welcome to "amanpour" on pbs. tonight, the former tv anchor who blew the whistle on sexual harassment at fox news. my conversation on gretchen carlson on where the movement she started is headed now. also ahead, disease bney bu, at&t tries to buy time warner. we'll talk to the media mow ggun the industry he helped shape. >> announcer: "amanpour" on pbs was made generous sport of rosalind walter.

good evening and welcome to the program, i'm christiane amanpour in new york. the me too movement caught fire last year, but before me too there was gretchen carlson, the form eer fox news anchor made headlines a full year earlier when she sued her former boss, the powerful ceo roger ailes for sexual harassment. the case was settled for $20 million. gretchen carlson is with me now. gretchen, welcome to the program. >> thank you for having me. >> you are most welcome because this is a massive conversation and a movement that is some say at a delicate stage right now. do you think that there is sort of a tipping point moment right now, a sort of come to jesus moment about how this is going to go forward. >> i'm calling it a cultural revolution and i don't think we put the genie back in the bottle at this point. so many women and men have felt encouraged, inspired to find that bravery and courage to come forward that i really feel like

we're going to continue down this path. my great hope is that it will trickle down to the women who work in all of these industries that are not hollywood, television, or capitol hill, where they're not famous necessarily but still enduring the same type of harassment and abuse. >> let's talk about that. because there obviously reason is a lot of high profile scouts and high profile highly paid men have been forced to leave their jobs, but it isn't just about the famous stars, it is, or the ceos? this is a whole culture of enablement throughout many organizations. >> so i was stunned to find out after i jumped off my cliff in july of 2016 that suddenly so many women started to reach out to me and i realized very soon after that it's a pervasive epidemic that crosses all cioeconomic lines and all careers so i'm talking about teachers, members of our military, bankers, accountants, lawyers, sports executives. it's everywhere. and they all said a similar

thing to me which was we never had a voice, we never had a voice but through you we feel like we do now. so that was the impetus for me to really put their stories into a book, to give their voice honor. they had never been heard and there's so many reasons why we've been keeping this secret, whichly probab-- which i will py get into. >> because it's sheer terror of where the chips may fall. >> if you come forward you're labelled a troublemaker, there's something wrong, you can't get along the boys. and you fear for your job. if you're a single mom and you have kids to feet you won't come forward if you know you'll be maligned, demoted and eventually fired. so here's the stark reality of what happened to those thousands and maybe more of that of women across this country and around the world. they came forward and in most cases they were fired and they have never worked in their

chosen profession ever again and that is criminal. >> it really, really is so troubling. you mentioned women with families. you yourself are married with two youngish children. what went through your mind when this was happening to you and when you were sort of plotting your revenge and plotting how to take down this criminal enterpri enterprise. >> well, i didn't share with my children at the time, they were too young. right now they're 12 and 14 so they understand it much more. but, of course, my husband was aware and my parents and that was about it. for me the final thing was when my career after working so hard for more than 25 years in tv, when it was going to be taken away from me and it wasn't my choice that i decided if i don't do this, who will? and so i did it for my children and your children and everyone else's and look where we are today. i mean, it's so heartening to know see where we are even though the stories are horrific

and the allegations and revolutions are horrible. we here in this awakening. it's a historic moment. >> were you troubled that even after you came forward and fox news, it has such a massive hold on such a huge segment of this country and such a powerful organization, i mean, shaping presidencies and the agenda in many, many instances, were you troubled that it didn't have the sort of avalanche effect that the harvey weinstein revelations had? why do you think that happened? >> because we were still operating under the old rules. >> which were? >> which were the fact that women were still not to believe believed and that it was just the fact that my show didn't have high enough ratings and, you know, the same old same old, it was a he said/she said environment. but look what's changed now. the amazing thing now if men are put in these positions and accused they're being let go from their jobs and they're

issuing apologies right away. i mean, that was unheard of just 18 months ago when my story broke. so to me that is humongous progress. here's the reason why women and men feel like they can come forward, because they saw consequences. even in my case. they saw something happen. and they thought to helmss, wow, maybe i should come forward. maybe i should say what really happened to me because finally even in 2017 and 2018 they're going to do something positive for me. >> can you tell me what happened? obviously you have certain restrictions because you were paid a $20 million settlement which came with a non-disclosure agreement. i mean, that's pernicious in and of itself. >> it is. >> do you chafe under the silencing of your voice? >> no, because look at what i'm still doing. i mean, i'm enacting new legislation on capitol hill. i set up a fund to give grants to empower young girls and boys. i am working on a docu-series

that will soon be out, i started the gretchen carlson leadership initiative for underserved women. the list goes on and on for the jobs i've been able to do on this issue but you bring up an excellent point about the secrecy of settlements. our society has chosen two ways to solve these issues -- settlements where women can never tell you what happened and arbitration clauses in employment contracts that keep this issue silent and that's what i've been working on capitol hill to change. i'm proud to say last month i was able to introduce a bill -- bipartisan --in the house and the senate to get rid of arbitration clauses in employment contracts with regard to sexual harassment. the reason it's so imperative is because arbitration is a secret chamber. so these women complain, they come forward in many cases they're fired, they get sent to secrecy of arbitration and we never hear from them ever again. >> what about the men who are denying these things have happened? and what about the sort of spectrum of abuses, of

wrongdoing? there's a big question right now, a little bit of a backlash that seems to suggest that a lot of issues are being conflated as one big no-no, one big crime. do you think that there has to be a moment where we define for all to understand what constitutes unacceptable behavior, fireable offenses and what doesn't? >> i mean, it's an excellent point. we've seen the horrific allegations of actual sexual assault and sexual crimes, right? and then on the other hand, inappropriate one comment or inappropriate touching one or two times. so, yes, there has to be this balance of horrible horrible and maybe a one off situation. but i will tell you there, of all those thousands of women i heard from, there was no gray area in almost all of their stories. they were so awful. so i don't want to diminish the severity and pervasiveness of the issue, but i do think we

have to keep that in mind. >> and when you struggle to figure out how to keep that in mind, how do we do that? those of us in journalism, people in hollywood, people in all different professions, how do we sort of -- or is it obvious what a code of conduct is and we know when it's being violated. the thing is, there are rules in all of our organizations. >> and there are laws. >> and laws. >> so sexual harassment is either quid pro quo, sleep with me and you'll get the job or you won't. it's pretty obvious. >> is that what happened to you? >> well, i can't say exactly what my particular case was but for many people, that's what they face, right? and then if they go to arbitration you never find out about that. but then the other area is more gray which is subjective. for example, now people are saying well, men can't even compliment you on what you're wearing. listen, that is not -- those are not the cases that people are coming forward about. the kinds of stories that i heard were so outrageous. a woman just wanted a promotion and the boss asked her to get up on the desk and spread her legs.

i mean, these the kinds of stories that i was hearing. it wasn't like there was a gray or subjective area. >> i was speaking to historian mary beard, the britishing ing dem -- academic who goes way back into the millennia about the patriarchy, about how it's so ingrained in our history. isn't one of the ways that this is going to be solved actually equal pay for equal play? >> totally. >> more women in the executive suites? more women at the table in the room where it happens, so of how you could report sexual harassment, which is why i went to them. but here's what i ended up finding out, 70% of their employees were female and they said well, we have this very progressive thing but we don't many reports and i said why not? oh, yeah, you have 70% women. so as long as the majority of

fortune 500 companies, 94% of them, are still being run by men, first of all, we need those men to help us, right? we need them to hire us in higher positions, we need them to pay us equally and fairliment we need them give us a seat in the board room. we need all of that and most importantly we need them to come forward when they see it happening. >> and stand by us. >> 100%. that to me will be the final tipping point. >> do you see enough of that happening? do you see a movement towards that? men being involved in the solution. >> the other surprising thing after my story broke was that i heard from so many men. in my unscientific study on the streets of new york city, more men would stop me than women and want to shake my hand and say "thank you for my daughters." >> that is great. >> it is. >> what did your daughter and son think when the news broke, they saw what their mother had done, what she'd been subjected to and she won? >> it didn't have an immediate effect, but i will share with you that my daughter found bravery and courage to stand up for herself and she did it in a

situation that was making her uncomfortable and she said "mommy, i did it because i saw you do it." which meant it was all worth it to me. my son saw me on television one night and asked me about a horrible statistic about once every 73 or 76 seconds when sexual abuse happens, mommy, is it true? i said yes, he said mommy, i want to help fix that. >> that is remarkable. >> it is. >> i want to is ask you, to their generation, pink, the entertainer, has said the behavior, the mind-set that a woman can be grabbed in any way, that mind-set is dying. do you think for your daughters, your son's generation it will be a dead issue or are we far away from that? >> it's my hope. when i've been meeting with these members of congress i say do you want this for your kids? not one person raises their hand. so we -- none of us want this for our children so this is why it's bipartisan and apolitical. we need to come together to be able to solve this issue. >> well, well done for taking up

the fight. gretchen carlson, you've been incredibly brave and thanks for continuing to speak out. >> thank you for having me. >> thank you. of course, it was women and journalists like gretchen carlson who helped kick off the me too movement, uncovering and speaking up about the abuses of power by men like roger ailes and harvey weinstein. on tomorrow's program here, we explore another triumph in the history of journalism when i speak with meryl streep and tom hanks about their new film "the post" which tells the true story of the first female newspaper publisher, catherine graham, and how she and her investigative team took on the white house to publish the pentagon papers about the disaster in vietnam under president nixon. >> so can i ask you a hypothetical question. >> oh, dear, i don't like hypothetical questions. >> i don't think you're going to like the real one, either. >> do you have the papers? >> not yet.

>> oh, gosh, oh, gosh, because you know the -- the physician that would put me in, you know, we have language in the prospectus -- >> i know they can change their mind and i know what is at stake. you know, the only couple i knew that both kennedy and lbj wanted to socialize with was you and your husband and you owned a damn paper. >> we'll have much more of that conversation on tomorrow's program when i sit down with tom hanks and meryl streep. now to the media and its struggles in the modern era -- sexual harassment, claims of fake news, and the ever-changing face of technology are all fights where my next guest has been at the forefront. barry diller is the chairman of the leading media company iac, having been chairman of fox incorporated and head of paramount studios and he joins me now. welcome to the program. >> thank you. >> so you've just heard the

conversation with grietchen carlson. you've been listening too this as it's been unfolding. what was it like when you were head of all these companies, when it was all happening, all these companies were being built. >> you mean before the great reckoning? >> yes, before the great reckoning, before it was de rigueur. >> a completely different world. it is the great reckoning. it is -- all of the practices that were go along, get along, whether they were -- i mean, i never saw in any of the situations that i've been involved in the kind of heinous behavior that has come out in the last year or so. so i don't really have any of those experiences, nor any of the companies of that kind of egregious -- but all sorts of shadows of gray and -- >> you heard about -- >> and overstepping and things about -- more than heard about. investigated, acted on, et cetera.

so, yeah, there but the excesses of it and the fact that this is now a completely changed thing. for instance, in the previous interview when you were saying how do you know? the truth is you really do know what behavior is -- >> yeah, you do. >> and by the way now it's going to overswing but in fact the day is -- there's a harsh line i mean, i thought it's before harvey and after harvey. >> what do you mean by overswing? do you think the me too movement is in danger? for instance, the "economist" said it's a very delicate moment right now. what do you mean by overswing. >> it didn't delicate enough because there's not proportio l proportionali proportionality. this is annihilate the moment anything happens, no due process, no -- nothing is actually -- of actual let's call it factual process. >> well, a lot of them admit it.

>> well, people admit it or people say no but the result is the same in all these cases which is you're kind of taken off whatever you're doing, you're put on the side probably for a very long period of time so i don't think it's a delicate period now but i do think the pendulum, like it always does, is going to swing a little too far and then come back. >> so how do you think it comes back to a place where men and women know the rules and hr practices and the law which we all know exists is actually -- >> no, it's now. it's now. i can't imagine -- i think there's not a man i know that is not rifling back in his history excruciatingly "did i do that? might i have overstepped this? did i have that kind of talk with somebody?" whatever it was. everyone is doing that. past. going forward it has got on the the point of people saying do i

hug you too much? which is ridiculous. so i think that's the -- but the actual practice today? not happening i think anywhere. now that may be naive, i don't think so. >> as gretchen was saying, as we'd all been talking -- >> it really is the great reckoning. >> i think it is. but we have said as we keep saying high profile scouts being claimed but there is so much enabling all of this. whatever it is, the agents, the bookers, the assistants, the people who lead a girl up to somebody's hotel room for a meeting and leave them there. >> i've talked to friends of mine who have been in that position and who really are guilty about it. now, again, it was -- when you say what was it like then? those kind of grayish practices -- it wasn't literally you were leading someone up to some monster who was going to then rape you. i mean, that was really not. but were you enabling it?

were you laughing a bit about it? were you saying oh, he's a hound and then the degree of houndness was not really -- you didn't really pick it apart too much? absolutely. >> let's move on to -- >> but it's over. >> let's hope it's over. >> it's over. oh, please. >> how about having more women run publishing agencies, run media. there are very few operations, there's almost no studios in hollywood. >> there isn't. >> there's one major producer, kathleen kennedy. >> stacy snyder runs fox. universal is run by female. of the major studios -- no, that's -- that's kind of there. >> all right, enough? female directors? female writers? >> no, no on the other side of the camera -- i'm talking about in the executive ranks it's all right, i'd say, all right-y. but in other areas, no.

but an inevitable part of this reckoning is that what all these balances were before, they're not going to be tolerated so the natural population push is going to take care of it. >> what about the business and the landscape? you are a founding charter member of building up a lot of the media we know today. >> yeah, yeah. >> from old media to new media. >> yes. >> now we have two megamergers in the public spotlight which i mentioned, disney buying out fox. >> yes. >> and at&t trying to buy our corporation, time warner. disney -- and i'll read what the white house said about that -- the white house was pleased about it. i know the president spoke with rupert murdoch earlier today, congratulated him on the deal and think that's dosh use o-- t of the president's favorite words -- great for jobs. >> that's the dumbest -- you

can't say it's the dumbest because the dumb standard has changed given this administration. but the idea of saying this merger is going to create jobs is beyond ridiculous because one of the key parts of this merger is to save money by putting these things together and eliminating jobs. now, you know, that is the fact here. i'm not saying it's a bad thing in and of itself, mergers by their very nature -- there's not a merger that doesn't usually almost always have cost synergies, cost synergies, what does it mean? it means eliminating people. >> i know, and i'm glad you actually made that clear for everybody. what about, though, how you square the white house seeming to love this merger about hating the idea of at&t merging with time warner, time warner, the parent company of cnn. >> i can't square anything with this lunatic administration. >> well, where do you think it's going to go? >> what's going to go? >> you're an expert.

>> what will happen? i think on at&t-time warner, i suspect they'll settle it because neither of them can take the chance of losing so i think -- what do i know but before it goes to actual trial they'll find settlement. if they go to trial i think time warner probably -- i think at&t probably prevails and fox is not even -- i can't imagine it's even an issue. >> cnn, you mean? >> pardon me? >> okay, go ahead. >> yeah, fox. whatever. but i think that in fact these are the crumbs, you know? these mergers are picking up -- if you think about in the world media terms, time warner, fox no longer matter in megamedia. >> what do you mean? >> go back to -- i was thinking about -- go back to '84. rupert murdoch bought into a seat at the table of one of the

majors. that seat at that table, there were only six seats and that seat gave him the platform to expand his business and build a large empire. those six seats now don't mean anything anymore. time, warner brothers, paramount, fox they don't have the same meaning. that seat at the table is today kind of irrelevant. so the merger of those things is not very interesting. >> that is really -- just that you say it's not interesting is a fascinating statement on what is going on. >> because it leaves only three lae compani which is at, comcast, nbc and disney which is kind of an outlier to everything but nevertheless, those are the only companies of scale and substance. real substance. >> what does it say about rupert murdoch.

here's a swashbuckling empire building -- >> he played a bad hand well. >> tell me about that. >> i think he realized those companies no longer have pricing power, they no longer -- they're not -- look, the history of media has been that whatever -- it wasn't that, in fact, disney invented espn. espn got successful and they bought it. in other words, they always -- what they were able to do, these old companies, they were able to buy whatever became successful. cnn started by ted turner became successful. bought by time warner, now bought by at&t. so these companies, though, usually were able to buy their progeny. now they have no pricing power so rupert murdoch realized that he was in a position where he's not buying netflix. he's not buying amazon and certainly he isn't buying apple or google or facebook. so what is he left to do?

what he's left to do is sell. so he played it well. >> he did as he's played a lot of things well. where does it leave the country -- >> the ordinary person? >> the ordinary person, yes. >> everybody is going to work for the man. >> for the man? >> yeah, for sure. because you can't really build -- i don't believe any of these entrepreneurial things are no longer possible in big, let's call it, media. >> what do you make of the trump effect on the media and the business landscape right now. you've got 60 seconds, barry diller, i know you can do it. >> to do that one? what do i make of it? i make bad of it. it's terrible. the question to me is not trump. we'll pass trump. obviously we'll pass him. hopefully sooner than later but what comes after? have we degraded things that, in fact, we will get more of this or hopefully what we will get is

essentially a rebalancing act where decency, dignity, every value that you can think of is emphasized in the future but i don't know what anyone would be able to say right now. all they could look at and see everything degrading. >> on that happy, cheery note, barry diller, thanks so much for joining us this evening. and that's it for our program tonight. thanks for watching "amanpour" on pbs. join us again tomorrow night.

♪ ♪ ♪