for breaking lockdown rules. now on bbc news. the media show: piers morgan returns. hello and welcome to the media show, our guest today is the star signing of rupert murdoch's go new signing, piers morgan and he will notjust have a show in the uk, it will be streamed in the us, it will be broadcast on sky news australia and as well is that there is a column in the new york post and there is a book deal with harpercollins as well. all of which is owned by rupert murdoch, all of which is a significant bet on one man grabbing the attention of the world. let us hear if he thinks this is about with making. how does that happen, how does a deal get thrashed out to? it was fortuitous, the whole good morning britain blow up with the megan marco thing and the free speech debate, it was all writing in the uk, but it was big in the uk and rupert happen to be in the uk and he watched it all go down. they had been toying with whether to do a new network and i think he thought if i was available, it was worth having a go. they had to get me and i had quite a few suitors, that has been well documented and as soon as rupert came knocking with his company, with the global tentacles it has and the ability to do columns, books, a crime documentary as well, it seemed to me to be an irresistible chance to go back and work for my first big mentor and also to do all the things i like doing. i also to do all the things i like doinu. . , i. also to do all the things i like doin. _ ., , y., ., ., doing. i am sure you negotiated hard, doing. i am sure you negotiated hard. how _ doing. i am sure you negotiated hard, how does _ doing. i am sure you negotiated hard, how does that _ doing. i am sure you negotiated hard, how does that work, - doing. i am sure you negotiated hard, how does that work, do . doing. i am sure you negotiated i hard, how does that work, do you doing. i am sure you negotiated - hard, how does that work, do you sit down with rupert murdoch at a table and say, i will take this much for doing this, or do your lawyers do that? i doing this, or do your lawyers do that? ., doing this, or do your lawyers do that? . , , ., , , that? i had representatives, but we had a few conversations _ that? i had representatives, but we had a few conversations and - that? i had representatives, but we had a few conversations and i - that? i had representatives, but we had a few conversations and i think| had a few conversations and i think we were basically in agreement, the kind of show that i was proposing fitted very well with what he wanted for the wider network. it is to show that defends free speech, it is a show that will uphold the pillars of democracy, in a time when society, is, i think, democracy, in a time when society, is, ithink, under democracy, in a time when society, is, i think, under more threat to free speech and freedom of expression that i have known it in my lifetime. expression that i have known it in my lifetime-— my lifetime. you have been very critical of the _ my lifetime. you have been very critical of the way _ my lifetime. you have been very critical of the way that _ my lifetime. you have been very critical of the way that you - my lifetime. you have been very critical of the way that you had l my lifetime. you have been very| critical of the way that you had to leave itv, but before that blow up, as you called it, did you have any pressure from itv previous to that walk—out we felt you could not say what you wanted? the walk-out we felt you could not say what you wanted?— walk-out we felt you could not say what you wanted? the sadness for me about it, what you wanted? the sadness for me about it. other— what you wanted? the sadness for me about it, other than _ what you wanted? the sadness for me about it, other than i _ what you wanted? the sadness for me about it, other than i was _ what you wanted? the sadness for me about it, other than i was living - about it, other than i was living doing the show and we were breaking ratings records left right and centre, including on the last, we finally beat the bbc, and they said that was a hill we would never climb. ifelt we that was a hill we would never climb. i felt we were doing exactly what we set out to do, which was me leading with very strident opinions, susanna reid, my co—presenter, having her strong opinions and creating a national debate about whatever the issues maybe. the sadness for me is that itv had always been unbelievably strong in protecting my right to express my honestly held opinions, right until the end and suddenly they lost their bottle. ., ., . bottle. hold on, the chief executive said they defended _ bottle. hold on, the chief executive said they defended you _ bottle. hold on, the chief executive said they defended you vigorously l said they defended you vigorously and there was no way we would not be absolutely not endorsing the championing freedom of speech and freedom of expression. truth? championing freedom of speech and freedom of expression.— freedom of expression. why am i sittin: freedom of expression. why am i sitting here _ freedom of expression. why am i sitting here doing _ freedom of expression. why am i sitting here doing another- freedom of expression. why am i sitting here doing another show? i freedom of expression. why am i - sitting here doing another show? itv said you chose to leave. it _ sitting here doing another show? itv said you chose to leave. it turned - said you chose to leave. it turned out that meghan _ said you chose to leave. it turned out that meghan markle - said you chose to leave. it turned out that meghan markle had - said you chose to leave. it turned i out that meghan markle had written to them the night before i was invited to apologise or leave, demanding my head on a plate. i was told, either issue a public apology for effectively disbelieving meghan markle, because i disbelieved what she told oprah winfrey or i had to give up the show which i loved. so if itv want to try and play semantics, let me be very clear, thatis semantics, let me be very clear, that is what happened and what they did not tell me and which would have been interesting to me as part of a general debate, they didn't tell me that meghan markle had personally contacted dame carolyn and i believed from what i was told used phrases like, we are both women and mothers. as if that has something to do with it. ifelt like mothers. as if that has something to do with it. i felt like the way that i was handled at the end was a shame, given how supportive itv had previously been. the? shame, given how supportive itv had previously been-— previously been. they said that they did not want — previously been. they said that they did not want you _ previously been. they said that they did not want you to _ previously been. they said that they did not want you to leave _ previously been. they said that they did not want you to leave and - previously been. they said that they did not want you to leave and they l did not want you to leave and they defended your right to free speech. they didn't. let us be clear, if they defended my right to free speech, then i would not have been asked to apologise or leave myjob. ofcom later came back and defended my right to free speech.— my right to free speech. ofcom also said, with reference _ my right to free speech. ofcom also said, with reference to _ my right to free speech. ofcom also said, with reference to some - my right to free speech. ofcom also| said, with reference to some of your statements about not believing that meghan markle had had suicidal thoughts, they said we were particularly concerned about his approach to such a serious issue and his apparent disregard for the seriousness of anyone expressing suicidal thoughts and we also heard from the charity mind saying it was disappointed and concerned at that when people share this, they need to be treated with dignity, respect and empathy. i'm sure he would agree you did not treat her with respect. i am afraid i do not _ did not treat her with respect. i am afraid i do not find _ did not treat her with respect. i am afraid i do not find her— did not treat her with respect. i —n afraid i do not find her very credible on the point that i made very forcibly on the show was, if, as she claimed, she went to two senior members of the royal household and told them she was suicidal and they said, as she put it, that she could not get any help, because it would be bad for the brand, let us have the names of those people and they should be fired. here we are over a year later, there is not a shred of evidence to support the claim, nor is there evidence to support either of the racism claims. you is there evidence to support either of the racism claims.— is there evidence to support either of the racism claims. you could have exressed of the racism claims. you could have expressed doubts _ of the racism claims. you could have expressed doubts about _ of the racism claims. you could have expressed doubts about meghan - of the racism claims. you could have . expressed doubts about meghan markle and what she was saying in a way that was more respectful of the broader issues of people having suicidal thoughts, which ofcom and perhaps even more relatively, a leading mental health charity, say they are concerned about, you do not have any concerns because my i am entitled to my opinion and i have no desire to diminish the importance of an issue like suicide or serious mental health or racism or any other issues that she touched upon in the interview. figs issues that she touched upon in the interview. �* , ., issues that she touched upon in the interview. ~ , ., ., ., , , interview. as a “ournalist, every instinct in — interview. as a journalist, every instinct in may, _ interview. as a journalist, every instinct in may, was _ interview. as a journalist, every instinct in may, was is - interview. as a journalist, every instinct in may, was is a - interview. as a journalist, every instinct in may, was is a true? l interview. as a journalist, every | instinct in may, was is a true? is what she same true and i reach the conclusion pretty quickly that it was not. if she was to produce evidence that supports her allegations and we are still waiting, then i may revise my position and i might be more sensitive, but i am afraid, when i watched it, ifelt she sensitive, but i am afraid, when i watched it, i felt she was sensitive, but i am afraid, when i watched it, ifelt she was being sensitive, but i am afraid, when i watched it, i felt she was being an actress, spinning yarn after yarn, to cause enormous damage to our royal family and the institution of the monarchy and i was not going to have it. ., , ., ., the monarchy and i was not going to have it. ., , ., . . the monarchy and i was not going to have it. ., . ., , have it. now you have a different show, have it. now you have a different show. you're _ have it. now you have a different show. you're on _ have it. now you have a different show, you're on talk— have it. now you have a different show, you're on talk tv, - have it. now you have a different show, you're on talk tv, piers i show, you're on talk tv, piers morgan uncensored. you have said it is to cancel those who have been cancelled, who is coming on, who cannot get into the media elsewhere? it is more of an issue for me, the council culture issue is not about... council culture issue is not about- - -— council culture issue is not about... ._, council culture issue is not about... ~ ., ., ., [m about... who are you getting on? i'm not auoin about... who are you getting on? i'm not going to — about... who are you getting on? i'm not going to tell— about... who are you getting on? i'm not going to tell you. _ about... who are you getting on? i'm not going to tell you. who _ about... who are you getting on? i'm not going to tell you. who is - not going to tell you. who is failin: not going to tell you. who is failing to _ not going to tell you. who is failing to get _ not going to tell you. who is failing to get access - not going to tell you. who is failing to get access to - failing to get access to high—profile media that you would like to have a new programme. i would love to get jk rowling like to have a new programme. i would love to getjk rowling on, who has been appallingly vilified and there has been a massive attempt to cancel her, it has been unsuccessful, because she is extremely wealthy, but the abuse that has been meted out to herfor effectively defending the rights of women has been a disgrace. i would love to getjk rowling on. irlat love to get jk rowling on. not surel love to getjk rowling on. not surely suggesting that if love to getjk rowling on. not surely suggesting that iij rowling and her representatives contacted a of high—profile media, they would not say... of high-profile media, they would not sa . ., of high-profile media, they would notsa ,, ., . ., ., not say... she had lunch at a cafe in london — not say. .. she had lunch at a cafe in london last— not say... she had lunch at a cafe in london last week, _ not say... she had lunch at a cafe in london last week, with - not say... she had lunch at a cafe in london last week, with a - not say... she had lunch at a cafe| in london last week, with a bunch not say... she had lunch at a cafe i in london last week, with a bunch of women, many of whom have been cancel, authors, university professors... cancel, authors, university professors. . ._ cancel, authors, university professors. . . professor you're talkinu professors. . . professor you're talking about is _ professors. . . professor you're talking about is kathleen - professors... professor you're l talking about is kathleen scott, professors... professor you're - talking about is kathleen scott, we can discuss how she was treated, but within the context of the media... that is the wrong context. irate within the context of the media... that is the wrong context.- that is the wrong context. we are here on media _ that is the wrong context. we are here on media show. _ that is the wrong context. we are here on media show. it _ that is the wrong context. we are here on media show. it is - that is the wrong context. we are here on media show. it is about i that is the wrong context. we are l here on media show. it is about two --eole like here on media show. it is about two people like kathleen _ here on media show. it is about two people like kathleen lose _ here on media show. it is about two people like kathleen lose their- here on media show. it is about two people like kathleen lose theirjobs| people like kathleen lose theirjobs for having held opinions and is that right in a democratic society and the answer is yes. although right in a democratic society and the answer is yes. althouthk rowling is wealthy enough to sustain the barrage, we have to ask ourselves, is this actually what we want in a democracy. do we want to see university professors who hold honest views, which in my view are not remotely contentious, do we want to see them driven out of theirjobs ljy to see them driven out of theirjobs by a bunch of students? irate to see them driven out of their “obs by a bunch of students?�* to see them driven out of their “obs by a bunch of students? we know that there are limits _ by a bunch of students? we know that there are limits to _ by a bunch of students? we know that there are limits to free _ by a bunch of students? we know that there are limits to free speech - by a bunch of students? we know that there are limits to free speech in - there are limits to free speech in any society, mainly around, i have a quote, you should not be ashamed or cancelled for having an opinion unless you're genuinely spewing hateful and bigoted stuff and i am interested on your programme, where is the line drawn. you have a guest on who suggest that vaccinations against cover 19 do not work? yes. on who suggest that vaccinations against cover 19 do not work? yes, i would want — against cover 19 do not work? yes, i would want to _ against cover 19 do not work? yes, i would want to expose _ against cover 19 do not work? yes, i would want to expose that _ against cover 19 do not work? yes, i would want to expose that process l would want to expose that process and i think it has been extremely dangerous. i would want to expose them with facts, i would want to let these people, there are a lot of people that think this and they have been encouraged to think it by a lot of nonsense on the internet, i would let them set out their stall, tell me where they have heard this, why they believe this, and then damn them with facts, that is how a democracy should function. if you let these kind of debates purely operate online, that is where the trouble starts. i do believe on shining a light on news like that, but when i get someone on who preached racial hatred towards people and wanted to cause violent conduct towards any minority group, no i would not. there are obvious limitations about where free speech leads and in which has the strongest free speech the world, you cannot run into theatres and shout, fire. there are logical limits. i want to understand this, let us take the drug ivermectin, which you will be aware of and that some people have been treating it as a treatment for covid. would you put someone on eric to challenge them on that? jae covid. would you put someone on eric to challenge them on that?— to challenge them on that? joe rogan did that on his — to challenge them on that? joe rogan did that on his show— to challenge them on that? joe rogan did that on his show and _ to challenge them on that? joe rogan did that on his show and it _ to challenge them on that? joe rogan did that on his show and it was - did that on his show and it was interesting, he talked to a doctor from cnn and it was an interesting debate about which of these theories, which have got huge followings now, around the world, during the pandemic, which of them have any merit or not. that during the pandemic, which of them have any merit or not.— have any merit or not. at which oint have any merit or not. at which point does _ have any merit or not. at which point does become _ have any merit or not. at which point does become an - have any merit or not. at which - point does become an irresponsible act? ah. point does become an irresponsible act? �* ., ., point does become an irresponsible act? ., ., , point does become an irresponsible act? ., ., . ., act? a lot of people criticise the bbc for refusing _ act? a lot of people criticise the bbc for refusing to _ act? a lot of people criticise the bbc for refusing to ever- act? a lot of people criticise the bbc for refusing to ever go - act? a lot of people criticise the | bbc for refusing to ever go down these roads have debate, because they believe they have the truth and yet we know in the pandemic that scientists have changed their own minds many times, whether it be about the efficacy of masks, whether it is about the ability of vaccinations, i have changed my view about coronavirus many times during the pandemic. you about coronavirus many times during the pandemic— the pandemic. you have seen the concern about _ the pandemic. you have seen the concern about joe _ the pandemic. you have seen the concern about joe rogan - the pandemic. you have seen the concern about joe rogan and - the pandemic. you have seen the concern about joe rogan and the| concern aboutjoe rogan and the misinformation around covid, but more broadly, if those pieces of information are not factually true are not adequately challenge, they then just get the platform without any of the downside. i then just get the platform without any of the downside.— any of the downside. i intend to challen . e any of the downside. i intend to challenge them _ any