make it. it's that will to overcome the

disability that and barked his competitiveness ever since. an interesting thing to point out the other part of the childhood was his father. his father was a very resentful man who felt frustrated and was pushed around by the educated managers of the plant and his father to get out on his children. his father was a violent man. i consulted the divorce rate curve of his parents into roger's mother testified in the divorce records that the father was a violent man and he threatened to kill her. it was a very dark childhood and i think out of that, you see the successful people all over the country, people's will to succeed and thrive and overcome the difficulties of their past. they were often home watching tv

at home and this was in the 1940s and 50s when it was coming into its own as a medium and they grew up on shows like gunsmoke with the divisions between good and evil. you see the seeds of data that were planted in the war and to see them flowering and fox news. >> host: you were feeling pushed around in a kind of populism. there was a kind that was interesting in the background that you talk about. talked about. he was also quoted as saying he liked his dad. >> guest: the way that he talked about it later in life is that they taught him these life lessons. he was filled with these life lessons in his book that i recommended to any reader into the viewer in addition to reading my book, in the book you

are the message is a fascinating window into his philosophy. but he talks about using this idea. sick people make positive people bring them down. it is a kind of school of hard knocks that he came out of and he applied it to fox news and one of the things i found interviewing all of these people is a sense of loyalty and inspiration, and he channeled this kind of dark childhood that he had into this positive message of making people feel they could overcome anything. >> host: yet he feels the world is disappearing so that is a kind of contradiction. >> guest: but i think that he is able to sort of harness all of these contradictions to appeal to people and their different needs. i want to talk about television for a second. he winds up in ohio's universi

university. radio television is kind of becoming an industry in the 1950s and he was kind of lost. he didn't know what he wanted to do he wanted to join the military that he was kept out of the air force so he stumbled into broadcasting. he would be the last one to leave and as a reporter it was interesting to see your subject find their mission in life. i felt like interviewing his college friends and hearing him talk about it you see someone find their direction and he found it in radio and television. >> host: let me ask you something about his -- a lot of people don't know that he was very successful. it was the first of the selling

of the president which was the first idea of packaging the president which everybody else has noticed recently. one of the things i think that is interesting is that he has gotten actually very good press because he's often quoted in a combated way yet to journalists seem to like him. >> guest: it's one of the things that propelled him to wear he is to charm reporters. his unwillingness to sit down with me i think is connected to that. >> host: tell me about that. >> guest: he has power by controlling the images of republicans and the news media in his channel. but if you think about it, the number one story that he has controlled has been his own. and it goes back to his days on the michael douglas show. he was a television advisor to nixon and here comes a philadelphia inquirer who is going to write a book about the campaign and roger threw his

charm -- >> host: his profanity -- >> guest: his charisma he talks himself into being the star and when the book came out it was unknown to the public and became an overnight celebrity. he was sought out fight republicans and even though he was trash talking and extend they wanted him to do the same thing that he did for them read he wanted them to work his magic and he began to spend dollars as a tv guru and that is a testament to the ability to sell himself and throughout his career he has massaged and embellished his own narrative to the power. >> guest: what was interesting to me as a reporter is to look at the hundreds if not thousands of quotes he is given through the years and compare that to the historical record that i consulted with archives in the michael douglas show and at the

richard nixon residential library of the time as a broadway producer i and i interview his colleagues had to match up the version with the used oracle record you also often times see the discrepancy ... discrepancy is it isn't a case of gotcha i was trying to see where in his life did he massaged his story to portray himself in a way that would advance his career and it was amazing. he was in a great tradition in the characters both real and fictional who impressed themselves on the beat american consciousness by massaging their story is what i'm trying to say and he was a great storyteller and that is a testament to the talent. not in any way critiqued. >> host: to ask about something that i didn't know that much about which was the

directions which you can explain as a news service, how that impacts what is on the air. as a journalist covering this as a media critic covering this, it is always easy to say when and how someone may or may not be doing something on the air that might be free on a scale. it's a talk to me about what you learned about that operation. >> guest: this is a part i hope my book illuminates because it was one of the most interesting parts that brought the project. he was the news director of tv and that was a fledgling news service that was in business from 1974 to 19 dot early 76 and went bankrupt. it was financed by the colorado magnet who was a financier. he was financing the right-wing group in the 70s and 80s.

so, roger gets a bear as a news director in 1975 and what they were trying to do is package the news stories to sell to local broadcast affiliates, political news coming international news in a way that would balance out because at the time as everybody remembers in the 1970s he had abc and cbs and that was the only source of television news and so the conservatives giving back a generation were trying to find a way to cut through the liberal bias of the mainstream media even though we were not talking about it in those terms back then. so i consulted these documents of the founder of robert who is a former abc executive to start this network and they were fascinating documents where they were bitterly strategizing how they could package the news to appeal to conservatives. there was one effort they would literally send their lineups to

a conservative watchdog group called the accuracy media which was a pioneer watchdog group now because accuracy media and this idea they were going to send their lineups to the conservative activist group to basically get the seal of approval showing me how explicitly they were trying to dictate the news. there was one memo where a consultant for tbn figured out they could develop their own whipping post. so they were hammering them for their use of the power and they could handle the welfare agency, the department of education or the environmental protection agency, conservatives could have their own men to beat up on.

it is a fascinating story because they do not talk about tbn much and he has glossed over that. but he was in this environment and soaking up these techniques that later he applied to fox news. >> guest: the health care the date was a classic fox news story line going back in time the iraq war into the run-up to the war -- they develop it into simple plot lina simple plot lip adversaries, select tickets to the case of iraq they were hammering the united nations. they were hammering out of al jazeera. michael moore was a fox news

enemy. they developed these kind of characters that would be on the opposing side and then they would build up their characters on the side george w. bush as a president was the hero. they developed storylines and repeated them through the day that they started on fox and friends and then and they are continued in primetime and you see that going back to tv and they discuss how the repetition of the story can be a powerful propaganda technique. >> host: sometimes you feel as if you are watching -- esko a fun house mirror. it's been about a corner or gabriesolyndra or the green pow. watch what you say to people that say well, let me just ask you what you see as the difference between what smb c. -- msnbc is doing how are they

similar or how are they fferent? >> guest: they outfoxed fox so they are a progressive talk channel and i think that is an interesting marketing strategy and it's important to point out that as a business decision not an ideological decision. as we talked about, msnbc was more than happy to be the conservative right-wing network after 9/11 when they thought that was a better marketing strategy. so, he started to fo fox for pol reasons. msnbc is more of a business marketing issue. msnbc is not as good as fox. as pure television producers the programming is not as compelling because they don't have the unique talent in the ability to foster conflict. they were often times faded

personalities. they never hosted a national television show and he was out of work. the viewers can relate on an emotional visceral level and msnbc i think was too caught up in being ideologically pure to win the argument rather than understanding the television is about performance. it's about the drama and spectacle. >> host: people at msnbc would disagree with your appraisal but they are purely ideological. they seem to have also been attracting the younger demographics and he's been quoted i saw recently he said he liked rachel matthau but he didn't want to get her into trouble. i think they would disagree with you about how the programming comes across. back to the talent or do you

think roger ailes viewed of bill o'reilly is today because they said it's a huge success. what is their relationship? >> guest: it's an interesting relationship. it's not particularly close but they both need each other and what is interesting is that o'reilly is the one talent at fox who can do almost what he wants. that is a testament to two things. he builds the show from scratch. he is a television genius. it is a testament to the talent as a performer. it's interesting to point out in 96 when they joined fox he was hosting the show that was going nowhere and they moved o'reilly to 8 p.m. during the scandal and o'reilly connected with the audience outrage that bill

clinton and in his sense of the story. it was almost like an irish street cop to laser in on what the issue is so that is a testament that has carved out the power center and he has the numbers. they grouch about it but it's because he has a respect that o'reilly is a self-made man. >> host: it's interesting because they have come out in ways that do not fit the scenario you are describing on immigration into gun controls. you are saying because he's powerful he doesn't have to --

>> guest: he is eventually the one talent with some exceptions he can do what he wants. he is very much in lockstep with what he wants. it's interesting to note that he is the programming deputy was for years that director-producer and it's that line between sean hannity where he can get what he wants on the air. >> host: there is a famous moment where carl who has been on fox was raising a lot of money against obama and doing commentary about obama. somebody said about go check. they looked pretty awful on

that. again it doesn't fit the scenario. what happened in that moment where she questioned and said let's go look at every turn. >> guest: i think we should back up to that morning. so, roger comes in and he is planning his coverage and in the afternoon they have a news meeting where all of the anchors and the analysts talk about how they are going to cover that night. and chris christie had given the photo op after hurricane sandy and they said they don't show that. well they couldn't help so everyone in that room as one of my subjects said they felt he didn't believe the poll. he felt it was skewed and that he had a chance so it was this idea that was the mindset a lot of people inside of the network had. fast forward to the call siding

with megan saying we are not going to call it and that is the moment that encapsulated the denial that took place on fox. you had the talking heads are claiming a landslide. he predicted a -- >> host: he thought that he was going to -- >> guest: the reason that the resignation with the culture is that it showed the world about on fox news people on fox thought romney was going to win even though all of the polls decided that maybe the rasmussen poll showed romney facing an up hill battle and so i think it is a testament to her set list and we are going to challenge you on this and it made for an amazing television moment. this is what makes him a television genius he turned what could have been this humiliating moment where he is denying the reality and they turn it into the television moment everyone

in politics have to talk about it and she marched down the hall and interviewed the analyst and they broke the tie and the networks called it and i think that was a fitting end to the way they covered the 2,012th election. >> host: is it possible that she was an independent journalist or do you see it as stage-managed? >> guest: i think that megan kelly has conservative views but she is also willing to challenge people's assumption and she used it at the moment to reflect her muscles and ailes used it to make great television. >> host: with me ask you this. what do you see as the future of fox news? he is 73-years-old. >> guest: i think the future is dependent. he has so far declined to name a successor. he is not disclosed. it's important to point out that

it's going to be rupert murdoch's decision because he is a corporate parent and a video on fox news. fox news cannot exist in its term. everyone waits to take their cues. there isn't a strong personality within the network that can rise up. >> host: do think that he envisioned what was going to happen and if he ideological in the way that he portrays? >> guest: i don't think that he could have imagined the success. fox news is the single most profitable division of the media empire into generates and it ga billion dollars of reliable profit every year. i think ideologically rupert

murdoch is a conservative and is a pragmatist. he has demonstrated an ability to back up the politicians of all stripes and needs. famously the new labour in the united kingdom he reached out to hillary clinton here in the states to program the fox as he sees fit so immigration issues like climate change they are not on the same page. they allow him to do it because of the business interest. >> host: he has failed to understand or put money behind any kind of a web apparatus. there was a brilliant man but divided america.

looking back on this reflectively what do you think has been the long-term going forward intact on the political discourse of politics were conducted in washington, d.c. and of what in your opinion they have done. roger ailes brought us back to an early time i earlier time in. if you go back to you before they were marked by the partisan media. going back -- >> host: it wasn't always this objectivity. >> guest: it was supposed to be the referee to let the politicians duke it out as a postwar anomaly for what he has done is brought it back in time and now the genie is out of the bottle. the partisan media is here to stay and has flowered with a million different voices on the left and right and

neoconservative. we are now a partisan conservative country and i think that is his lasting legacy. in terms of the politics i think that the lasting legacy had been to normalize the vision of politics. i think it is a testament to the success that democrats have copied the success. bill clinton in 1992 the democrats talked about how they ran the campaign and brutally confronting the attack with the clinton war room using the tactics to attack your opponent while offense with the roger politics.

they like to fire the famous 47% video. those were roger ailes styled attacks and it was successful in defining romney in the eyes of many americans out of touch. partisanship is the ultimate goal into those of the left and the right now if you look at the polarization in congress, the politics now is about trying to get all of your issues across the finish line rather than see the confines. >> host: is this different from how the congress operated years ago? >> guest: i think that roger ailes brought it back to time. i don't think that he invented a new style of politics. he has brought us back to this style of politics. he has made the notion of consensus a dirty word in american