HomeVideos

Jon Stewart Rewatches Himself on ‘Crossfire’ | The Ezra Klein Show

Now Playing

Jon Stewart Rewatches Himself on ‘Crossfire’ | The Ezra Klein Show

Transcript

371 segments

0:00

You're gonna enjoy this. So, I'm gonna

0:01

play a clip. Sorry. This is on This is

0:05

not

0:06

>> You You've done a lot to You've done a

0:08

lot to deserve this. There's karma. You

0:09

do this to other people.

0:11

>> You're [laughter]

0:12

You have listeners.

0:13

>> Has this not happened to you?

0:15

>> No.

0:15

>> Really?

0:16

>> You put a No.

0:18

>> Yeah. Unfortunately, it's happened to

0:19

me.

0:19

>> I've not had a This is your life like

0:21

this where you you play things. My wife

0:24

after my wife and this was before it

0:26

everything became viral and things like

0:27

that. That really hadn't happened at

0:29

that point. This was a long time ago. My

0:32

wife called me, called me, not texted me

0:34

on my iPhone, like none of that [ __ ]

0:36

existed. She called me and said, "Don't

0:39

you ever do something like that again."

0:42

>> Why?

0:42

>> And and I

0:43

>> Well, I'm going to play first what you

0:45

did and then we can talk about it.

0:46

Sorry, you can cover your ears.

0:49

I'm not. I'm here to confront you

0:53

because we need help from the media and

0:57

they're hurting us. And it's the idea is

1:00

>> if the indictment, let me get this

1:02

straight. If the indictment is

1:04

>> uh if the indictment is and I have seen

1:06

you say this, that crossfire reduces

1:08

everything as I said in the intro to

1:09

left, right, black, white. Well, it's

1:11

because see we're debate show. It's like

1:13

single.

1:13

>> No, no, no. That a storm. would love to

1:16

see a debate in a 24-hour day where we

1:18

have each side on as best no that would

1:20

be great and have them fight it out.

1:21

>> To do a debate would be great, but

1:24

that's like saying pro wrestling is a

1:27

show about athletic competition.

1:29

>> I I think you're a good comedian. I

1:31

think your lectures are boring. Let me

1:32

ask you let me ask you a question on the

1:34

news.

1:34

>> Now, this is theater. I mean, it's it's

1:36

obvious. How old are you?

1:38

>> 35.

1:38

>> And you wear a bow tie.

1:40

>> Yeah, I do. I do. So, I do. So, this is

1:42

>> No, no, I know. I know you're right. Let

1:44

me just go now. And listen, I'm not I'm

1:46

not suggesting that you're not you're

1:48

not a smart guy because those are not

1:49

easy to tie. But the thing is

1:52

>> that this you're doing theater when you

1:55

should be doing debate, which would be

1:57

great.

1:58

>> It's not honest. What you do is not

2:00

honest. What you do is partisan hackery.

2:04

>> You can put him on now. You're It's

2:05

okay. Yeah, it's it's safe now. We're

2:07

we're back in a safe space.

2:09

>> Yeah, it's all right. I apologize. Yeah,

2:11

>> I knew Tucker Carlson in those days and

2:14

his signal characteristic to me, the

2:16

thing I think you were picking up on

2:17

particularly about him is he treated it

2:20

all as a joke. You can go back and read

2:23

Tucker Carlson's old magazine journalism

2:25

and it's great, hilarious magazine

2:28

journalism. He's a very very good

2:29

magazine writer when he was young

2:30

>> and he went through all these, you know,

2:32

very quick transformations. He was on

2:34

MSNBC for a while. People forget that.

2:36

Um Rachel Matts, one of her early uh

2:39

breaks was that she was a regular

2:41

contributor to Tucker Carlson's show on

2:43

MSNBC. He was this kind of good times

2:45

libertarian type and he was a guy who

2:48

treated it all kind of as a game. I

2:51

guess what I will say for him now is I

2:53

don't think it's a joke to him now.

2:55

Something happened there. I think his

2:57

politics are much more serious and much

2:59

more

3:00

>> real and obviously for that much more

3:02

dangerous.

3:03

>> Humiliation happened.

3:04

>> Yeah. Yeah. I'm curious how you

3:05

understand his what what what

3:09

>> happened to him psychologically.

3:10

>> Well, I think that

3:14

and I I hate to do this to you, Ezra.

3:15

I'm going to I'm going to describe this

3:17

to you in professional wrestling terms

3:20

since that was one of the analogies that

3:21

I used on there. [snorts]

3:23

>> See, this is actually the sport I know.

3:26

>> Okay, then Ezra, you and I,

3:27

>> we're in good shape here. Kayfabe, I got

3:29

it.

3:29

>> Beautiful. So what I was complaining

3:33

about on Crossfire was kayfabe was this

3:35

idea that this is just theater and

3:37

everybody's playing a character and

3:38

nobody's blah blah blah. But the other

3:40

way to describe it for them is so

3:44

there's an establishment and then

3:46

there's the anti-establishment, right?

3:47

The disruptors and the rebels.

3:50

Tucker Carlson was establishment. He

3:52

was, you know, and he tried to be a

3:55

face. He was a heel like like Fox News.

3:58

Megan Kelly, same thing. FA face being a

4:00

good guy, heel being a bad guy.

4:01

>> That's right. So, she was kind of a

4:03

she's on the heel network, Fox, but

4:05

she's kind of the face on Fox. She's the

4:08

one that like every now and again will

4:09

say something and like the establishment

4:11

or liberals will go like, "Wow, she

4:13

actually that's empathy. That's like

4:15

that's interesting. Oh, she's not towing

4:17

a dogmatic party line." Right? So, they

4:20

decide like, "Oh, I will live amongst

4:23

the faces. I will join them. I will be a

4:25

part of the establishment." and the

4:27

establishment and the faces reject them.

4:29

They feel wrongly and with a dogmatic

4:32

litmus test and it's never good enough

4:34

and it's their intolerance that put them

4:37

in that position. So they tried to live

4:39

amongst the normies, right? And when

4:42

that blows up and creates humiliation,

4:46

the anger and bitter and returns them to

4:49

I think

4:51

their truer selves. I I prefer them the

4:54

way they are right now. I kind of dig

4:56

it. It is like,

4:59

>> explain that.

4:59

>> I'd rather someone not pretend to be

5:01

Barbie and just be who she is, which is,

5:04

I think, Ursula from The Little Mermaid.

5:07

>> See, I went from It really went from pro

5:10

wrestling to The Little Mermaid. You

5:12

know, in many ways, Ezra, I am still

5:15

stuck in the same entertainment options

5:18

that I was using when my kids were

5:19

little. And that's that's I'm I'm frozen

5:22

in that time. But but do do you get my

5:24

point about like what happened is they

5:27

view and Donald Trump in the same way.

5:30

He views that there's this world that is

5:32

excluding them and they are excluding

5:34

them purely for dogmatic and they think

5:38

they're better than me and they hold

5:40

these views that they think their [ __ ]

5:42

doesn't stink. and I stepped into that

5:46

world and and tried to, you know, be

5:48

amongst them and and they rejected that

5:50

because they're [ __ ]

5:54

and now I can just be in my own world

5:57

and be as angry and as vicious as I

6:01

think I was treated.

6:03

>> I

6:03

>> and I think that's kind of the way it

6:05

goes.

6:06

>> I think it's so interesting. I I don't

6:08

know Megan Kelly's story as well as I

6:10

know or watched Carlson and and Trump. I

6:12

think it's a very s I think it's very

6:13

similar.

6:14

>> Yeah, I'm just

6:15

>> Her moment was the I joined NBC.

6:18

>> This morning is the launch of Megan

6:19

Kelly today just about six minutes from

6:21

now.

6:22

>> Megan, good morning.

6:23

>> Good [cheering] morning.

6:25

>> Show didn't go that well. And and by the

6:26

way, in both instances after being run

6:28

out of Fox News, by the way, because she

6:31

asked hard questions of Donald Trump at

6:33

the first debate, right, she was

6:34

rejected by the right first because she

6:38

was not sufficiently pro-Trump and he

6:40

came after her and within a year

6:42

>> and that's why we're seeing that's what

6:43

I meant by she was a face. She became a

6:44

face. But so if you think about it, both

6:47

Tucker Carlson and Megan Kelly were

6:50

rejected and the reasoning behind their

6:52

rejection, I think, is still

6:54

misunderstood.

6:55

I didn't get Crossfire canceled.

6:57

Crossfire's ratings sucked and CNN

7:02

looked for a way out and that was a

7:04

convenient flash point. And by the way,

7:06

none of that had much to do, you know,

7:08

with Tucker Carlson. Anyway, person I

7:10

really didn't like there was Novak, but

7:12

he just wasn't on the show that day. And

7:14

Megan Kelly in the same thing. Her show

7:16

just wasn't connecting on NBC.

7:18

>> I'm Megan Kelly and I want to begin with

7:20

two words. I'm sorry.

7:23

You may have heard that yesterday we had

7:25

a discussion here about political

7:26

correctness and Halloween costumes

7:28

>> and then she had that moment of it was a

7:31

blackface I think comment about the

7:32

thing.

7:33

>> I defended the idea saying as long as it

7:36

as it was respectful and part of a

7:38

Halloween costume it seemed okay. Well,

7:41

I was wrong and I am sorry.

7:44

>> If her show was killing it, they'd have

7:47

found a way to forgive it. They'd have

7:48

found a way to keep her on there. They'd

7:49

have found but they used it as a

7:51

convenient excuse. Megan Kelly looks to

7:53

be parting ways with NBC. Her show Megan

7:56

Kelly Today is now cancelled.

7:58

>> The move comes 4 days after her

8:01

blackface comments that provoked a

8:03

firestorm leading to a tearful apology.

8:06

>> The chairman of NBC News condemned

8:08

Kelly's remarks during a staff town

8:10

hall. according to Variety saying there

8:12

is no place on our air or in this

8:14

workplace for them.

8:15

>> But I'm sure for her it was incredibly

8:19

painful

8:20

and felt like a cancelled because of my

8:23

viewpoints. But the truth of the matter

8:25

is NBC executives and CNN executives,

8:29

they aren't woke. They aren't any of

8:31

those things. They're [ __ ]

8:33

desperately trying to hold on to their

8:35

jobs by generating ad revenue by

8:38

whatever means necessary. And and so

8:41

that's what they got caught up on. And

8:43

by the way though, the way that it

8:45

happened

8:47

attacked them at a core level and that's

8:50

what's created that. Like I've been

8:52

cancelled a [ __ ] ton of times. But the

8:56

only reason I was canceled is like the

8:58

network executives just were like,

8:59

"Yeah, this show sucks or you're not."

9:02

But they didn't say like, "You're a bad

9:04

person and that's why we're canceling

9:06

the show." And that's what they did to

9:08

them. the industry rather than standing

9:12

up for what was really going on there,

9:14

which is you're not generating enough

9:18

revenue and interest to justify your

9:21

large contract or whatever it is. They

9:23

turned it into we're getting rid of you

9:26

for a moral failing or lapse. And that

9:32

was wrong. I I I really And that's not

9:35

Listen, I I don't care for what they do.

9:38

I don't care for their opinions, but

9:40

what happened to them

9:43

was wrong.

9:45

>> The executives are interesting here. Uh

9:47

I was thinking about this when you were

9:48

relaying that story about Roger Als.

9:50

>> Yes.

9:50

>> Cuz I there was a period of time in my

9:53

life I did a lot of MSNBC and was a a

9:55

guest host on a lot of the prime time

9:57

programs there. And so I knew the people

9:59

who ran it pretty well.

10:00

>> And what I would say about the people

10:01

who ran it was they were fundamentally

10:03

not that ideological. They were

10:04

television executives. what they cared

10:07

about and that's why Tucker Carlson had

10:08

a show and why they were so excited

10:10

about Joe Scarboro uh you know and still

10:12

and still are why recently they tried to

10:15

hire Ronald McDaniel the uh RNC chair

10:18

sort of disgraced RNC chair that didn't

10:20

end up working out due to a revolt by

10:22

people at the um network of morals

10:25

>> Roger Als is honestly ideological right

10:29

he had as he's put it he had a vision

10:30

right he had a view about how things

10:32

should be he wanted to be successful but

10:34

he also actually knew what he was trying

10:37

to achieve in the world. Those NBC

10:39

executives who brought on Megan Kelly,

10:41

it was obvious to me that that show

10:43

wasn't going to work, but they they

10:45

wanted the look of bringing on Megan

10:47

Kelly because they are not that

10:49

ideological and particularly don't want

10:50

to be seen as

10:51

>> they're lying to themselves because they

10:53

place things in a moral universe when

10:56

they really are just crass executives

11:00

who are trying to sell. Like that's the

11:02

part where I think the critique if if

11:04

there's one critique of the media from

11:06

the right that I do agree with is the

11:09

moralizing nature. You know the idea

11:12

that these media executives moralize

11:14

their position. Like there may be no

11:16

greater disparity between uh reality and

11:21

whatever idealized moral image you have

11:23

of yourselves than the Washington Post

11:25

putting on their uh uh mass head,

11:28

democracy dies in darkness. Like who the

11:31

[ __ ] do you think you are?

11:34

Like what world? You have a board up in

11:36

your room that shows like who's getting

11:38

what clicks where. Like that's just

11:41

nonsense. And this idea that I mean I

11:44

would almost welcome maybe not

11:47

necessarily a more moral component but a

11:49

component of the news media that is more

11:52

forceful uh editorially. Like Als's

11:55

greatest trick was delegitimizing the

11:59

idea of editorial authority

12:02

while exercising almost complete

12:05

editorial authority but doing it a way

12:08

that was really smart. Like there is no

12:13

uh condescension and moralizing on Fox.

12:15

It's people on a couch asking questions.

12:17

Are you worried about how many

12:19

terrorists are coming in on the border?

12:21

Do you ever worry about that? Whereas if

12:24

you turn on MSE sometimes you're like

12:26

it's like birds descending you know at

12:30

at sea on a tuna boat going that's

12:32

factually incorrect incorrect

12:37

not correct incorrect

12:39

and YOU'RE JUST LIKE I CAN'T listen to

12:41

this but that's the brilliance of it but

12:44

you know so so when I say like Megan

12:46

Kelly's right like I do believe she's

12:49

right they pretended that they had to

12:51

get rid of her out of some moral

12:54

obligation

12:56

to enlightened racism

12:59

sensibility like [ __ ] you. That is so

13:02

not what you did. If they're making

13:04

money, they're making money. And they'll

13:06

let you get away with anything. Anything

13:08

as we see. But when you ain't making

13:10

money anymore and they don't, for some

13:12

reason have the timmerity to just go,

13:14

"Yeah, you're not making us any money."

13:16

They find some pretense of your moral

13:19

failing

13:20

and yank you.

13:23

And so I get

13:25

where the where some of that anger comes

13:29

from from those folks. don't have a ton

13:32

of sympathy because I've been fired a

13:34

bunch of times too, but for the the

13:36

old-fashioned reasons of sucking.

Interactive Summary

The video discusses the shift in media personalities like Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly, moving from what was perceived as entertainment or a game to a more serious and potentially dangerous political stance. It explores the idea of 'kayfabe' in media, comparing it to professional wrestling where characters play roles. The transcript suggests that figures like Carlson and Kelly were initially part of the establishment or played certain roles (like 'heels' or 'faces') but were later rejected by the right for not being sufficiently aligned with a particular ideology, especially concerning Donald Trump. The discussion delves into how media executives, driven by revenue rather than strong ideology, sometimes use moral failings as pretexts to remove personalities whose shows are not performing well, rather than admitting a lack of success. This is contrasted with figures like Roger Ailes, who had a clear vision, while others are seen as crass executives moralizing their positions. The overall sentiment is that while the media landscape has changed, the underlying business motivations remain, and the 'cancellation' of personalities is often misconstrued.

Suggested questions

5 ready-made prompts