♪ you are watching c-span, your unfiltered view of government. america's created by cable television companies in 1979. today, we are brought to you by these television companies that provide c-span viewers as a public service. >> coming up tonight on c-span at 8 p.m., a look at the political career of retiring senator lamar alexander. en c-span2, the year in review features books about science starting at 8 p.m. with physics professors on the origins and future of the cosmos. and on c-span3, programs marking the 400th anniversary of the mayflower trip from plymouth, england in 1620 starting with the discovery of the mayflower compact. at 8s tonight starting

p.m. on the c-span networks. but today we will hear from cheryl atkinson. -- sharyl atkinson attkisson. you have written books taking a look at the media, what does this book have apart from the others. ofst: it is the evolution the death of the news which has been observed by most of the people listening and watching today but don't necessarily know what is behind it. in this book i talk about what is happening with social media. this trend in social media is born of the same time of putting coed corporate interest that has controlled news narratives before the focused on social

media and internet because they thought the public could still get unfettered access and viewpoints and people so they decided to figure out started that and have done so successfully how to control the information we see online. host: we heard about social media leading up to the election. you are saying before then these trends were happening? guest: right. big tech for all of its flaws and invading our privacy was not interested in interceding between us and information until 2016 when they were lobbied to do so by special interests who wanted to stop certain narratives and storylines and advance others. it can be traced specifically to 2016, really targeting donald trump with interests that saw him rise in popularity despite the fact that pretty much all news organizations were telling people. for for him, these

interests -- telling people don't put for him, these interests could control normal print publications. they started focusing on my. host: who are the special interests? guest: there are many of them. they're not always divided along political and ideological lines. that is the most obvious thing i think people have seen and put to. there are also corporate industries like the pharmaceutical industry which lobbied our politicians and media organizations and control the narratives we see every day. that was back in the early 2000's. the first pick in street i saw successfully influencing the news in a major way that qualified is what i call censorship, not wanting to air a story at all rather than representing various points, i didn't want people to hear certain scientific studies.

the tactic i saw the pharmaceutical industry use was adapted by other political interests. host: tactics such as want -- such as what? guest: hiring crisis management firms, starting nonprofit to figure how to influence news from the corporate level as well as getting into the newsroom by logging with talking points and other narratives. step, i talked about this in my last book, this industry of figuring out how to influence our information landscape moved into our newsroom in a more direct way. they didn't just figure out how to manipulate us and dictate how we talk about a story from the outside, we hired them into our newsroom's. i talked about how we pay these political consultants and analysts salaries to distribute propaganda and we allow

ourselves to be used as tools. they should be paying us, if anything, to have the outlets of the talking points every day to get to these mass audiences. we have invited them to work and our newsrooms as reporters and anchors in many cases. i argued that in many instances we are one and the same in these special interest. the firewalls have come down between the news division in the interests they are supposed to be reporting on. host: our guest will be with us for the hour. if you want to ask about her reporting and her latest book, "slanted: how the news media taught us to love censorship and hate journalism," you can call us. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. you start pressing the narrative refers to a storyline that influential people want told in order to narrow your views.

that is chosen ideas deep within society so that they're no longer west and -- so the questions are no longer permitted. can you elaborate on that? guest: this was unheard of 15 years ago, the notion that a story should be aired or should -- for person should not be interviewed because their ideas were wrong or dangerous. it used to be we heard from all different viewpoints. now the narrative has taught us -- and i think this has been a successful propaganda effort -- we decide who is right and who is wrong even if we can't know the truth of the matter. then we are to shape what we report to -- to the public by making sure we controversial lies those who are -- controversialize those who are off that narrative. we push instead a one-sided .ersion of somebody's

truth if you dig behind that, it is not a fair-minded this is what we think is right, this is what we push out to you because we can't know what is true. the election is a good example. regardless of whether one thinks there was fraud or whatnot, the fact that so many news reports and social media within a day or two were reporting their sibley wasn't. this -- there simply wasn't. they did not know whether there was fraud or not, they only knew what other people tell them which is what we should be reporting if we are journalists. if we claim to know something we can't know, we declare something to be true and something to be false, and then we turn out to be wrong. i think this contributes to the corrosion of public trust in the media, government, and all our institutions. "to: you add in the book,

begin with and narrative always presents multisided issues in a one-sided fashion. the standards and judgments applied to the target smeared by narrative never applied to those advancing the narrative or their allies." thet: there is a book about verbiage of the narrative, they were greeted against donald trump and his supporters. this is not something said previously if at all. when the other side presents the same source of information as you would say without evidence, they are not called on it. dictates news without evidence to claim something is true, they have no recognition that they are doing the same thing they are accusing somebody also doing.

even worse, they are presenting things contrary to the evidence or counter to the evidence that exists. again, with lack of recognition that that is what they are doing. host: you go back to your own experiences in this idea pushing back the narrative. you write about reporting on swine flu and stimulus money in new york. what were the lessons learned from pushing back? guest: what do you mean? host: pushing back against the narrative. you highlight when you put on the sweatsuit, inc. you encountered. back on-- when you push -- you highlight, the pushback you encountered. this reporting is what

good journalists wanted from the people who worked for them. they wanted to get on the ground and find out what was going on. to the extent that it was contrary to the official story line it was applauded. it got to be in my later years at cvs -- at cvs that even -- at it got harder to do that reporting. powers were pulling strings. boeings the story about and the dreamliner. i was assigned to cover the story of the dreamliner fires. everybody loves the story and then somebody decides it shouldn't air. that was happening more and more. back in 2014 when i thought the trend was industrywide.

journalists are speaking of the same thing. some can't talk about it and give up their livelihood, but this is it problem across the. yep journalists who don't like it and then you have a new breed of journalists that are all in you have journalists who don't like it and then you have a new breed of journalists that are all in. the new journalists have different asked her degrees -- have different master degrees. if they think something -- if , -- say to the right person i think people have to understand that for these people the role of journalism has been redefined into something different than what we were used to. even when they report something that is incorrect, something

really bad, the reason you don't see much in the way of apology or why these reporters continue to get rid seats and get promoted is because their mission is accomplished. if your mission is to further the narrative to sway public opinion, your goal is not to represent the facts on the ground so it is okay if you are wrong because you still accomplish the goal. host: our first call comes from carl he is in berkeley springs, west virginia, republican line. go ahead with your question or comment. old andi am 82 years you are my favorite of all the news people i watch. i am very surprised that washington journal would let you on for an hour. i grew up watching walter

cronkite and that bunch. i remember the very evening saidr cronkite came on and the war in vietnam is unwinnable. veteran i thought this was the beginning of opinion in the news. we are getting more opinions and extent with some news -- mixed in with some news. this laptop they found in delaware, none of the journalists are really curious. they don't want to know what is in it. if they knew what was minute they would have to report on it so they sweep it aside. ma'am, i want to tell you, you are my favorite and you are the most honest journalist on tv. i record your program every

time. host: we will let our guests respond. guest: i don't know what to say that, he is always the correct. -- he is obviously correct. i am kidding. i caught the substitution game, the game we played when we see a story such as the hunter biden laptop. anything about the other side, seems to bes false late if it hurts that site. be curses we should about to question power and authority and look to see what -- ifer investigation you're neutral and objective we apply that to his under investigation -- to whoever is under investigation. side is attacked into his

nice and held to a different standard too often than the other side. i agree with that. host: our guest has been with us eight times, i just look on this program -- i just looked on this program. democrats jersey, line. caller: thank you for taking michael. , i remember you when you were on cbs, was it? guest: and cnn and pbs. caller: it is refreshing to hear you and see you again. i have comments concerning what has been happening for the past four years if i may present my statements and comments.

it seems as though for the last four years we have been divided butonly by mr. trump members of congress on one side of the aisle. that irks me. it irked me when he became 2016.ent in the moment the results came in the following day, the following , i was on a local radio station. i was a regular caller. is thethe host that he curse of america and it has been

proven to be so. host: what the what our guest to address? what i want her to address is the censorship that the president tried to place upon the media. host: that is jim in new jersey. go ahead. i have notguest: studied it from that view. there are plenty who have written about what they think trump has gone -- done wrong. that i instead on topics believe are under covered and underserved. for my viewpoint, i think the censorship i have seen that the media is responsible for and what i have seen on the internet , what we have seen in the weeks building up to the election is more concerning than what i have

seen in the political realm from what politicians try to do which is always the case. political figures try to advance their narrative. it is their job. as reporters, we are supposed to be the equalizer. with reporting narratives and try to be neutral and objective when we are reporting simple facts, fair when we are investigating something to the extent that we can present something that powerful interest are trying to hide. that is what i focus on in my books. host: we have a viewer off our twitter that asks this question saying "i think the president is the one who hates journalism. news" term -- ring a bell?" my book howced in

that was started and by whom which i think is interesting. i point out that donald trump co-opted the phrase which was at the dismay of people who tried to -- most people associate that with donald trump. i think there is a lot to be said for how the media has allowed its self to be used in in a way that i andk is inappropriate changing the definition of journalism in a way that is not good for us. when we do report the facts fairly, i think it is dismissed. what they canre trust out of us because of the reporting we are doing. host: another question asking about if this evolution of journalism affects more ideological groups than others?

i spent a chapter going devolution of cnn. i interviewed insiders who have run news divisions of all that works. of those who describe their leanings with tickly, most of them said they are progressive orlean left yet they were as troubled by the things -- they are progressive or lean left yet they were as troubled by the things i'm talking about. at cnn, we would not have dreamed of inserting our opinions in news stories. most of our reporting had nothing to do with politics. another consequence of the near to is that too much all you see -- is that pretty much all you see are political stories.

there is a lot going on in this who don'tth people have ties to washington, d.c. we had a half hour put it will show at night and then we started one at 4:30 in the afternoon during the election year. other than that, our news was ordinary news that wasn't to people. i also talk about it in a separate chapter on the new york times. it is so disappointing that -- to so many people, including insiders i talked to. there are two chapters talking about those because their downfall has been so obvious. host: who does a fair job as reporting in the way you would see it? guest: i talked in terms of not entire news organizations in a talk not even in terms of fairness.

places like cnn when i worked there, they just don't exist. even people who like their news one-sided, they like to see something on the left or on the right, they still when i talked to them say they would like to have a neutral place they could go where they can also check in and know what they are watching -- they don't have to discounted because the site on a place that might want you to lean left -- because they saw it on a place that might want you to lean left. we need to look for people and reporters at outlets on a particular topic that reports off narrative information that may that -- that powerful interests may not want. i do talk about some reporters and news organizations who are fair. cbs.tioned david martin at i got recommendations from fellow journalists who talked

about those who they see as pillars of objectivity in the face of these trends i'm talking about. host: this is very from kentucky on our independent line. this is something i think the republicans have been ignoring. in the 2016 election, for sick -- 56% of republican voters were over 50-year-old. you can imagine in that for your period how many of those have passed away. -- overther hand, 50% 50% of the democratic voters largender 50 years old, a percentage between 18 and 40 -- 18 and 24. imagine how many of those young people that were 14 years of age

in 2016 were 18 years or older in the 2020 elections. it is something being ignored or censored for their just not aware of? -- for they are just not aware of? -- or they are just not aware of? guest: i can't comment authoritatively on that, i am sorry. but i am concerned among young people today that may start watching news now or in the next couple of years, there is sloped slippage of what some of us -- this slow slippage. of journalism. they have become too -- they have become used to the idea that they will get a one-sided opinion shut down their throat by a media organization instead of neutral information.

the second, the censorship trends, they are going to become used to it that this is how it is. make sure we don't see certain information or hear from certain people. that is not the way it was, not the way i grew up, not to wait journalism works or information access should work in america. i'm afraid among young people this is what they know and how things are. host: this is bill in georgia. democrats line. caller: i would like to talk about the defense authorization hasand the fact that trump threatened to veto it on the ground of confederates -- confederate generals and having a forged name after them as well as the 203 liability shield for social media. what is not being mentioned in

-- thatl is the fact offshore accounts are going to be required to report the ownership of those companies. this is something i think is being missed in the media and to me is the biggest story in the defense authorization act. guest: -- host: i don't know if our guest wants to tackle that but you can if you with -- if you wish. guest: i'm not familiar with that. sorry, i cannot comment. host: what a fox news on journalism -- what do you think about the influence of fox news on journalism. guest: there is a lot about that in the book because some blame fox news about what happened with cnn. cnn and yet some

of these people i interviewed were in on the decision-making about what msnbc was going to become, about what cnn was going to become. success ofhow the fox news when they came on the scene and catered to a when theyve audience thought the rest of the media was catered to a liberal audience. success -- this is according to interviews -- they figured -- they saw that success -- this is according to interviews -- they thought why not just go all out. why not do something that is unabashedly left and appeal to that audience in the same way fox news had done? in termsa lot to that of why cnn became the way it did and how the news has become increasingly split because of the success of fox news. all of the news organizations i

have talked about and talk about in the book are likewise subjective, whether left or right or perceive themselves in the middle. i think they have all been inundated by these narratives and interests i'm talking about that make sure they stay on point with the topics of the day these special interests want us to talk about. even if you are hearing both sides for your hearing right and are thee that these topics and the language used to talk about the topics any given day is the result of the successful application of the narrative. host: do think that applies to the growth we have seen reported of organizations like newsmax and one america news? guest: yes, to one extent i would say there are these outbursts of new places people are turning to because they have become disillusioned and don't like the opinions they're

getting from the news they are watching. iffy -- if people feel like they're only going to get opinions from news, they're going to shop around for the opinions they would like. there is a market among the same people watching these news organizations left and right. there is a market for old cnn gete they could turn to factual information that goes where the facts lead without having to wonder if that is because this reporter or this new cigna station -- this news organization wants me to say something. host: let's hear from wisconsin, republican line. are on.you inler: i got a degree journalism in 1985 and back then it was a given that you were neutral and nonbiased.

somehow, i'm not sure what pointed, at some journalists got to believe that their mission in life and their sacred job is to be a citizens advocate and inform the people on the viewpoint they may truly believe is in the best interest of the people. it is kind of social engineering. sicke gotten physically over the horrible bias in journalism in the past few months. if you what's to be truly concerned and scared, turned back and forth between fox news and msnbc. they are like alternate realities. the true reality is somewhere in the middle, probably. i heard someone say over the

past six months or so that people need to do their own research. no. the true free press, people who work full-time and have children and are busy should be able to turn into national news and get a halfts and only spent hour a day getting the facts. i need to bring up the fact that it is hard to find it. the bbc is not as horribly highest -- highest. ed.bias journalists started a show called "news nation" out of chicago from 7:00 to 10:00 every night. every hour they do some repetition. valance, notre " "balance, not bias."

your concerne about what has happened with journalism. i say the same thing that people have to do their own research but people probably think that is what you are therefore. there -- there for. some people don't have time to watch full of its and their own events i do watch full in their own conch -- watch full their own context like i do. i tell everybody, when you see , it has allported these sources and using the same language, maybe it is true but maybe it is out of context or

maybe it is not true. all three of those things are equally as possible. the best question to ask when you see something reported is who wants me to believe that at why? sometimes that leads to the more -- whynt story and it is stories have turned out so different than what we have --? --t: guest: i think there are some good things that fill the gap because journalists have not done their job in some respects on some topics. yep citizen journalists stepping in more often than not. these are often partisan journalists. you're getting information which is good. but if you think it is slanted or bad on the regular news, you

can imagine when there are people who have no pretense of a journalism mission, they are there just to get whatever information they want, they have no obligation to be neutral or fair. you are getting news that you have to set yourself, am i getting the whole story? am i getting something i have to discount because it came from left or right? i think citizen journalism has become important. i think like everything else, it comes with a bit of peril because of this information landscape where people don't quite know what side something is coming from or they are not sure if they're getting an opinion or fact. they don't necessarily believe what they see. host: this is carol from baltimore. hi, thanks to c-span. i would like to challenge your thought that censorship and narratives just started.

the 1968lashed back to mme was speakingr and it was cut away from her because the media did not want to see her talking on tv. from an african-american perspective, the narrative has always been biased. another thing is that they always talk about trump because he treats ad nauseam. i would like to go. . a day without a tweet they have to report on it because he is president. finally, the black lives matter, i would like to get your thoughts on how that was presented. african-americans were saying let us get a chance to celebrate us. , but in thesting immediate it is rioting. to defund they want the police, that is not what we were saying. i would like to get your

perspective on how that is covered. guest: two things i would like to address, you are right. the shaping of news has always been there. and i didn't mean to imply that it is no -- it is new because i know this is true. there is always an element of us deciding as news organizations what people do and don't see. most news was not reported. we got to choose or took it upon ourselves to save this is what the public needs to see, this is what they don't get to see. we will take you live to where governor beshear is holding a live update on the coronavirus pandemic. gov. beshear: today will be the last of eight we give this week, with christmas coming later in the