Long time to congress come. The selfradicalized or small groups who through the interin the become radicalized and then decide to act. And what we have seen is after they do radicalize themselves, they act pretty quickly. So its difficult to predict who is going to react to the thousands or hundreds of thousands of tweets that come out and we conclude with charlies regular sment with steve sharsman, c. E. O. Of blackstone with three students of the inaugural class of schwarzman scholars. I have learned just as a person to have good lifetime subbing cease you have to have unique experiences and unusual understanding of what is going on. Not just simply academic input. Because the academic input is great at all the places where they are. So this is something where when you finish this program, academics will be excellent with you what you are getting is a unique look at a unique country. Toll politics and the media, former police chitioner commissioner ray kelly and steve schwarzman. Rose funding for charlie rose is provided by the following and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and Information Services worldwide. Captioning sponsored by Rose Communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. Good evening, im Andrew Ross Sorkin of the New York Times and cnbc. It is my privilege to be filling in for charlie rose tonight who is on assignment. The medias coverage of the president ial campaign has been a topic of interest throughout the primary and general election season. Donald trumps handling of the press was no doubt a decisive factor in his path to securing the republican nomination. This week Hillary Clintons health is now the latest source of rampant speculation after delay in revealing she had pneumonia. Brian stelter is the host of cnns reliable sources which examines the worlds top media sorses each monday. From Los Angeles Ben schapiro, columnist, author and editor in chief of the daily wire, formerly a top editor at Breitbart News and im pleased to have both with me. Brian, let me start with you. And let me start with the issue of Hillary Clintons health. There was a lot of speculation about Hillary Clintons health in the news med why prior to the revelation of these images, prior to her disclsure about pneumonia. You called some of the spejlation speculation back then reckless. You called trump hannity a reckless. Now that this news is out there was it still reckless. Some of the figures feel vindicated today, baskets are a popular phrase, lets use baskets for this. There say basket of legitimate questioning about Hillary Clintons health. Some conservative commentators fit into that basket. They are right to wonder about her health in some cases. Then there is this other basket, the truly deplorable basket. Sean hannity fit nooses it, so does rush limbaugh, alex jones and others. These are people who bring up rumors an innuendo about her health and have been doing it for years. Im not saying hannity or limbaugh fit into these, some of these figures want her to be sick. They want her to be dying. They want her to be on her death bed. It is wishful thinking. That is some of this bs that is on the web, on facebook. That is the problem with media is this stuff then pop lates our facebook feeds and twitter feeds and become this innuendo that we dont just see on the front page of the National Enquirer which is an offender here, but also seeps into the public discourse. That is why i think the hannity ares of the world are responsible. Do you think the quote unquote Mainstream Media should have been asking questions about her health before . I think the Mainstream Media was asking those questions. It wasnt necessarily all broadcast, right, but i do think many reporters had been questioning her health. Especially with her coughing fits and things like that. En she was diagnosed withkeabout pneumonia, the reporters did not know until sunday. Partly that is because he campaign kept it a secret and partly its because its very hard to get inside the innercircle of the campaign. Maybe on saturday and sunday morning reporters should have been trying harder to get that information but st disturbing the campaign withheld that and disturbing the campaign kept the press in the dark for 90 minutes when she left the 9 11 memorial. You are listening to brian here. And im curious, im curious where you land on this issue. When it comes to the Media Coverage of this, no, i dont think the media was asking the appropriate questions about Hillary Clintons health, five days ago, sick days ago asking why we shouldnt be ask any question, why you are going to release your health records, a consist ent record of hacking this much, none of that is il legitimate. I agree with brian that baseless speculation these videos that go around, that she has park insons or ms all is nonsense. Exactly. You know, having doctors on the air to try and diagnose hillary based on the fact that there is tape of her coughing is silliness. My wife say doctor and currently in residency. She wouldnt be diagnosing people based on 30 second. What is the appropriate way to do it. That is deplorable behavior. The difference between reporter and rumormongering, there is too much wishful thinking, rumormongering, what we need is less guessing and more reporting. This is jim rudenberg in the New York Times writes a colume trump is test the norms of objectivity in journalism. He says balance has been on vacation since mr. Trump stepped on to his golden trump escalator last year to announce his candidacy. Democrats say that trump has gotten 2 billion in free advertising, free media. Free coverage. Republicans say that mr. Trump has gone unchallenged. And im going to go to ben first. Do you think there is true and utter bias in the media . Yeah, i mean i think there is bias in two directions. Do you think it is a conscience buoys. Yes, obviously there is conscience bias in the media and the general identified unconscious bias most of the people in the Mainstream Media are people who are democrats and will vote for Hillary Clinton come november. And they dont reveal that before they go on air. So yes, unconscious bis has an impact on how people perceive these particular issues. Cnn, msnbc have run chie rones back checking trump thrks is another a cry ron on cnn or Fact Checking clinton. That is bias in one direction. In the other direction, this is true for the Trump Campaign there has been an unconscious lowering of the standard of decent we maf behavior for trump in the sense that if donald trump shows up in mexico and doesnt really do anything supremely note worthy, this is considered a major victory for his campaign. If he goes into a debate with clinton and doesnt act like an insane loon bag that will be a big win for him. There is a lowering of the standard because the new standard for normal campaigning has been left behind. If they held trump to mitt romneys standards, there is no way he would have gotten nearly this far. Do you think the med media is truly down the middle, if you will. There is a complicated definition of fair innocence this election. Not all lies or misstatements are created equal. Sometimes you look at the kie ron, the banner on the bottom of the screen, it may not be Fact Checking that Hillary Clinton lied because that lie may be more complicated, more nuanced, may take a lot more explanation versus some of what trump has said. I think in this election fairness does not mean 50 50 coverage of each candidate and 50 50 treatment. These candidates are not equal. They are not even in that way. And i think ben is right. There has been a lower standard of treatment for donald trump. There is a lower expectation for him among many members of the media. I always hate to talk too broadly about this because. Why is that. Why what . Why do you think then, if you believe that donald trump has gone unchallenged, why do you think that is the case. I think he has been challenged many times. But the treatment is different for a couple of different reasons. Number one, he has been up until recently very accessible to Television Networks in particular. At the same time simultaneously running a tvdriven campaign, media driven campaign and antimedia campaign. This is the definition of having it both ways. He attacks the press on a daily basis. And there are reasons to think he is a true threat, there are reasons to think he is a true threat to press freedom even though he recently relaxed his so called black list of some news outlets am that is all true. At the same time he has been very accessible, answers lots of questions. And to the extent that people think that he has gone unchallenged, it is because of his accessibility he has gone unchallenged. I think it is because of the sat raise, the saturated news environment we live in. You may read a hundred stories where it feels like trump is being let off the hook where it seems like the press is going easy on trump. A hundred other stories on your facebook feed where he is being severely screut niezed, rigorously covered. We live in a choose your own adventure, choose your own news environment which makes it increasingly difficult for the audience at home to get to the kreelt of the situation. Im assuming that the assertion that there is balance in the coverage of trump or that he has gorch unchallenged you will disagree with. I wildly disagree with that. He has gone challenged on virtually everything. The problem with trump is he gives ten different positions, different positions for the same issue. And so it makes it difficult for anybody to finally get down to what does he actually believe about something because he will shift on a dime and we have seen him do this on debate, this is a challenge for the media. But the issue that Hillary Clinton gets off scott dpree because her scandals are too compli complicated. They are not complicated at all. Im talking about the banners on the bottom of the screen. She will say things like i never had classified material on my server and the fbi said no, you did have classified material on your server. The kie ron underneath said Clinton Colin no classified material on my server and there is no parenthesis that says not true but they will do that with trump all the time. This sort of quawsi, you know, evenhanded treatment t doesnt really exist. Trump is always perceived to be fibbing. And sometimes thats true. A lot of the time he is fibbing. With hillary she is always perceived to be telling the truth and then later if it turns out she is lying the media retroactively rushed to coverage, like with the health situation, with the email server situation. For months all we heard about the email server was it wasnt a big deal until the fbi said it was. I dont know what shows you were watching. What i hear sometimes is the victimization narrative from conservatives. I would point out there are many liberals who are equally frustrated by News Coverage this year. Im interested andrew in how much anxiety and fear there is outright fear among liberals about the prospect of a donald trump candidacy and how that is being, theyre taking that out on the media in many cases. Let me ask you this. Both of you have talked about this issue of Fact Checking. And i wonder how you feel or what you feel the role of the journalist is supposed to be. We have a series of debates coming up. Chris wallace from fox news is going to be one of those moderators. He recently said truth squatting was not his responsibility, that he didnt see the idea of fact check on the fly being something that he should be doing, it is a show dont tell approach. What do you think the role of the journalist is supposed to be when it comes to these upcoming debates. We work for the viewer at home. We work for the reader who is reading our work. To the extent that the viewer is misinformed by a candidate, the moderator needs to help the audience understand what the truth is. Sometimes that can mean going to the other candidate and making sure the other candidate rebuts it, sometimes with a carefully crafted followup question, as you do on cnbc. The followup question can be the fact check. But sometimes i think the moderator will have to step in and explain what the facts are. The reality is not all lies are created equally. Sometimes it is very hard to fact check what a great story. Is but some stories are black and white. That is why donald trump is a unique challenge. Could you argue set biggest journalistic challenge of this debated decade. Its not clinton should be let off scottfree, she shouldnt be. She does make misstatements. Trump is uniquely challenging. You add clinton to the stage, this is the hardest task the moderator have faced in modern times within the role of a journalist, the responsibilities as the debates approach us. The role of the journalist in this case when it comes to debates is asking the followup questions. A lot of the Fact Checkers out there including organizations like fact check. Org that do have a bias an where they will simply grant certain amounts of credibility to candidates based on the political appeal of those candidates or political leanings of those candidates. Its dangerous to me to vay moderator up there who says donald trump what you are saying about Vladimir Putin isnt true. Hillary clinton what you are saying about your emails is or isnt truement because there ar many interpretations, unfortunately, of a lot of these issues. But it would be good to be able to say donald you werent saying this a year here say clip you of you not saying it a year ago. Lets stop pretending it is that difficult a job it really isnt. We have seen these candidates for a year it isnt in the sense that we know what they are going to say. If you have been watching trump for a year, you predict what he will say before he says it and clinton is absolutely predictable. So if you know what they are going to say you should have a followup prepared for every question if they say what you think they are go to. If the pod raters dont step in i would say the Television Networks, major papers have a real responsibility even more than normal to provide Fact Checking right after the debates. Then of course it on the viewers at home, the readers at home to actually check, followup, to lyully actually look into the information ourselves. We are so devided, so on our own sides right now as tribes, but the information is out there if we want it. There is more Information Available than ever before. But we have to work harder to access it. Let me ask you a question about the mainstream meeting. I am looking at you because you look at cnn. Mainstream media. There is an argument that as been made that the Mainstream Media has not been aggressively covering Hillary Clinton. And that much of the most aggressive coverage is actually emanated from some of what might be described as a conservative or right wing media, im thinking of organizations like Judicial Watch which freedom of information requests for some of her emails, for example. Do you think that is a fair assertion . I think to some degree it is. That is a valuable part of the media ecosystem. It we are better off to have outlets that are explicitly conservative, like fox news and others. We will also better off to have liberal outlets like salon and places like that. Were better off to have that diverse and that variety. But i would point out the New York Times assigned amy chosic years ago, cnn assigned to years ago and there have been thorough investigations from Mainstream Media. There is a distinction between outlets that come with a point of view like fox news and outlets that try not to come with a point of view. Ben, im assuming you think nobody comes without a point of view. Well, i mean i think obviously trying to separate, using brians language, fox news into the opinionated basket and cnn into the nonopinionated basket, anybody who objectively views both understands will is an editorial bent to the networks. When it comes to let a thousand flowers bloom, obviously i agree. I would point out the distinction. You sorlt of shifted away from the fact the Judicial Watchers name, they have done most of the heavy lifting on a lot of the clinton documentation here. Judicial watch is not a media outlet it is a 501c3 organization that gets the deums from the federal government and why the Washington Post wasnt doing that or the New York Times or you as cnn werent doing that is a question that really ought to be looked at. Where i disagree with you is Judicial Watch is a media outlet. All of these groups are Media Outlets. I would also say Trumps Campaign and Clinton Campaign are Media Outlets. Buds feed pointed out, all these outlets are Media Outlets but we should take that seriously. That has been a change in our medio ecosystem. That all of these outlets, fon profits, companies are Media Outlets. Again, its harder for the audience at home, it puts more of the onus on us to sort through it all. But the fact is Judicial Watch, the way it works because i know the folks there, if they actually receive documents from a foyer request it is not lik