go back to the eclectic way these things would go where courts would go on for five or ten pages about what a statute meant. he was very influential but not any conventionally we talk about. >> you can watch this and other programs online at booktv.org. >> good evening, ladies and gentlemen. good evening and welcome to the half king. my name is glenn raucher, the host and curate of the series. here at the half king were entering the best authors and books with the unifying factor that they are all vital, medical, thought-provoking works of statement thought and discussion, not just in this room but stay with you after you left us. we are extremely pleased to welcome amanda marcotte who will

join us monetarily to discuss her book tonight. we're also happy to c-span2 taping us tonight. [applause] >> thank you, c-span. when the actual showing is scheduled will put that word out on our various channels. we do want you to persistent in the conversation we are going to have the cd. we have a request, however. please wonder thoughts in the shape of question. [applause] if you cannot form your thoughts in the ship of the question i will move along to someone who can come and give you the time to change that into a question. so again, please help us help you help us have great event by doing that. we do have copies of "troll nation" you tonight for sale from new york's premier onset bookseller. the book is not out so when you buy your copies, plural, tonight by new york law, you have

something no one else on plant is able to get for another eight or so days. so again please pick up a copy of the book. amanda and be happy to sign copies we after the event. we want to thank our friends at sky horse publishing for the assistance of her publishing the book in the first place. please take care of your service. they work very hard to bringing your victuals and your beverages. with that which this be a much dryer literally and fatally evening. we are in week three of eight weeks in a row of amazing authors and books. i won't list them all. the half king website is everything we're doing through memorial day. just a little tensile loading the next couple of weeks, next monday april 23 john sedgwick joins us was book blood moon about the rivalry between two legendary cherokee chiefs and effect it had on the cherokee nation. when april 30 we joined by journalists carmen gentilly, to

discuss his book blindsided by the taliban in detailing his war reporting and is one in which caused in his sight into right eye. all of our events begin at 7:00 motion mondays. with a couple of tuesday fence. check the calendar again. there are 10,000 other places you could be on any given night in new york city and no one involved in this headline events we do at the half king takes for granted you chose to be here with us, so thank you very much for that. and now to this evenings featured author. with intelligence, a keen eye for detail and razor-sharp wit the brings to mind the great molly ivins, about whom it was said she was rowdy and profane but she could for life proponents with decision, as it is here as well. amanda take surgical pain at right-wing politics led to the election and administration of america's greatest troll, donald

trump. she thoroughly examines how he got into the situation and with many different opinions on how to deal with troll nation, how best to do so. engaged or not engage? protest against speakers like charles murray, mileage annapolis or ann coulter on college campuses, or allow the ideas to be heard denying them and their followers their cherished victim of martyr status. especially when the actual content of the ideas is will more than at hieronymus insults. she incisively examines debunking versus ignoring and follows that further into motivation and intent to try to figure out ways to better understand trolling without stepping into arguments where facts cannot be agreed upon. she rightly point out that thinness of donations ideas and how in trump the front of the who shares their consent for empirical truth and gives them the easy shocks they get off on also warns that trolls with access to the very highest levels of power, regardless of

the motivation, are in position to and have done tremendous harm to society and a long church ideas of fairness, justice and a sense of community. in chapter center address specific issues like women's rights, the environment, healthcare, guns, amanda sposato trolls have entered the discussion not with reasoned arguments, fax and data but with the singular focus on discomforting liberals cannot within the damage the policies they claim to support like denial of contraception, removal of environmental regulations and corporate giveaways due to the mostly conservative communities they ostensibly claim to represent. she persuasively argues that there is a way out and while she says that she and knows peopleo share a little perspective would love to find troll nation reachable, she writes, you can't reason summit avenue position they didn't reason themselves into. but they can be outvoted if

liberals are willing to show up at the polls. failure to do so risks allowing authoritarian viewpoints to prevail with the motivated base who will turn out. and will, regardless of the damage that ensues even to themselves, enthusiastically support policies that further marginalize already marginalized groups. it's a nihilistic view that those they despise suffer and they win. with "troll nation" amanda marcotte continues a great tradition of political writing. there are two kinds of humor, molly ivins told people magazine. one of the kind quote that makes us chuckle about our foibles and our shared humanity, she said. the of the kind those people up to public content and ridicule. that's what i do. this is where you can tell the truth with the bark on it. laugh if anyone is ridiculous, and go after the bad guys with all the energy you have. please welcome amanda marcotte.

[applause] >> now i feel like i've a lot to live up to. >> you have already done it. thanks so much for coming. >> thank you. thanks for having me. thanks for coming out, everyone. >> i been reading the book and i realize the worst thing you can do to a troll is laugh at them. >> one would hope. >> how does that factor into trolling and the president's actions, in your mind? >> that's an interesting question because i do think that donald trump is kind of created his own personal health and a lot of ways for himself. his in and you probably president because he was angry at obama laughing at him and that he is the most laugh at person on the planet. so, i mean, i do think also that

a lot of people that are into trolling, they have these, lease that kind of right-wing, have a lot of privilege, , white male privilege and a lot of social status and so they don't necessarily grasp sometimes how much they are being laughed at. >> is it a lack of self-awareness or is it -- >> i mean, certainly willful in that sense but also do think that, i never stopped being a maze when i'm online at how many men that come at me on twitter and whatnot don't seem to grasp that women can be funny or women can make fun of them. it's just a category error on their part. >> is it because they seem to have circumscribed view of what women can do in this particular case? >> exactly. they just don't think of women as people that generate humor. that's something men do and you can sit there and make fun of

them all day. that or they are russian. that might just be a translation issue. >> there's a rather well-known internet saying which is don't feed the trolls. i know that in the book you wrestle with the idea of responding, not responding. tell me your thoughts about that very concept. >> i continue to wrestle with it. i don't know i will have the answer to this question, and i know that the disappointing to say because you read books for answers. there's more in the book than this. i think there's a problem especially with this kind of right-wing trolling. like you mention charles murray, and colder, milo yiannopoulos, two campuses. their only brother in the sense to troll but they also have ideas about racism, sexism. they are pushing bigoted notions and to do think there's a danger that if you don't meet people

making bigoted arguments with resistance, then they will interpret that as community ascent, right? i think there's some evidence to back this up, like white supremacist if they don't get counterprotest sometimes they feel like they've been validated that they are speaking for the community. i do think that people whose instinct is to meet these kind of trolls in public and to confront them and to argue with them are doing the right thing. the question is how can we do that without feeding the victim complex and without them leaning on the other narrative, which is we are martyrs picnic i do sense for us -- they are trying to censor us. i don't know what the right interest but i do think that having trashed trash this out h another people including some folks at the poverty law center, the best way to deal with them

is to bring them the debate that the claim they want a don't actually want. maybe not go shout somebody down but stay outside their event and hand out literature talk to some people about what your views are, just try to make positive idea-based arguments. it's not sexy but it works. >> that's different than what we see a lot in the news where mainstream journalists, i think i want to ask you about both sides a little bit, where mainstream journalists seem to seek out not the extreme cases that you speak about in "troll nation" but with the idea thatk to find every single trump voter, find it with the fake was not mr. account away. is there a forum where you can hear those ideas encounter them or is everything siloed right now? >> i don't know if things are as

silent as we think, especially in the air of social media. i think that we can go out there and look at people having conversations across partisan lines every day. what i think my objections to some of that would go out to rural america and talk to some working-class trump supporters type stories is about a distorted reality of what's going on when they should be illuminating those realities. for one thing we know that the majority of trump voters are not working-class. they are middle-class or they are upper-class, that actually the average trump voter makes a lot more money than average clinton voter. therefore, by pushing this narrative that the average trump voter is a working-class person, they hide the fact that what the average trump voter is is a white person. that's like what holds that coalition together, not class

status or anything of that nature. does that answer your question? >> it does. one of the things you talk in the book is tribalism. can you talk about that a little bit? >> i don't use words like -- >> it's in the book, i swear. you were quoting someone. >> probably quoting david roberts. it's one of the things that's what's interesting. i feel like the right-wing tribe as it exists now has only kind of formed in a cohesive way in the past few decades, like a lot of the people that are in the right-wing tribe and have a tribal allegiance to being a republican or being a conservative or whatever else you want to call it, i don't know that they would have thought of themselves as a tribe that was supposed to liberals as they identify as a separate tribe 34

years ago. i think we had siloed off into tribal identities and a lot of ways, and so much of what makes troll nation exists is that they have notion of themselves as a group of people that has their own identity, own tribal identity. that isn't to say that they didn't, that they don't have an allegiance to certain older kinds of ways of being in the past it's just that kind of white christian, , protestant hegemony like of the past was just bad. it wasn't challenge, the notion that was the equivalent of american. like wasn't challenge the tempo last couple of decades were people of color, people who disagree with this kind of traditionalist worldview, all sorts, the diversity of america has started to exert itself. >> despite the basic centrism or his basic centrism.

>> i think that helped form, it's not just barack obama. like fox news, rush limbaugh, there's been all these forces reaching out to certain kind of white american and trying to convince them they are a number of tribe opposed to these other people for decades now. barack obama, however, did seem like an alien to the kind of white people i grew up with out in like rural texas. they've never met somebody with a name like barack obama. they don't know that many black people to begin with, and so did you do something like that could be supported enough to become president must have felt like a shock to the system. it must have felt like that is can choose not the one that they know. >> i don't like to wait until the into opened it up to questions, some like to start right here. what i'll do is, if you have a

question, i'll make sure everybody can hear and i may repeat it, so if you have a question throw your hat in the air. we'll start with you. go right ahead. >> what do you make of this conundrum? on the one hand, we decry the meanness which we call mindless meanness of the right to troll. and yet we adore molly ivins who is self described as mean, like she's on our side. how do we deal with that? that's a contradiction, wouldn't you say? >> the question was, i don't think it would hurt it, how do you do with what can be potential described as sort of a meanness on a side that politically you agree with? >> that's a really good question something that is been coming up a lot, especially i think as there's a sense that hatred and angry sort of escalating in this country. in this book am kind argue not

against meanness or invective even really. i use both those things myself a lot. more of the intimacy of it. i think what the difference to me is that the right has lost all sense of arguments or basis of argument, that they've lost the culture war arguments, they lost the economic arguments and scientific arguments. so all that is left is anger, invective, resentment and a desire for revenge. i so we don't evidence that's true on the left. yes, people on the left can be mean. i can be mean. they can be insulting but i have an idea of like a set of policy ideas that i i believe in, a st of principles that a belief in. at the end of the day most of them would help most conservative americans who also need clean air, clean water to breathe and drink. they could use healthcare through obamacare. they could use the social safety

net. the difference is i don't think liberal politics are at their core about punishing the right something for existing, and i don't think the reverse is true. >> you mentioned in the book and amazing set of statistics and trends of pulses people support when they are asked. >> i can remember right off the top of my head. >> as soon as i said, wait, you're going to have to quote the numbers. it is quite remarkable. maybe it's the matter with kansas idea where people vote against the own interests. define own interest and to think that's what i really disagree with thomas frank. i think he correctly assessed that cultural war politics are often a distraction in away from economic policies and politics. i agree with you on that what i disagree with is he buys into an argument that a lot of us on the left by into, which is that therefore culture war politics

are not real. that what people are getting out of this sort of racial bigotry and sexism and flag-waving nationalism or whatever kind of culture war politics you want to decry today, that's meaningless. i think that's condescending as an argument. it is underestimating what conservative americans are sorted sort of basing their worldview on to certain extent. i do think they get something out of it. i don't think they are idiots, and i think you could make an argument that it's maybe they just don't have anything else. i think there is validity to that and i try to make that argument in this, but i think ultimately that sense of self-esteem they get from feeling superior set something to underestimate. >> you break down the famous quotation from barack obama when you talk about clinging to guns and religion.

you say that might be an example of what you're talking about, because the entire quote i think speaks to what you are addressing right now. >> yes. he got raked over the coals. it's like to one of those kind of perfect examples of the thesis of this book. obama made a speech that i felt like was at its core very sympathetic to right wing america, like he said that they feel cut out, the kind of trump voters that the "new york times" photo romanticizes. they feel kind of cut out of american mainstream. if you like to being left behind by the world, therefore, they cling to the guns and the god, and they are bitter, right? i think he was actively assessing them, and they are so angry about it. if you go on right wing sites you often see them identify themselves as bitter cleaners. -- cleaners.

it proves it, right? the bitterness sort of proves his point and yet they think they're retaliating against it or maybe do they? their sort of an admission is true and yet a desire to punish and went anyway. it's a little incoherent but i think that tells us a lot about the politics we're at now. >> the butchering of that whole sentiment and also in the last political race, the butchering of the speech where hillary clinton referred to basket of deplorables, really problematic, as presented in full maybe it still would make no difference because people will hear what you want to hear, but i wanted to ask about both sides and now that damages the discourse and inadvertently plays into "troll nation" ." >> yeah. i mean, one of the things that advantages "troll nation" is

that both siders-ism. siders-ism. i understand why mainstream journalism want to seem fair and evenhanded. so it's created this myth that if the right to something, then the left might do in an equal measure. so if the right likes donald trump, i don't know, the left needs some all were sown president or something maybe. [laughing] but that obviously -- >> i must admit to that. >> it obvious he didn't happen but you see a similar kind of rhetoric going on. the right sort knows that they do this and sort of exploited. it's a permission slip for them to go as far as they want to and be as ridiculous as it he wanto because on some level they know journalists are going to try to normalize that by saying, well, that's just politics, both sides do it in equal measure. donald trump is a master at this actually. he is constantly reading these false equivalences.

>> more questions, please. over here. >> you said earlier -- [inaudible] >> so the question is the difference between idea based and fact-based arguments. >> that's a good question. i think an idea based, when i talk about idea based arguments i think it's very much around like what your values are and what you think will accomplish those values. what you're stated values are and how your policies or ideas will generally fulfill it. when i say that the left has still an idea based kind of thing, i think we have certain

ideas. we think people should be equal and, therefore, we have some policy ideas about that. we feel things like health care and shelter our rights. so we create policy idea based around that. it's not that the right hasn't done that traditionally and i think to a certain extent still does. it's just i think a lot of the ideas have failed and have been able to come up with new ones. and so all that's left is a sort of vortex of nihilism and anger. i know this sounds extreme but it's true. you think about what were some of the classic right-wing arguments? traditional family values. that's a legitimate argument. i don't agree with it but the notion that men have a role and women have role and it creates stability in the home, and that's a desirable thing. but that's an argument. it's not one that makes sense when you like donald trump tries married, multiple old older. it shows that given up on that. of course they given up on it. in red america people living their lives in a way that shows

that given up on the idea of traditional family structure. like they have premarital sex. they get divorce more than in blue states. they've lost that argument. instead they're just angry and they're going to elect this like open learning misogynist that sort of lays naked what was always idea a little bit underneath that. >> more questions, please. right here. [inaudible] [inaudible]

>> i think it's a really good observation and absolutely, like jealousy and biting people stop is huge part of i think what is driving this kind of alt-right way of thinking about politics. it goes back to that what about-ism about-ism that he was talking about, both siders-ism. i do joke often like i think more right-wingers now, saul alinsky rules for -- people on the left. they are borrowing i think to great effect some of his ideas. they are not wrong, that humor and trolling are effective political strategies. i would be the first to say that, used correctly, like trolling can work as a political strategy. my question is, what are you

trolling for? like what is your end in goal? what are your actual values. that's where the big difference is. trolling has become an and in and of itself on the right, just sticking it to liberals has become the end, where as ideal if you're doing a saul alinsky style troll, it's turn peoples attention to positive change you want to see in society. i hope that answers the question. >> other questions. >> how do you define trolling? [inaudible] online harassment, like i do -- i'm curious like what your main 34 trolling, or how he basically would explain. >> the question is what is the baseline definition of a trolling. >> the basic form of trolling is being deliberately provocative to get a rise out of somebody else here so that you can kind of make a spectacle out of their

reaction, right? that's anywhere trolling has begun, like a special on the alt-right that do a lot of people in. it's inherently a sadistic act. you are trying to make somebody else look like a fool by provoking them to act in what you think looks humiliating for them. it is clear to me that that is why, that's kind of what i wanted to go into the book because i feel like about all of the things, voting for donald trump was an act of trolling. like, the whole point of voting for donald trump is because you feel like it's going to anger liberals and make the mac and then you can mock their liberal tears and their snowflake reactions. i think there's more to kind of like the sadism and desire to punish and humiliate your

opponents, but ultimately why i want use the troll mentality was, a question a lot of liberals have is what motivated that desire to boat for trump in the first place, especially like those above for in in the primaries. >> i wanted to ask you sort of come in terms of the book itself, you write at immense amount. how did you approach writing the book differently than, let's say, the number of articles you write, essays you write? >> i was lucky to dividing as a journalist for salon while i was riding this. lucky in the sense that it can't be sort of constantly doing research so i could then use and cannibalize for the book. not liking since that working all day and then going home to write at night, that's a lot of work.

because the book is like on the hot books label, , it's supposed to be short, supposed to be analytical. i wasn't able to do like a lot of independent research for the book but i was lucky that being a journalist means i already have that on file. >> what was the biggest problem you ran into writing the book and how did you get around it? >> my biggest concern, i would say, is that everything is moving so fast in the news cycle right now that you feel like you file it and stuck in it for a few months in so much of the crazy stuff is going to happen. i acknowledge it in the book and i try to make it clear that if you like all these trends that i am sort of identifying our publicly to continue. i will see the one thing that is true about donald trump as a man, his supporters as people is that the behavior is predictable. as crazy as the news cycle gets,

i think you can predict everything they're going to do and react because of past behavior. >> more questions, please. right here. thank you. [inaudible] [inaudible] >> so the question was having an agreed reality that we all buy into, the role of trolls. i was going ask about the concept of devaluing the truth that you write about in the book. >> i thought about this a lot, and have chapped about conspiracy theories in particular. i think that "troll nation" and trolling is actually made it easier for conspiracy theories to take off, not just in terms

of like the social media structures that spread them, but also the way of thinking about politics. like, if all you care about is getting a rise out of your opponents, humiliating them and just winning at all costs, and things like truth and facts don't matter anymore. what i find interesting watching the trolls, by conspiracy theory trolls like alex jones or donald trump himself is that you can tell on some level that they don't believe the own thing, allies they are telling. like they just simply don't care and the audience doesn't really care because they feel like as long as i am scoring points on people, as long as i am dunking on liberals than i can say or do whatever i want. i can accuse hillary clinton of running a pedophilia ring out of a pizza shop, because the angle is i've made mean things about hillary clinton and that is a good in and of itself.

i think this has a long tail of it, too. this didn't come out of nowhere. i'm very stuck on the notion that climate change is kind of like the original conspiracy theory that once all republicans had kind of site onto the idea that climate change is a hoax, which is a conspiracy theory, like it opened up the door to whatever, pizzagate, info wars, you name it. because literally the top republicans in this country endorse a pretty lurid conspiracy theory that the majority of like scientists around the world are conspiring to hoax us about climate change. >> yes, go ahead. >> one question. it may sound quaint or oxymoronic. [inaudible]

where our principled conservatives in the modern republican party? >> the question is, basically, are there any more principled conservatives, and how, is there a way out for conservatism to challenge the existing troll nation weighing of the conservative movement? >> that's a really good question and i think it depends this whole book. and i think that my answer to that is i think what happened is they lost the argument. the evidence was stacked up against him. i would argue that most of the kind of general conservative arguments about what's good for people and good for society have lost empirically. they have lost the popular vote. they have lost in some fundamental way and they know what.

it's difficult for them to continue on, continuing on, and i would say someone like paul ryan would be arguably a principled conservative in the sense that i think he actually does believe that tax cuts for the wealthy are good for society in some way. but even then he kind of started to become part of what became troll nation in that he pretended to believe that it was good for poor people in that it was good for even middle-class people, that he kind of pretended to believe it didn't discredit his theory of trickle-down economics. rather admit defeat, they serve to embrace this kind of nihilistic politics. paul ryan is a good figure to see that happen to because, on one hand he has an ideology. on the other hand, he sold it out completely to trumpism because he knew i could do some

level he could do when any other way. >> it's also i think, i mean, i think it's not just liberals that troll nation turns their targets on. >> no. yeah, in fact, one thing that is alarming in some red states is that the republican party itself is being subject to increasingly crazy, like attacks from the right. i am from texas originally and you can see it going on in texas. there's a group called empower texans. they are using dark money like from oil billionaires in the state. there's a lot of extremely right-wing oil billionaires in texas who are willing to spend a lot of money secretly, and they spend most of it primary republicans in state legislature. they don't spend it trying to beat democrats. they don't have to. democrats have been gerrymandered out of power in

that state. instead they target people like the texas speaker of the house, joe strauss, who was kind of an old-school business republican who was really interested in much of these culture war politics. they basically have effectively pushed him out of the speakership. that's happening in texas. i would argue that that was happening to a large extent in wisconsin. you can see it happening in ohio. what is is this ever to sort of make all conservative politics this sort of all out fundamentalist culture war. >> is it an achilles' heel of the kind of politics that it actually can't govern? >> yes. i mean, they have no interest in governing, right? like governing i think at its core is still based in the sort of like general idea for the common good, and i think they

have rejected that as an ideal. >> there's a really fascinating study that you talk about. you talk about why troll nation actually posits the idea that they do. they are asked questions are different ways. can you relate that where, it's about barack obama's birth certificate. >> oh, yeah. >> i found that fascinating. >> yes. >> very revealing. >> i do the exact study in front of me right now but there has been research that shows if you ask like conservatives if they believe barack obama was born in the united states, it sort of depends on how the question is framed. if you frame it as we're doing at trivia quiz about how knowledgeable you are about politics, conservatives will i could be said that barack obama was born in hawaii.

if you frame it in terms of culture war politics, they will say he was born in kenya or not in the united states. so it's clear that on some level, believing that barack obama is considering where he was born is in a sincere belief, but what it is his way to stick it to liberals. and to sort of show your tribal affiliation. >> more questions. yes. >> amanda, what do you make of the notion that troll -- like whack-a-mole in a four the long defense like milo yiannopoulos -- [inaudible] people get upset. you can't criticize the ethical grounds because i'm just doing it to provoke you. >> so that why did they say -- that's a really good example of what i think is going on in this political correctness debate,, which is again it goes back to

the notion that the right knows they can't defend their arguments on their own merits. they find ways to promote their arguments without having to actually defend them. one way they do it is, say, you know, i'm only being politically incorrect. a motrin to a rise out of you. and if you react negatively, that on you. it's a way to deflect the argument. they say something racist if you say i'm going to argue with you on that. they say it was just for the locals. they go to advance the racist argument without having to defend the racist argument. to us certain extent these 20 events on campuses where milo or charlesworth only goes to do a speech on campus and draws up protest, they are doing the same thing, which is they are trying to make the argument about the right to speak or the right to be provocative without actually discussing what they're trying to actually say in their

provocative argument. .. [inaudible] all shapes and sizes. [inaudible] how do you bridge that gap? [inaudible] >> i think the two things are one, yes, people that have cultural knowledge to begin with. one of the most frustrating things is all these people

who've never lived amongst, apparently this exotic group of people. you know, maybe ask someone like you to cover them. second of all is cover all of them. like this way of only talking the working-class white people is creating this very distorted vision. talk to the business owners or talk to the rich people or talk to people who will make your readers uncomfortable because maybe they look a little bit more like them. they're well off, have a college degree, voted for trump. and that is a lot of trump voters. >> just so often the local press of the national press -- [inaudible]

[inaudible] >> yeah, i think that would be really useful. that would be one way to do it, especially since local papers are so often failing because they don't have any financial support appeared to be kick a little bit of "the new york times" "washington post" tomography their way, right? >> but is there also, to follow up on your question, is there also a responsibility to flip the idea as well. because i think both, if i can do both sides, there are clichés in both directions. we kind of know what a lot of people think about the new york liberal elite. they're sort of a benefit to perhaps take in the idea and turning it around as well. >> well, i would like to see

coming you know, a couple of effort to respond to this criticism of the times and other papers by profiling clinton voters, but those efforts have focused on also why well-off stereotype of quick matter. the reality of the clinton voter is not that. i would like to see the profiles of the actual diversity of clinton voters. not just clinton voters. the democrats generally. if your credit profile for trump voters, and the majority of voters who voted for hillary clinton, which was a different coalition. i don't think that is reflected in the media at all. >> you think there is an assumption that when someone says working class person, they generally in the media of being a white person. >> over and over again you see people say working class person

and sometimes they'll say why working-class and even that doesn't excuse it in my opinion because again, you are hiding the fact that the majority -- not the majority, the racially diverse group of people and light lack in latino and asian working-class people are just not well portrayed in the media. especially when you look at labor organization efforts right now, the face of working-class labor is female and it's not way. >> you talk about failures of the right wing policies. do they believe those ideas are involved. do they actually believe that?

>> you can't crack people schools and see what's in their head. just when the behavior in the behavior shows increasingly a lack of enthusiasm to defend their ideas. you turn on fox news and it's true that msnbc and fox news in national review, whatever you want to do. they read a book about the other side. the utter lack of willingness to really argue and engage our ideas on the right. i think it shows at least a sense that maybe they don't have knowledge of themselves, but at least the sons that there's no point anymore. >> wasn't there a report that came out after the romney campaign, which talks about the

thing to genuinely change to voters. >> a lot of that was aimed at engaging the idea that if they promoted their ideas correctly they could get more minority voters. the ideal person for that was she actually kind of tried. she was like small government, low taxes and was actually out there trying to promote the idea that latino voters would like these ideas. they look at the strategy and was like nope. voted for donald trump instead.

>> can you get someone else to answer your question. [inaudible] >> looking at the trend line of trolls, where are we in the trend line? where is the market on trolls right now? >> i don't know. it is so hard to tell in there. it seems like trolling got worse and now we're only just getting to grapple with the fact that a whole bunch of them were fake. at least until recently, the rise in my experience is this is just an total in just my observation not backed up with any scientific evidence. if you like it was getting worse because a lot of older people learned how to use twitter.

>> many of them use it very well. >> of course, of course. your average fox news viewer was not on twitter. but the personal and go. i think that more americans generally are on social media. that's created more trolling behavior and social media. but i think a lot of the more trolling relatives and friends to begin with. >> right back here. [inaudible] >> what does a post job tense world look like?

>> i probably learned not to do that. >> disclaimer, past results are no guarantee. >> well, i don't know. i'll give you my hope that my fear. my hope is i look at these kids and that is my best hope for the future is that i see these young people in there so many of them to genuinely want a politics generally when the politics have changed in the optimism pass these politics and vendor solutions that actually make for a better tomorrow. worst-case scenario is redux 2008. barack obama was the lack that in no small part because conservatives and republicans were demoralized.

daylight that barack obama and they got complacent and they got angry and resentful and rageful and give us donald trump is an act of revenge for barack obama. i am not sure that i see enough evidence that we found a way to break that cycle of vengeance and canada conservative team politics to get together when they feel they've lost. i don't know. you all are in the room. you're like i hope they can sell the book and convince some people to maybe think about politics differently because that's the only way it can change. >> registered to vote.

[inaudible] >> the question is even the ones who voted for him anyway you're saying. [inaudible] >> well, i guess my question would be what did they believe about him enough like a better way to put it, which is like donald trump changes what he thinks one minute to the next inhale openly lie. i think his supporters know that and get out about him and they just don't care. but i do think that they believe

he is a racist and i do believe they think he is sexist and i do think they believe that it's going to be a warrior for their tribe and that's all they care about. they don't care that he's against bombing syria one second and bombing syria the next second. they don't care that he'll protect medicare and medicaid on the trail and then gets an office in that paul ryan two/these benefits program. the fact that every two seconds what he thinks about a changes and he continues to be racist to latinos in real america is this why christian identity politics. i hope that clarifies. he's not somebody who has policies, but someone with cultural belief.

[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] what do you think? >> there's a lot of evidence for what you're saying and i think that's true. i also feel a lot of times the sort of rise up in bubble in bubble in spillover.

so they are not burdening until they are. that said, i often joke and i'm only half joking that we are lucky in our opponents that the younger people of the generation despite the faces were more younger. they voted for trump are older and that takes a lot. like it takes young people to burn torches and ride in the street and pick of guns and start evolutions. i think that the younger generation is really i think they are a very small subset of their generation and i don't think they have the numbers.

[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] >> please correct me if i'm wrong. is there overlap and how does that speak to the idea of troll nation? >> i think that is true and we've seen that happen. there's been propaganda that can do a lot better job than i have discussed in the way that trolls and propaganda and prey on fringe types in chaos. i think what i would say though is the difference as far as i can tell is the crazy conspiracy theory in media that is not true on the flipside.

for instance, as they became more and more evident that julian sanchez clearly a thumb level of government come in mainstream sources abandoned him like as a source like en masse. you don't see the guardians, you know, really defending julian masson jenni moore or new york or places like that. whereas these right wing conspiracy theories are on fox news. john hannity was pumping not conspiracy theory on primetime television and you do not see the same thing. you never get to see rachel matthau talking about the deep state. >> i want to give people assertive taste of the book. do you want to read a little bit with carefully marked in

advance. thank you. >> sure, sure. so if you'll indulge me for a minute, just a couple pages from the book. sean hannity of fox news mainstay since 1996 made a bold attempt in 2017 to change all that by showing deeply involved conspiracy theory accusing hillary clinton of killing the democratic national committee or the whole debacle was a vital assault on basic human decency and yet another sign eaten away, hannity hasn't paid a price for the role he played in the murder rate down. he died in the early hours of the morning of july 10, 2016 a couple weeks before sending the e-mails which were now no worse by the russian government for the staffers on the internet to rickie weeks. they were providing tech

support. the 27-year-old had gone out drinking and was murdered in a robbery gone wrong in the wee hours of the morning. right wing conspiracy theorist aided by left-wing sources who hate the clintons react to the strategy by trying to argue not the russian government was the source who leaked the e-mail said he was murdered for it. on the surface the argument doesn't make sense. which was a whistleblower trying to shine light on the dnc's effort to rate the primaries to quit and bernie sanders. no evidence to support this in the e-mails leaked. they wanted people to believe that in many supporters by the accusations. examination found about for some people in the dnc grumpy defenders wouldn't concede the race after they wrapped up a vote count to the nomination. doesn't make sense and even if it was evidence, or preferably

connect to a major newspaper rather than shady operation like wikileaks. a bunch of people deeply invested they are behind the e-mails. julian astonished him ahead of wikileaks to attenuate. and he could prove that their failure to do so after he was murdered with one more piece of evidence that this is the disgusting exploitation of a conspiracy theory. the group includes trump supporters who got taken in by russian propaganda and don't want to admit to themselves or others. the conspiracy theory is a pile of bull shape. that hannity started using his fox news show wondering what to sell into its global audience.

he hinted as a conspiracy theory multiple times, but it made 2017 he went all in. private investigator named rod wheeler had been communicating with wikileaks before his death. that was untrue. the report they have been hired were false. he had been hired by a trump supporter flatly denying claims that wheeler himself through the network advocated some of his statements. i want to pause here to say was so hard to keep track of all of this. hannity had picked up the steak and he was running with that appeared on the fox news show from his radio show at twitter account relentlessly promoted that could pierce the theory and one of his own lawyers even joined in on one segment on fox news. hannity was obvious that he could convince his audience that has leaked the e-mail wikileaks and had an excuse to dismiss the

dreams of the real-world evidence to show hackers that american government today. they didn't even try to hide the service. the mysterious murder of software completely shattered the narrative was working with the russians correlation between the troubled campaign and the russians he declared on fox news on may 16th. the timing is important to wonders and the desperation. trump had fired fbi herb in a bid to derail the investigation. trump admitted to an nbc news anchor that his purpose was obstruction of justice when i decided to do it, so this russian thing with trump and rush as a made up story. robert mueller was appointed special counsel to investigate collusion between the trump campaign and the russian government to commit illegal to tip the election. the two indictments of campaign

staff. with a pathetic ploy to tap into a conspiracy theory minded nature of conservative america against accepting the revelations of the trump administration's evolving the russia can you seek to manipulate the american election. it was so over-the-top that fox news turn on hannity. may 23rd reluctantly agree to stop embarrassing the network but he still kept at it. it turned out there was a conspiracy. instead it was reported in august that the wealthy trump supporter backing wheeler had been in contact with the white house and fox news about efforts to claim the dnc and clinton had been murdered. they have real cost and not just on election outcomes. he suffered greatly because of the exploitation of the murder. every day we wake up to new headlines, factual errors, people approaching the to take

advantage in the "washington post" on may 23rd. it just won't stop you do stop you the amount of pain and anguish that has caused us is unbearable and we are forced to relive us more memories turn away from us. it demonstrates the moral depravity and nihilism over 21st century conservative america more than the white bread conspiracy theories. the proliferation is rapidly degrading public discourse which is what lol nothing matters has become the dark internet joke of our time. real people are being hurt are the rapidly growing pile of bull. there is no real remorse which means we can only expect the problem to expand until it involves us all. [laughter]

>> amanda, thank you for being here and writing the book. everyone, please feel free to stay here in the room. by your two copies of the book, please. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

you know, for example, i immediately confess this woman came over to our table and i was like i'm a journalist. i'm just asking some questions. do you mind? she was super helpful. she named all these companies here all the time and they come in groups of mostly guys is sometimes a woman tagging along for whatever reason. they talk about work. so after the big tech conferences, and they walk in the door and people flock to them. this is getting done in the middle of the day in the heart

of san francisco at a strip club. you know, we are talking about sexism exists in every industry. silicon valley, this is supposed to be the most progressive industry in the world. it certainly is the most powerful industry in the world. and yet, the people who have connected the world and are building self driving cars, when you ask them what can we do about hiring more women. that's just so hard. i don't know how we're going to solve this. so one of the really important we send i wanted to ride it was simply the hypocrisy of it. but on top of that, fully believe the people connecting the world and have given us a ride to the push of a button, i believe they can do this. like they can hire women and pay them fairly. in another stat for you. the pay gap in silicon valley is

five times the national average. so if you control or job title in experience and geographic location, the pay gap is 5%. silicon valley is 28.5%. .. [inaudible conversations] >> good evening. hello. i am amanda chavenson and on behalf of the smithsonian associat