October 18, 2024

♪ >>> HELLO, EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO "AMANPOUR & CO." HERE'S WHAT'S COMING UP.

>> IT'S A MAJOR ACHIEVEMENT.

AND IT OPENS A MAJOR OPPORTUNITY FOR PROGRESS.

>> WITH HAMAS LEADER DEAD, IS AN END TO THE WAR IN GAZA ANY CLOSER?

I ASKED FORMER HOSTAGE NEGOTIATOR.

>>> THEN -- >> THERE'S NEVER BEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS AT THIS MAGNITUDE AND QUALITY.

>> "THE APPRENTICE," THE FILM THAT CHARTS THE RISE OF A TRUTH-CHALLENGED DONALD TRUMP.

>>> PLUS WEB OF LIES, TROUBLING TRENDS IN THE WORLD OF MISINFORMATION.

ALSO AHEAD.

>> THAT'S WHAT WE SIRECEIVED FR WOMEN AROUND THE WORLD, INCREDIBLY HONEST AND OPEN AND RAW AND BRAVE.

REVELATORY.

>> AWARD WINNING ACTOR GILLIAN ANDERSON TELLS ME WHY SHE'S SHARING SEXUAL FANTASIES IN HER NEW BOOK, "WANT."

♪ >>> "AMANPOUR & CO." IS MADE POSSIBLE BY -- THE ANDERSON FAMILY ENDOWMENT JIM ATTWOOD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS CANDACE KING WEIR THE SYLVIA A.

AND SIMON B. POYTA PROGRAMING ENDOWMENT TO FIGHT ANTISEMITISM THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF LEILA AND MICKEY STRAUS MARK J. BLECHNER THE FILOMEN M. D'AGOSTINO FOUNDATION SETON J. MELVIN THE PETER G. PETERSON AND JOAN GANZ COONEY FUND CHARLES ROSENBLUM KOO AND PATRICIA YUEN, COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITIES BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG JEFFREY KATZ AND BETH ROGERS AND BY CONTRIBUTIONS TO YOUR PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

THANK YOU.

>>> WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM, EVERYONE.

I'M SITTING IN FOR CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR.

MAKE THIS MOMENT AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEEK A PATH TO PEACE.

THAT IS THE MESSAGE U.S. PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN SAYS HE'S GIVEN TO ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU AFTER THE KILLING OF HAMAS LEADER YAHYA SINWAR.

MANY ARE WATCHING HOW HIS DEATH COULD INFLUENCE THE COURSE OF THE YEAR.

ISRAEL HAS NOT SHOW SIGNS OF CHANGING TACKS.

THE TASK IS NOT YET COMPLETE, REFERENCING THE NEED TO SECURE THE RETURN OF MORE THAN 100 HOSTAGES IN GAZA.

TO UNDERSTAND WHAT SINWAR'S DEATH MEANS AND WHAT HAMAS MIGHT DO NEXT, I'M JOINED BY A LONG-TIME HOSTAGE NEGOTIATOR JOINING US FROM MADRID.

WELCOME BACK TO THE PROGRAM, YOU'VE BEEN A REFERENCE AND EXPERT VOICE THROUGHOUT THIS HORRIFIC YEAR SINCE OCTOBER 7th.

THE MASTERMIND OF THE ATTACKS IS NOW DEAD.

I'M WONDERING HOW THIS FACTORS INTO WHERE YOU SEE THE PATH TO A POTENTIAL CEASEFIRE AND HOSTAGE RELEASE DEAL.

>> IT IS A MOMENT OF OPPORTUNITY, I HOPE.

BUT IT COULD ALSO BE A DIRE MOMENT FOR THE FUTURE OF THESE HOSTAGES.

THERE IS A RUMOR, SPREAD BY HAMAS, THAT ORDERS WERE GIVEN TO THE PEOPLE HOLDING HOSTAGES, SHOULD HE BE KILLED, THEY SHOULD KILL THE REMAINING HOSTAGES.

WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S TRUE.

BUT IT IS A MOMENT OF OPPORTUNITY AND I APPEALED TO THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT TO SPREAD LEAFLETS AROUND THE GAZA STRIP FROM THE AIR SAYING ANYONE HOLDING A HOSTAGE AND WHO IS WILLING TO GIVE THEM UP WILL BE GRANTED SAFE PASSAGE FOR THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILIES OUT OF GAZA WITH A BUNDLE OF MONEY TO START A NEW LIFE SOMEWHERE ELSE.

IT MIGHT BE A WAY TO SAVE SOME OF THE HOSTAGES.

AND I CALL ON THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT TO NOTIFY EGYPT AND QATAR THEY'RE WILLING TO IMMEDIATELY RENEW NEGOTIATIONS, NOT ON THE DEAL ON THE TABLE BUT THE DEAL THAT HAMAS TOLD ME THEY WOULD ACCEPT, THREE-WEEK DEAL TO END THE WAR, FREE THE HOSTAGES AND RELEASE PALESTINIAN PRISONERS.

AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY'RE WILLING TO GIVE UP GOVERNMENTAL CONTROL OVER GAZA AS WELL TO A TECHNOCRATIC GOVERNMENT THEY'RE NOT PART OF.

>> THIS DEAL THAT HAMAS IS WILLING TO SIGN ON, WAS THAT SIGNED BY SINWAR HIMSELF?

THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION UP IN UNTIL HIS DEATH SAID HE WAS THE BIGGEST IMPEDIMENT, AT THIS POINT, OF LATE, FOR A PEACE DEAL.

>> RIGHT.

I HEARD FROM TWO DIFFERENT HAMAS SOURCES, TWO MEMBERS OF THE POLITICAL BUREAU OF HAMAS, ONE A MEMBER OF THE NEGOTIATING TEAM, THAT THE ENTIRE LEADERSHIP STOOD BEHIND THIS DEAL.

THE PROBLEM WAS THEY WERE NOT WILLING TO SAY IT.

AS HAMAS NEGOTIATES, I KNOW FROM 18 YEARS OF NEGOTIATING WITH THEM.

ANYTHING THEY PRESENT THAT IS SEEN BY THEMSELVES AS A CONCESSION WEAKENS THEIR POSITION IN NEGOTIATIONS.

WE'VE BEEN STUCK FOR A MONTH, A DEAL ON THE TABLE, PRESIDENT BIDEN AND HIS EMISSARY HAVE SEEN IT, AND BILL BURNS, HEAD OF THE CIA, PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL, HEADS OF THE INTELLIGENCE IN EGYPT AND QATAR KNOW IT'S BEEN ON THE TABLE BUT IT'S BEEN ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO GET VERIFICATION ON IT.

I HOPE THE KILLING OF SINWAR WILL BE A TURNING POINT AND THE HAMAS LEADERSHIP, MOSTLY ABROAD NOW, WILL MAKE THE DECISION TO END THE WAR.

AND NOW NETANYAHU HAS TO MAKE IT HIS POSITION TO DECLARE VICTORY AND BRING THE HOSTAGES HOME.

>> SINCE THE KILLING OF SINWAR, THE REMAINING FIGUREHEAD STILL IN GAZA, HIS BROTHER MOHAMMED OVERSEES THE MILITARY AND THE REST OF THE LEADERSHIP ARE OUTSIDE THE COUNTRY, IN QATAR, MANY OF THEM.

SINWAR'S DEPUTY INCLUDED.

DO YOU THINK ANY OF THESE THREE MEN ARE IN POSITION TO BE MORE FLEXIBLE ABOUT NEGOTIATING AT THIS POINT, COMING UP AND AGREEING TO A DEAL THAT SEES THE WAR STOPPING AND HOSTAGES COMING HOPE?

>> THERE ARE STILL MEMBERS OF THE HAMAS LEADERSHIP IN GAZA NOT WELL KNOWN TO THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY.

AND MOHAMMED SINWAR IS IN CHARGE OF MILITARY OPERATIONS, NOT A POLITICAL LEADER.

SO HE WON'T HAVE A SAY IN THE DECISION.

THE LEADERSHIP IN DOHA, ISTANBUL AND BEIRUT HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION IF HAMAS IS GOING TO SURVIVE AS PART OF THE FRAMEWORK OF THE PALESTINIAN MOVEMENT.

THIS IS A DECISION THEY NEED TO MAKE NOW THE MILITARY STRUGGLE IS OVER.

HOPEFULLY THEY CAN TRANSFORM INTO A NONMILITARY POLITICAL PARTY WITHIN THE PALESTINIAN ARENA.

IF THEY MAKE AN AGREEMENT WITH ISRAEL, DO THEY HAVE THE POWER TO ENFORCE IT IN GAZA?

CAN THEY ENSURE THE HOSTAGES CAN BE RELEASED?

THAT IS NOT KNOWN.

IT WILL BE A TEST ONCE AN AGREEMENT IS REACHED AND WE'LL SEE IF THE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO RELEASE THE HOSTAGES OR NOT.

ISRAEL WILL HAVE TO PAY A PRICE AS WELL, RELEASE PALESTINIAN PRISONERS.

THIS WILL BE THE QUID PRO QUO HERE TESTED IN REALTIME AS ISRAEL RELEASES PRISONERS IF HAMAS RELEASES HOSTAGES.

THEN IF THE WAR ENDS.

WITHOUT ENDING THE WAR, THIS WON'T COME TO A PRETTY PICTURE EITHER.

>> YOU TALK ABOUT THE PRICE THAT ISRAEL WILL STILL HAVE TO PAY.

WE KNOW SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE WAR PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU LAID OUT GOALS MANY VIEWED AS UNATTAINABLE AND UNREALISTIC.

OVERALL VICTORY.

KILLING YAYHA SINWAR IS RIGHT UP THERE.

BUT RELEASING PALESTINIAN PRISONERS DOES NOT TO ME, IN THE WAY WE'RE COVERING HIS GOVERNMENT, ESPECIALLY THE FAR-RIGHT MEMBERS, THAT DOES NOT SUGGEST A VICTORY TO THEM.

DO YOU THINK THIS IS SOMETHING HE WOULD ULTIMATELY AGREE TO?

>> I DON'T THINK HE HAS A CHOICE IF HE'S REALLY INTERESTED IN BRINGING THE ISRAELI HOSTAGES HOME.

MANY PEOPLE IN ISRAEL BELIEVE HE'S PUT THEM SECOND OR THIRD PLACE IN HIS OVERALL GOALS, WITH HIS PRIMARY GOAL POLITICAL SURVIVAL.

ENDING THE WAR FOR NET ANYAHU I CHALLENGING BECAUSE THERE WILL BE AN INQUIRY ON WHAT HAPPENED OCTOBER 7th AND SINCE.

HE'S SPIKING IN THE POLLS BECAUSE OF THE MILITARY SUCCESSES IN LEBANON AND KILLING OF SINWAR, THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL DON'T FORGET WHAT HAPPENED ON THE THEY HOLD NETANYAHU RESPONSIBLE.

IT'S NOT ABOUT VICTORY BUT ABOUT HIS ABILITY TO STAY IN POWER.

THERE WILL BE NO DEAL WITH HAMAS WITHOUT ENDING THE WAR AND RELEASING PALESTINIAN PRISONERS.

HAMAS, WHILE SEVERELY WEAKENED, HAVE THE ABILITY TO ROUTINELY KILL ISRAELI SOLDIERS EVERY DAY.

WHAT IS THE PRICE THAT ISRAEL ISSINIS WILLING TO PAY TO STAY IN GAZA.

WHAT HAPPENS TO THE ETHOS OF ISRAEL, WE DON'T LEAVE PEOPLE BEHIND.

IF THEY DO, IT'S A BLOW TO ISRAELI SOCIETY I DON'T BELIEVE THEY CAN FULLY RECOVER.

>> I WAS TAKEN BY A CONSTANT THEME I WOULD HEAR SPEAKING WITH ISRAELIS, GOING TO ISRAEL SINCE OCTOBER 7th, THAT THE COUNTRY CANNOT HEAL UNTIL THE HOSTAGES ARE BROUGHT HOME, THERE'S RESOLUTION HERE.

A YEAR HAS PASSED.

AND MORE.

AND NOW WE'VE SEEN THE WAR ONLY EXPAND.

DO YOU THINK THAT THAT SAME LINE OF THINKING EXISTS FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNTRY AT THIS POINT?

>> I THINK IT DOES AND THE POLLS SPEAK TO THAT AS WELL.

THERE'S VERY MUCH A SENSE IN ISRAEL SINCE OCTOBER 7th WE'RE A VERY SAD COUNTRY.

THERE IS NO ONE YOU CAN ASK THE SI SIMPLE QUESTION OF HOW ARE YOU WITHOUT PEOPLE STOPPING TO THINK HOW TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.

WE'RE ALL IN PAIN, TRAUMA, STILL IN SHOCK FROM OCTOBER 7th, AND THE HEALING PROCESS WILL ONLY BEGIN WHEN THE HOSTAGE CAT CATASTROPHE IS FINISHED AND PEOPLE ARE BROUGHT HOME AND TAKEN CARE OF.

SERIOUS THERAPY.

THEN WE'LL BE POSTTRAUMATIC, BUT NOW WE'RE DEEP IN THE TRAUMA.

>> THANKS FOR JOINING US.

>>> AS ELECTION DAY LOOMS, THERE IS ONE FILM THAT FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP DOESN'T WANT YOU TO SEE.

"THE APPRENTICE" CHARTED HIS RISE UNDER THE TUTELAGE OF NOTORIOUS LAWYER AND FIXER, ROY COHN.

TRUMP HAS ATTACKED IT AS A DISGUSTING HATCHET JOB.

CHRISTIANE SAT DOWN WITH THE DIRECTOR.

>> WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM.

>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.

>> WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT YOUR FILM "THE APPRENTICE," A MOVIE BUT ALSO A POLITICAL MINEFIELD.

FIRST IT'S THE STORY OF DONALD TRUMP'S BEGINNINGS, WAY BEFORE HE HAD THE PRESIDENCY IN HIS EYE.

TAKES PLACE BETWEEN 1973 AND 1986.

WHY DID YOU WANT TO DO THIS MOVIE?

>> EVERYONE HAS AN OPINION, EVERYONE THINKS THEY KNOW HIM.

HE'S A VERY POLARIZING FIGURE.

IT'S EXCITING TO DIVE BACK AND SAY OH, HE WAS NOT THE PERSON YOU THINK HE WAS.

AND HE HAS GONE THROUGH A MAJOR TRANSFORMATION.

LOOK AT THAT, THE COLORFUL '70s AND '80s NEW YORK WITH LARGER THAN LIFE CHARACTERS.

ALSO AS AN OUTSIDER TO UNITED STATES AND AMERICAN SOCIETY, THAT'S MY CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE POWER STRUCTURE OF AMERICA, THE LEGAL STRUCTURE AND SOCIAL DARWINISM THAT HAS CREATED SOME OF THIS.

>> WHAT WOULD YOU DESCRIBE HIM AS AT THE TIME OF THIS FILM, WHEN IT'S SET IN.

HE'S NOT THE CHARACTER HE IS NOW.

WHAT WAS HE THEN?

>> A STRIVER, A YOUNG MAN WHO WANTED TO BECOME SOMEBODY, DO SOMETHING.

AND WASN'T EXACTLY OBVIOUS WHAT TO BECOME AND DO.

BUT HE WANTED TO ASCEND.

HE WAS AN ASCENDER LOOKING FOR A PURPOSE AND PLACE.

OBVIOUSLY COMES FROM MONEY, HIS DAD WAS IMMENSELY WEALTHY.

THEY WERE IN BROOKLYN AND QUEENS, DIDN'T HAVE THE MANHATTAN SOCIAL CONNECTIONS AND THAT'S WHERE HE WANTED TO BE.

>> HE WANTED TO PROVE TO HIS FATHER HE COULD BE AS GOOD A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER AS HIS FATHER.

>> EXACTLY.

>> REASON IT'S CALLED "THE APPRENTICE" IS BECAUSE HE'S APPRENTICED TO A PROMINENT LAWYER, MANHATTANITE FAMOUS IN THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION AND THE McCARTHY HEARINGS, VERY EXTREME, VERY GOOD LAWYER, VERY, VERY RIGHT WING, WHO PROFESSED ALWAYS HIS MAJOR CLIENT WAS AMERICA.

BUT I WANT TO PLAY THIS CLIP.

IT IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT THE WRITER SHERMAN LEARNED WHAT WE KNOW AS TRUMPISM.

>> DON'T ALWAYS WIN.

FIRST RULE, ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK.

>> MAYBE IN THE CITY, IN THE COUNTRY, IN THE WORLD.

>> RULE TWO, ADMIT NOTHING, DENY EVERYTHING.

>> NEVER BEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS OF THIS MAGNITUDE.

CHEESEBALLS OVER HERE.

WHAT DO YOU DO?

WANT ONE?

>> NO, LOOKS TOTALLY DISGUSTING.

RULE THREE, NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS, CLAIM VICTORY, NEVER ADMIT DEFEAT.

>> YOU HAVE TO BE WILLING TO DO ANYTHING TO ANYONE TO WIN.

>> SO THE THREE RULES ARE BROKEN UP WITH SCENES AT MUSIC.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>> BUT DENY, DENY, DENY, ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK, AND NEVER EVER ADMIT DEFEAT.

YOU CAN TAKE THAT AS STRAIGHT LINE FROM THERE TO JANUARY 6.

>> IF REALITY WORKS FOR YOU, MANIPULATE IT.

IF IT DOESN'T WORK FOR YOU, MANUFACTURE THE REALITY YOU NEED.

>> GABRIEL SHERMAN WHO WROTE THE SCREENPLAY SAID HE HAD HEARD ROGER STONE, A VERY CLOSE TRUMP ALLY, IN THE 2016 CAMPAIGN SAY THAT TRUMP WAS WINNING BECAUSE HE WAS IMPLEMENTING THE LESSONS ROY COHN CATAUGHT HIM.

THESE THREE.

>> AND FOR DRAMATIC REASONS, WE SIMPLIFIED THAT.

MR. TRUMP IS A SPONGE-LIKE CHARACTER, AND HIS IDEOLOGY, WAY OF LOOKING AT THE WORLD, IF YOU WIN, HOWEVER YOU WIN, WHATEVER YOU WON, YOU WON.

THEN YOU CAN WORRY ABOUT THE PRINCIPLES, NARRATIVE AFTERWARDS.

HE'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL IN THAT.

>> EVEN IF YOU LOSE YOU WIN BECAUSE YOU SAY YOU WON.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

BECAUSE THE WINNING HAPPENS SORT OF IN THE WORLD OF MEDIA.

AND THE WINNING HAPPENS ON THE NEWSPAPER PAGE.

IF YOU WIN THERE, THEN THE REALITY WOULD SOMEHOW FOLLOW.

>> IS THIS A POLITICAL FILM?

>> IT IS A POLITICAL FILM, BECAUSE IT -- YOU KNOW, WE'RE INVESTIGATING POWER STRUCTURES, THE LEVERS OF POWER.

BUT IT IS NOT A PARTY POLITICAL FILM.

I DON'T HAVE A HORSE IN THIS GAME.

I DON'T CARE IF DEMOCRATS WIN OR REPUBLICANS WIN.

THAT'S SORT OF THE POINT OF THE MOVIE.

THERE'S ANOTHER STRUCTURE HERE THAT DOESN'T ADHERE TO THIS BINARY.

>> THE MOVIE IS CLEAR, IT TAKES NO PARTISAN POLITICS, AND YOU REMIND EVERYBODY DURING THE TIME IT WAS SET, DONALD TRUMP WAS A DARLING IN MANHATTAN, ON ALL THE MEDIA SHOWS.

YOU'RE SHOWING A DIFFERENT TIME OF HIS LIFE.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>> WHERE YOU EVEN SAY THE GUY HAD A SENSE OF HUMOR.

>> HE STILL HAS A SENSE OF HUMOR.

WHAT WE TRIED TO DO HERE IS CAPTURE HIS HUMANITY.

SEE HIM AS A COMPLEX HUMAN BEING HE IS.

AND ALSO ROY COHN, ALSO IVANA.

AND FOR ME IT'S WORTHY, A HUMANIST PROJECT.

THAT IS THE POLITICS OF THE MOVIE IN A WAY.

>> AS YOU KNOW, A LOT OF REPUBLICANS HAVE TRASHED IT.

WE'LL GET TO TRUMP IN A MOMENT.

>> SOME LIKED IT, TOO.

>> SOME MAY HAVE LIKED IT, TOO.

BUT A LOT OF LIBERALS THINK YOU'RE NOT CLEAR-EYED ENOUGH ABOUT TRUMP.

IT'S A MINEFIELD.

>> YEAH.

WE'VE BEEN SORT OF IN THE MIDDLE OF OH, YOU'RE TOO SOFT, YOU'RE TOO HARSH, YOU'RE BASHING HIM, YOU'RE PRAISING HIM.

I'M THINKING IF YOU HAVE ROGER STONE LIKING IT, MR. TRUMP HATING IT.

BRIETBART LIKING IT, MSNBC LIKING AND HATING IT, ALL THESE DIFFERENT ACTORS, IF YOU'RE AGITATING ALL SIDES, YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING RIGHT.

>> THAT'S ONE WAY OF PUTTING IT.

LET'S GET TO THE MEDIA AND POLITICAL ASPECT OF IT.

THIS FILM PREMIERED AT CANNES.

IT GOT A LOT OF BUZZ AND IMMEDIATELY TRUMP'S PEOPLE AND TRUMP STARTED TO ATTACK IT.

A CEASE AND DESIST FROM THE PRODUCER, THE PERSON WHO PUT DOWN THE MONEY FOR THE FILM, AND TRUMP'S LATEST ATTACK IS ON SOCIAL MEDIA EARLY MONDAY CALLING IT A CHEAP, DEFAMATORY AND POLITICAL DISGUSTING HATCHET JOB MEANT TO THWART HIS PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDACY.

AND HIS SPOKESMAN GOES ON TO SAY THIS IS PURE FICTION.

HAVE YOU BEEN SLAPPED WITH A LAWSUIT?

>> NOT YET.

AND I THOUGDOUBT THAT THE LAWSU WOULD COME BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY DON'T HAVE A CASE.

THERE'S NO CASE.

ARE YOU GOING TO MAKE A CASE OF US MAKING A MOVIE ABOUT A GUY WHICH IS THOROUGHLY RESEARCHED AND FACT CHECKED?

NOT SAYING THAT MAKES IT A GOOD MOVIE, BUT THERE'S NOTHING TO -- YOU CAN WHINE ABOUT IT IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN A LAWSUIT.

>> ONE OF THE BIG ISSUES THAT TRUMP AND HIS TEAM DON'T LIKE IS THE SCENE WHERE YOU SHOW HIM SEXUALLY ABUSING/ASSAULTING HIS WIFE IVANA.

>> RIGHT.

>> YOU TELL ME WHERE IT CAME FROM.

>> WE'RE BASING THIS ON IVANA'S DEPOSITION UNDER OATH IN THE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS FOR THE DIVORCE.

AND YOU KNOW, THIS CAME -- IT WAS LATER RETOLD IN DETAIL IN A BOOK ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP.

THE SAME BOOK, THERE IS A DISCLAIMER.

IT GOES LIKE THIS -- I KNOW I SAID OH, HE RAPED ME, BUT I DIDN'T MEAN RAPE IN THE LEGAL/CRIMINAL SENSE.

AND I'M THINKING OKAY THAT SOUNDS A BIT OF -- WHY WOULD YOU REPEAT IT IN DETAIL IF YOU WANT TO DENY IT LATER?

ALSO IF YOU LOOK AT THEIR DIVORCE PROCEEDINGS, ACCORDING TO THE JUDGE, THE REASON THEY GOT DIVORCED WAS MR. TRUMP'S CRUEL AND INHUMAN BEHAVIOR TOWARD IVANA.

THAT'S IN THE CASE.

TRUMP LATER SUED, TRIED TO GET A GAG ORDER AGAINST IVANA TALKING ABOUT THIS, WHICH HE WON.

THIS IS THE SAME GUY WHO IS ACCUSED OF MANY TIMES SEXUAL ASSAULT AND ALL THAT.

THE LATEST THING IS, YOU KNOW, HE WAS BACKSTAGE AT THE BEAUTY PAGEANT SAYING THAT I CAN GO THERE AND DO WHATEVER I WANT BECAUSE I OWN THE PLACE AND THEY HAVE NO CLOTHES AND THEY'RE INCREDIBLE LOOKING WOMEN BECAUSE I CAN GET AWAY WITH IT.

BUT GUESS WHAT, YOU CAN'T.

>> OBVIOUSLY HE DENIES IT, WHAT IVANA WROTE.

AND IN 2015 CAMPAIGN SHE TOTALLY RETRACTED IT.

>> THAT'S FROM ROY COHN'S RULE BOOK, ISN'T IT?

>> AND HE'S DENIED ALL THE OTHER CHARGES AGAINST HIM, INCLUDING THE CONVICTIONS.

>> HE ALSO DENIED HE LOST AN ELECTION.

>> WHY DID YOU FEEL IT WAS IMPORTANT TO PUT THIS SCENE IN?

>> LOOK, I DON'T HAVE A PERSONAL VENDETTA AGAINST MR. TRUMP, I'M JUST STATING THE OBVIOUS FACTS HERE, SOME WIKIPEDIA, SO FORTH.

THIS IS A MOVIE ABOUT A HUMAN BEING AND HIS COMPLEXITY.

AS ANNOYING AS IT WAS TO MY LIBERAL FRIENDS SHOWING HIM AS RELATIVELY NAÏVE, RELENTLESS AND SMART WITH HIS BUSINESS DEALINGS EARLY ON IN NEW YORK, AS IMPORTANT TO SHOW THIS ASPECT OF HIS RELATION WITH IVANA.

>> YOU'RE GOING TO RUIN YOUR LIFE IF YOU DON'T MARRY ME.

>> WHY?

>> ONE SECOND.

LISTEN.

>> WHY IS THAT?

>> I'M RICH, HANDSOME, GREAT FAMILY, GOING TO BE THE NUMBER ONE BUILDER IN NEW YORK.

LISTEN TO ME.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE LIFE YOU NEVER DREAMED OF, IVANA, WITH ME.

I LOVE YOU, OKAY?

I WANT TO HAVE CHILDREN WITH YOU, I WANT US TO GROW OLD TOGETHER.

>> WHETHER YOU DON'T LIKE OR LIKE THESE CHARACTERS, THEIR LOVE STORY WAS REAL, THEIR LOVE WAS REAL.

THAT'S THE TRAGIC THING.

WHAT HAPPENS IN THIS SCENE IS THE RUPTURE OF THAT.

I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN CONTROVERSIAL TO EXCLUDE THAT.

AS WOULD BE TO DENY HE WAS A GOOD BUSINESS MAN IN THE BEGINNING.

>> YOU ALSO SAID YOU THINK THIS IS PART OF THE WAY TO COUNTER RISING TIDE OF FASCISM.

>> YEAH.

BECAUSE THE PROBLEM WITH FASCISM IS THAT IT SELLS THE NARRATIVE OF ETHNIC TENSION AS BEING THE BIGGEST PROBLEM AND SOLUTION TO ALL OUR PROBLEMS, YOU KNOW.

AND I THINK WHAT -- THIS IS WHAT THE AMERICAN POPULACE RIGHT HAS BEEN DOING.

THE AMERICAN ECONOMY IS SO EXTREMELY DEPENDENT ON UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS.

SO WITH EUROPE.

WHEN MR. TRUMP GOT INTO THE WHITE HOUSE IN 2016, I WASN'T SURPRISED.

I'VE BEEN HEARING THE SAME ANTIFOREIGNER, ANTI-IMMIGRANT THINGS FROM DENMARK WHERE I LIVE.

I CAN SEE THE NARRATIVE UNFOLDING.

ALWAYS THIS MYTH OF THE SELF-MADE LEADER WHO MADE IT AGAINST ALL ODDS.

AND I THINK WHEN YOU DECONSTRUCT THAT MYTH AND FIND A HUMAN BEING -- >> YOU SEE WHERE IT CAME FROM?

>> EXACTLY.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

>> AND "THE APPRENTICE" IS NOW IN THEATERS ACROSS THE U.S. >>> WITH THE STAKES OF COMMUNICATION AND PUBLIC MESSAGING HIGHER THAN EVER, THE SPREAD OF MISINFORMATION ONLINE IS A REAL WORLD CONCERN.

16 ELECTORS FOR DONALD TRUMP THIS YEAR DENY THE 2020 RESULT.

TO DISCUSS HOW FALSE INFORMATION SPREADS AND WAYS TO COMBAT IT, WE SPEAK TO AN ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR.

>> YOU STUDY MISINFORMATION, DISINFORMATION AND HOW INFORMATION SPREADS.

SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN SO DISCONCERTING FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE IS IN THE WAKE OF THE TWO HORRIBLE STORMS AND DISASTERS THAT WENT THROUGH FLORIDA AND THE SOUTHEAST, WE SAW SO MUCH FAKE NEWS, FALSE INFORMATION, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO FRAME IT.

WHY DID IT TAKE OFF SO FAST?

>> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAPPENS IN ANY CRISIS SITUATION IS THAT RUMORS BEGIN TO SPREAD ABOUT THE RESPONSE, ABOUT THE SITUATION, THE REALITY ON THE GROUND.

THEY EVOLVE OVER TIME AS MORE ACTUAL INFORMATION COMES OUT ABOUT THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAPPENS TODAY, A LOT OF PEOPLE GET INFORMATION FROM SOCIAL MEDIA.

SOCIAL MEDIA IS A PLACE WHERE SOMETIMES YOU GET REAL PEOPLE TALKING, ACTUALLY THERE ON THE GROUND AND ABLE TO COMMUNICATE.

IN THESE PARTICULAR SITUATIONS A LOT OF WHAT WAS HAPPENING, PROMINENT INFLUENCERS HAD A PARTICULAR POINT OF VIEW AND SAID A FRIEND OF A FRIEND TOLD ME, AND THAT KIND OF RUMOR TENDS TO GO VIRAL ON SOCIAL MEDIA, PARTICULARLY IF THEY'RE SAYING SOMETHING THAT SOUNDS SCARY, SCANDALOUS OR IMPLIES A GOVERNMENT INSTITUTION IS DOING SOMETHING WRONG OR FAILING.

THAT'S HAPPENING MORE AND MORE LATE LATELY.

>> X SEEMS TO BE A PLATFORM WHERE MISINFORMATION SPREADS BECAUSE THE OWNER, ELON MUSK, AS TAKEN OFF THE GUARDRAILS AND REMOVED MODERATION.

THEY'VE TRIED TO REPLACE WITH COMMUNITY NOTES, WE COULD ALL CROWDSOURCE A BETTER TRACK OF INFORMATION.

WE COULD SEE SOMETHING FALSE, FLAG IT.

ENOUGH PEOPLE FLAG IT, MAYBE THE ALGORITHM SAID WE SHOULDN'T SPREAD IT AS FAR.

IS IT WORKING?

>> COMMUNITY NOTES IS A REALLY GOOD IDEA.

ONE THING THAT'S GREAT, A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T TRUST FACT CHECKS FROM MEDIA, PEOPLE DON'T LIKE CNN, FOX.

BUT TWITTER USED TO HAVE FACT CHECK LABELS, WITH THE CONTENT WRITTEN BY A MEDIA OUTLET.

WOULD BE RELIABLE, TAKE A LITTLE TIME BUT GENERALLY RELIABLE.

BUT WHAT BEGAN TO HAPPEN IS THE ENTERPRISE OF FACT CHECKING WAS GRADUALLY DELEGITIMIZED.

MEDIA WANTS YOU TO THINK THIS AND THE PLATFORM IS CENSORING THE FREE EXPRESSION OF PEOPLE BY PUTTING A FLAG ON IT.

I THINK THAT'S NUTS.

BUT THE IDEA IS CAN THE COMMUNITY HELP MODERATE ITSELF?

MODERATE THE PLACE WHERE WE ARE?

WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN ON COMMUNITY NOTES, PEOPLE ON THE RIGHT AND PEOPLE ON THE LEFT AS THE ALGORITHM INTUITS IT HAVE TO BOTH AGREE THAT THE COMMUNITY NOTE IS FAIR AND THE SOURCES REPUTABLE.

IF THAT HAPPENS, THEN THE COMMUNITY NOTE APPEARS.

BUT WHAT'S BEGUN TO HAPPEN IS TWO THINGS.

ONE, OFTENTIMES THE COMMUNITY CAN'T ACTUALLY KNOW SOMETHING IN THE MOMENT.

YOU REALLY SEE THIS HAPPEN IN CRISIS SITUATIONS.

ME SITTING ON MY COUCH IN CALIFORNIA, I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT'S HAPPENING TO SOMEBODY IN NORTH CAROLINA.

I CAN'T COMMUNITY NOTE FACT CHECK A RUMOR.

IT TAKES TIME TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S HAPPENING.

OTHER DYNAMIC IS A LOT OF THE TIME ONCE THE RUMOR BECOMES A SOURCE OF POLITICAL PROPAGANDA, IT GETS TIED INTO PEOPLE'S IDENTITY.

THEY DON'T WANT TO ADMIT THE RUMOR WAS FALSE AND THEIR POLITICIAN PICKED IT UP.

YOU DON'T SEE THAT AGREEMENT HAPPEN, SO THE NOTE DOESN'T APPEAR OR DOESN'T STAY.

UNFORTUNATELY THIS IS A FAILING OF COMMUNITY NOTES.

WHAT YOU WANT TO SEE IS BOTH THINGS HAPPENING, FACT CHECK AND THE NOTE, SO HOWEVER QUICKLY YOU GET IT THERE, THE INFORMATION GOING VIRAL HAS CONTEXT AS FAST AS POSSIBLE SO PEOPLE CAN BE INFORMED.

>> HOW MUCH DOES AUTHORITY FACTOR INTO IT?

ASKING IN THE CONTEXT OF POLITICIANS THAT SPREAD MISINFORMATION OR CONSPIRACY THEORIES.

A COUPLE HERE, REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE FROM GEORGIA TWEETED OUT QUOTE -- GOING TO SAY THIS BEFORE AND AFTER THE QUOTE, THIS IS NOT TRUE.

YES, THEY CAN CONTROL THE WEATHER, IT'S RIDICULOUS FOR ANYONE TO LIE AND SAY IT CAN'T BE DONE.

DON'T HAVE ANY PROOF THAT ANYONE CAN CONTROL THE WEATHER, AND IT'S UNCLEAR IN THIS STATEMENT WHO THE THEY IS, AND SHE HAS A HISTORY OF SPREADING THIS.

THE FACT SHE'S AN AUTHORITY, NOT A COMMONER LIKE YOU AND ME, DOES THAT SUPERCHARGE OR GIVE GREATER REACH TO THIS?

>> TWO THINGS HAPPEN.

ONE, IT DOES GET GREATER REACH.

SHE HAS A GREATER AUDIENCE.

POLITICAL ELITES HAVE THAT POWER TO MAKE A LOT OF PEOPLE SEE A MESSAGE.

BUT ONE LITTLE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ELITE AND INFLUENCER AND ELECTED OFFICIAL IN PARTICULAR, SHE DOES HAVE THE IMPRIMATUR OF BEING AN AUTHORITY.

HER WORDS CARRY WEIGHT.

SHE'S AN ELECTED OFFICIAL OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT.

IT'S REMARKABLE TO SEE THE EXTENT TO WHICH PARTICULAR POLITICAL ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE BEHAVING IN THIS INFLUENCER LIKE WAY.

JUST SAY I'M JUST ASKING QUESTIONS, JUST SAYING THIS THING, TOSS AN IDEA OUT THERE.

IT NORMALIZES THE IDEA FOR THE PEOPLE WHO FOLLOW HER, SEE HER AS -- HER OR ANYBODY ELSE, ELECTED OFFICIALS SEEN AS ARBITERS, THESE ARE THE OPINIONS THAT GOOD REPUBLICANS HOLD, PEOPLE OF MY POLITICAL TRIBE HOLD.

ONE OF THE THINGS YOU START TO SEE HAPPEN IN SOME SITUATIONS, YOU HAVE TO SEE THE CORRECTION COME THEN FROM OTHER PEOPLE ALSO SEEN AS LEGITIMATE AND AUTHORITATIVE WITHIN THAT COMMUNITY.

IT HAS TO BE A FELLOW REPUBLICAN WHO PUSHES BACK AGAINST THESE "THEY'RE CONTROLLING THE WEATHER" LIES.

IT HAS TO BE RIGHT-WING MEDIA AND INFLUENCERS SEEN AS AUTHORITATIVE AND RELIABLE.

IF IT'S FROM A SOURCE OUTSIDE, IT'S EASY TO SAY THE LEFT-WING MEDIA, MAINSTREAM MEDIA LIES, THEY'RE FOOLING YOU.

THAT'S THE CONTEXT WE'RE OPERATING.

>> IS IT STILL TRUE THAT THE LIE GOES FARTHER AND FASTER THAN THE CORRECTION, RESPONSE, TRUTH.

EVEN IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE SAID, CARLOS GIMENEZ, REPUBLICAN OF FLORIDA, SAID SHE SHOULD GET HER HEAD EXAMINED, ADDING THERE'S NO PLACE FOR MISINFORMATION, ESPECIALLY ON PURPOSE IN TIMES LIKE THIS.

A FEW OTHER GOP MEMBERS AND LOCAL OFFICIALS SAID THIS MISINFORMATION NEEDS TO STOP, ET CETERA.

BUT IS IT TOO LITTLE TOO LATE?

BECAUSE THE PLATFORM SHE HAS, THE RUMORS SHE'S ABLE TO SPREAD, WILL THIS KIND OF RESPONSE GET TO EVERY NOOK AND CRANNY THAT THE ORIGINAL TWEET WENT TO?

>> IN THE CASE OF MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE, I DON'T GET THE SENSE SHE HAS A WIDE BASE OF SUPPORT EVEN AMONG THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

SHE'S A PARTICULAR NICHE.

SEEING OTHER REPUBLICANS COME OUT, SAY THESE ARE THE FACTS AND THIS IS THE INFORMATION IS ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL.

IT HAPPENED IN SPRINGFIELD, GOVERNOR MIKE DeWINE, THE REPUBLICAN, SAID NO ONE IS EATING THE PETS.

BUSINESS LEADERS CAME OUT AND DID INTERVIEWS TO EXPLAIN HOW THE HAITIAN COMMUNITY WORKED IN THEIR FACTORIES, THINGS LIKE THIS.

IT HAS TO BE THE TRUSTED COUNTER SPEAKERS PUSHING BACK AGAINST IT.

>> IF YOU'RE A FAN OF THE FORMER PRESIDENT, THERE'S NO HIGHER AUTHORITY THAN HIM.

AND RECENTLY IN THE WAKE OF THESE STORMS, HE SAID, QUOTE, THEY'RE OFFERING THEM $750 TO PEOPLE WHOSE HOMES HAVE BEEN WASHED AWAY.

YET WE SEND TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES MOST OF US HAVE NEVER HEARD OF.

THE $750 PUCKS IS A DIRECT PAYMENT FOR EMERGENCY SUPPLIES, NOT THE VALUE OF THEIR HOME OR SUM TOTAL OF WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO GET FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

BUT WHAT DID HAPPEN IN THE WAKE OF THAT?

HOW DID THAT MISINFORMATION TAKE ON A DIFFERENT LIFE?

>> IT'S SEEN AS A AUTHORITATIVE STATEMENT FROM A POLITICAL LEADER.

FOR MANY PEOPLE, A HERO.

THIS IS THE STATEMENT HE PUTS OUT ON TRUTH SOCIAL AND IT'S SCREENSHOTTED AND MOVED TO TWITTER BY HIS SUPPORTERS.

SOMETIMES HE POSTS DIRECTLY TO TWITTER, TOO.

BUT YOU SEE THAT DYNAMIC OF THE PERSON WHO THEY TRUST IS CONVEYING A CERTAIN TYPE OF INFORMATION, IN THIS CASE VERY MISLEADING.

IT'S NOT WRONG, IT'S NOT FALSE, THEY'RE GETTING $750, BUT IT'S COMPLETELY DECONTEXTUALIZED.

$750 HAS YOU THEN APPLY FOR ALL THE OTHER AID YOU'RE ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE.

IT'S A CHALLENGING DYNAMIC.

EXPLAINING IT REQUIRES NUANCE.

THERE'S A SAYING IN POLITICS, IF YOU'RE EXPLAINING, YOU'RE LOSING.

BUT THE HARRIS CAMPAIGN AND OTHERS IN THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION HAVE TO SAY HE GOT IT WRONG, HERE ARE THE ACTUAL FACTS.

YOU SEE THE EFFORT TO GET FACTS OUT, TO EXPLAIN TO PEOPLE, MANY OF WHOM HAVE LOST THEIR HOMES AND REALLY HAVE LOUSY INTERNET, POWER OUT, WATER NOT WORKING, THEY HAVE MANY OTHER THINGS TO WORRY ABOUT.

HEARING THIS INFORMATION DOES IMPACT HOW THEY THINK ABOUT THE RESPONSE.

YOU SEE THIS IN THE CONTEXT OF MISLEADING CLAIMS THAT TRUMP SPREAD ABOUT FEMA.

THEY'RE NOT HELPING TRUMP SUPPORTERS IS A THING THAT HE SAID AT ONE POINT.

YOU HAVE THIS DYNAMIC OF A TRUSTED OFFICIAL, TRUSTED LEADER AMPLIFYING THESE CLAIMS FOR POLITICAL ADVANTAGE, JUST TO BE CLEAR.

THAT'S ONE OF THE MAIN MOTIVATING FACTORS HERE.

>> THERE IS A GROUP THAT LOOKED INTO THIS.

JUST 33 POSTS ON X WERE ALREADY DEBUNKED BY VARIOUS DIFFERENT SOURCES ARE 160 MILLION VIEWS.

WHAT AS ALSO INTERESTING TO ME IN SOME OF THEIR ANALYSIS, 30% OF THESE POSTS CONTAINED ANTI-SEMITIC HATE, AND SOME OF THE LARGE ACCOUNTS WITH MILLIONS OF FOLLOWERS THAT WERE SHARING THE LIES ABOUT THE STORM WERE ALSO PEOPLE WHO WERE ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN OTHER FORMS OF MIS- AND DISINFORMATION.

LIKE A VENN DIAGRAM OF PEOPLE WHO LIKE TO DO THIS ABOUT HURRICANE MILTON OR THE GREAT REPLACEMENT THEORY.

>> THEY'VE BUILT UP AN AUDIENCE BASE THAT FEELS A CERTAIN WAY TOWARDS THE GOVERNMENT OR AUTHORITY FIGURES.

EVENTS DON'T HAPPEN IN A VACUUM.

ONCE YOU'VE BUILT UP A VILLAIN, FEMA, JEWISH PEOPLE, BIDEN, TRUMP, WHOEVER IT IS, YOU CAN REFER BACK TO THEM CONSTANTLY AND CONNECT THE DOTS FOR YOUR AUDIENCE.

THERE'S A PHRASE I'VE COME TO APPRECIATE -- CONSPIRACY WITHOUT THE THEORY.

THERE'S NO ACTUAL ARGUMENT FOR WHAT IS HAPPENING.

NO COHESIVE WHY ARE THESE PEOPLE DOING THIS THING, WHAT IS THE INCENTIVE.

BUT THERE ARE COMPLICATED THEORIES THAT GO VIRAL BECAUSE THEY'RE PHRASED IN WAYS THAT CONNECT THE DOTS TO A DIFFERENT CONSPIRACY THEORY.

GREAT REPLACEMENT, QANON.

THEY HAVE A LIFE ONLINE NOW.

IT'S NOT JUST CLOUT AND GROWING FOLLOWERS TO MONETIZE ON A DIFFERENT PLATFORM, IT'S THAT YOU CAN DIRECTLY MAKE MONEY FROM YO YOUR ENGAGEMENTS.

THE PLATFORM SETS AN INCENTIVE OFFERING PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE MONEY ON IT.

THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS HAPPENING.

FIRST PERSON OUT OF THE GATE WITH A WILD THEORY ABOUT A HURRICANE, NATURAL DISASTER OR MASS SHOOTING, UNFORTUNATELY THE ATTENTION GOES TO YOU, WHETHER YOU HAVE THE FACTS OR NOT.

AND THE FINANCIAL PERK ALSO GOES TO YOU.

IT CREATES A SERIES OF MISGUIDED INCENTIVES IN SOME WAYS.

>> THE OTHER MAJOR CRISIS POTENTIALLY LOOMING WHEN IT COMES TO MISINFORMATION AND DISINFORMATION IS THE ELECTION CYCLE.

THE INTERNET HAS EVOLVED, NEW PLATFORMS AND TECHNOLOGIES EMERGE ALMOST EVERY FOUR YEARS.

WHAT ARE THE THREATS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT WHEN IT COMES TO THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS?

>> SINCE 2020, THE INTERNET HAS FRAGMENTED QUITE A BIT.

MULTIPLE NEW ENTRANTS, TRUTH SOCIAL, BLUESKY, THREADS, MASTODON.

PEOPLE HAVE LEFT TWITTER ON THE LEFT, IT'S MORE RIGHT-WING PLATFORM AT THIS POINT OR SEEN THAT WAY BY PEOPLE USING IT FOR POLITICAL COMMUNICATION.

THERE'S A FRAGMENTING OF AUDIENCES, GENERATIVE A.I.

IT'S AN ENHANCER.

NOT THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE PROPAGANDA BEFORE, AND CAN'T BE JUST AS EFFECTIVE SPREADING MISLEADING INFORMATION WITHOUT GENERATIVE A.I., BUT IT IS A VERY INTERESTING TOOL UNFORTUNATELY FOR THINGS LIKE CREATING EVIDENCE TO BACKSTOP A RUMOR OR CLAIM.

SO YOU HAVE SOME SHIFTS.

ULTIMATELY IT IS GOING TO BE VERY MUCH THIS PROCESS OF RUMORS AND ELECTION OFFICIALS AND POLITICAL LEADERS AND POLITICAL INFLUENCERS IN THEIR COMMUNITIES TAKING THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES SERIOUSLY AND TAKING THE INSTITUTION OF DEMOCRACY SERIOUSLY AND BEING OUT THERE SPEAKING THE TRUTH, CORRECTING RECORDS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE, REBUTTING RUMORS AS SOON AS INFORMATION IS KNOWN, PROACTIVE, THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO SEE IN THE ELECTION AS WELL.

>> YOU WERE AT THE STANFORD INTERNET OBSERVATORY, A RESEARCH GROUP STUDYING THE THINGS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

YOU'RE NOW AT GEORGETOWN.

BUT FOR FOLKS WHO MIGHT NOT KNOW WHAT HAPPENED, WHAT THE POLITICAL PRESSURE WAS, WHY THAT ORGANIZATION IS IN EFFECT NO LONGER AROUND, WHAT HAPPENED?

>> WE RAN A PROJECT LOOKING AT ELECTION RUMORS, IRONICALLY.

AND VACCINE RUMORS.

2020, 2021.

ELECTIONS AGAIN IN 2022, AND TRACED RUMORS.

ABOUT VOTING.

NOT HUNTER BIDEN'S LAPTOP, WHAT CANDIDATE A SAID ABOUT CANDIDATE B.

BUT WE LOOKED AT RUMORS ABOUT VOTING, PARTICULARLY THOSE THAT ALLEGED FRAUD.

IN AGGREGATE, A STEADY DRUMBEAT OF RUMORS PROPELLED BY POLITICAL INFLUENCERS ON THE RIGHT TO SUPPORT THE CLAIM THAT THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN, WHICH WAS NOT TRUE AND LED TO THE VIOLENCE OF JANUARY 6th.

REAL WORLD IMPACT.

WE DID WORK TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT WAS HAPPENING.

COMMUNICATED WITH LOCAL ELECTION OFFICIALS, TO TECH PLATFORMS.

30% OF THE TIME THEY LABELED IT, 10% OF THE TIME THEY TOOK IT DOWN.

BUT IT WAS REFRAMED BY THE SITTING CONGRESSMEN WHO DENIED THE RESULTS OF THE 2020 ELECTION.

WHEN THEY GOT THEIR GAVELS, THEY LAUNCHED INVESTIGATIONS INTO US, SUBPOENAED OUR DATA AND INFORMATION, DEMANDED INTERVIEWS AND THEN THERE WERE REPORTS ALLEGING OUR RESEARCH PROJECT HAD IN FACT BEEN SOME SORT OF CABAL, A VAST CONSPIRACY THEORY TO TAKE DOWN TENS OF MILLIONS OF TWEETS.

UTTER NONSENSE BUT FOR THE BETTER PART OF A YEAR, YEAR AND A HALF NOW, GOSH, THE INSTITUTION WAS UNDER SUBPOENA AND IT DECIDED IT WAS NO LONGER GOING TO DO THE RAPID RESPONSE ELECTION RUMOR WORK.

I THINK THAT'S VERY SAD BECAUSE IT IS THAT NEED TO HAVE DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS WITH DIFFERENT INFORMATION UNDERSTANDING THE INFORMATION ENVIRONMENT TO TRY TO GET THE CORRECTIONS OUT THERE AND GET GOOD INFORMATION OUT THERE TO THE PUBLIC.

IT'S ACTUALLY TO ENHANCE COUNTER SPEECH, ENHANCE AND INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF INFORMATION THAT THE PUBLIC HAS.

MY HOPE, EVEN AS THIS CONTINUES, THAT INSTITUTIONS STAND UP AND SAY NO, WE HAVE A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO DO PROTECTIVE RESEARCH AND STUDYING RUMORS TARGETING AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS IS INCREDIBLY WORTHWHILE THING FOR ACADEMIA TO PURSUE.

>> THANKS FOR JOINING US.

>> THANK YOU.

>>> UP NEXT, FROM THE POLITICAL TO THE HIGHLY PERSONAL.

ACTOR GILLIAN ANDERSON MADE HER NAME PLAYING AGENT SCULLY IN "THE X-FILES," BUT OTHERS NOW KNOW HER IN "SEX EDUCATION."

SHE'S PUBLISHED A BOOK OF SEXUAL FANTASIES CALLED "WANT."

THANKS FOR TAKING THE TIME TO TALK TO US.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

VERY EXCITING.

>> PEOPLE KNOW YOU FROM YOUR ROLE ON "SEX EDUCATION" ON NETFLIX.

TALKING ABOUT WHAT LED TO YOU TO THIS BOOK, "WANT," WAS IT THE CHARACTER FROM THE SHOW THAT INSPIRED THE SUBJECT MATTER?

>> I THINK MOST LIKELY YES.

I STARTED TO EMBRACE AN ASPECT THAT WAS VERY MUCH JEAN, THE CHARACTER, IN TERMS OF HOW SHE RELATED TO PEOPLE ABOUT INTIMATE MATTERS AND HOW OPEN AND INCLUSIVE HER THINKING WAS.

SO WHEN I WAS APPROACHED WITH THIS IDEA, I THOUGHT THIS IS INTERESTING, I'M ACTUALLY REALLY CURIOUS WHETHER ANYTHING, AND I ASSUMED QUITE A LOT, HAD CHANGED SINCE 1973 WHEN NANCY FRIDAY PUBLISHED "MY SECRET GARDEN," ALSO ANONYMOUS LETTERS WRITTEN IN BY WOMEN IN A MUCH SMALLER COMMUNITY, WRITING ABOUT THEIR SEXUAL FANTASIES.

>> WHAT DID YOU FIND?

WERE YOU SURPRISED?

>> REREADING FRIDAY'S BOOK, I WAS SURPRISED HOW RAUNCHY AND ILLICIT SOME OF THE FANTASIES WERE.

I ASSUMED BECAUSE IT WAS BACK THEN, AND I THINK OF BACK THEN AS BEING IN BLACK AND WHITE, THEY WOULD BE MUCH MORE STAID AND LESS EXPLICIT.

BUT THEN IN OUR BOOK, THE THING THAT SURPRISED ME THE MOST IS THE DEGREE TO WHICH SHAME IS STILL SO PREVALENT FOR WOMEN.

NOT JUST IN WHETHER OR NOT THEY CAN TALK OPENLY WITH THEIR PARTNER ABOUT SEX, BUT THE IDEA OF EXPRESSING A DESIRE OR FOR SOMETHING DIFFERENT TO BE DONE DIFFERENT, TO RECEIVE PLEASURE IN A WAY IS -- THERE'S STILL A LOT OF SHAME AROUND THAT.

>> LET'S TAKE A STEP BACK.

YOU LAUNCHED THE PROJECT "DEAR GILLIAN" AND ASKED ON SOCIAL MEDIA, I'M CURATING A BOOK ON YOUR ANONYMOUS LETTERS TO ME.

18, 80, SLEEP WITH WOMEN, MEN, NONBINARY INDIVIDUALS, NO ONE AT ALL, I WANT TO KNOW YOUR PERSONAL DESIRES, LET'S OPEN UP THE CONVERSATION.

OVER 1,100 LETTERS, 800,000 WORDS.

WERE YOU SURPRISED AT THE RECEPTION YOUR REACH OUT CAME TO?

>> NO.

I THINK BECAUSE OF JEAN MILLBURN AND HOW I OFTEN PRESENT PREDOMINANTLY ON SOCIALS THAT MAYBE WE WOULD GET QUITE A FEW ENTRIES.

WHAT DID SURPRISE ME ACTUALLY WAS THAT WE HAD SO MANY PEOPLE START TO WRITE AND NOT EVERYBODY FINISHED THEIR LETTER.

IN THE FIRST SHORT WHILE, WE HAD 1,800 ENTRIES, THERE WERE QUITE A FEW NONCOMPLETES.

I'VE ALWAYS WANTED TO ASK, WAS IT COLD FEET.

WHAT WE ENDED UP RECEIVING, HEARING YOU READ THAT, THAT'S WHAT WE GOT FROM WOMEN AROUND THE WORLD.

INCREDIBLY RAW AND HONEST AND OPEN AND BRAVE, AND YEAH, REVELATORY IN A WAY.

>> EVERYTHING FROM FANTASIZING ABOUT HAVING SEX IN A CHURCH STARING AT JESUS ON THE CROSS, THINKING OF THE MADONNA VIDEO.

SEX WITH SIBLING, HEIRS TO A ART FORTUNE.

WITH HARRY STYLES.

WITH A ROBOT.

BIGFOOT, TENTACLES.

HOW DID YOU CULTIVATE WHAT YOU PUT IN THE BOOK?

>> IT WAS REALLY HARD.

AT THE BEGINNING, THE STACK WAS LIKE THIS.

AND WE WERE GOING TO START TOGETHER TO HAVE REALTIME EXPERIENCE OF READING THEM.

AND WE HAD THE SAME ORDER.

IT WAS TAKING SO LONG BECAUSE WE'D STOP -- WE WERE GASPING, WOULD WANT TO SHARE.

DID YOU READ THIS BIG?

NO I'M -- SO WE DECIDED TO SPLIT IT INTO SECTIONS.

I'M SURE MANY WERE LEFT ON THE TABLE AS GOOD AS THE ONES THAT REMAINED IN THE BOOK THAT WE HAD TO RETURN AND DESTROY.

THAT WAS PART OF THE DEAL, ANYTHING THAT WASN'T PUBLISHED WOULD BE DESTROYED, WHICH IS SO SAD.

WE DIDN'T WANT PRESSURE.

IT WASN'T A CREATIVE WRITING COURSE.

WE DIDN'T WANT THAT PRESSURE ON THE WOMEN WHO SUBMITTED.

YOU CERTAINLY GET THAT FROM NANCY FRIDAY'S BOOK.

IT FEELS UNEDITED AND RAW, AND THERE'S SOMETHING INCREDIBLY MOVING AND BEAUTIFUL ABOUT THAT IN AND OF ITSELF.

SO WE TRIED TO CHOOSE THEM NOT BASED ON WRITING QUALITY PER SE BUT JUST BASED ON HAVING AS MUCH INCLUSION OF DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES AS POSSIBLE.

>> WAS INCLUDING YOUR OWN FANTASY ALWAYS PART OF THE PLAN?

>> YEAH.

YEAH.

IT FELT LIKE THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

AND BLOOMSBURY WAS -- YOU KNOW, WANTED TO MAKE SURE THEY HELD ME TO THAT EVEN WHEN I WAS GETTING COLD FEET.

I DID LEAVE IT TO THE LAST MINUTE.

>> GOING TO ASK, DID YOU WRITE IT PRIOR TO READING THE OTHERS?

>> I HAD TO HAND IT OVER TO SOMEBODY WHO WOULD KNOW IT WAS MINE.

>> DID YOU GET IDEAS FROM THE SUBMISSIONS THAT YOU READ?

I NEVER THOUGHT OF THAT.

>> ACTUALLY, NO, INTERESTINGLY.

BUT THERE'S QUITE A FEW THAT ONE COULD EASILY ADOPT.

BUT I FOUND IT MUCH HARDER THAN I HAD EXPECTED TO ACTUALLY PUT IT DOWN.

WASN'T EVEN THE FACT I WAS GOING TO BE HANDING IT OVER TO SOMEBODY THAT BY THEN I KNEW PERSONALLY.

IT WAS JUST CERTAIN WORDS.

AND I'M NOT -- I DO NOT CONSIDER MYSELF, I DON'T THINK I AM, COULD BE IN DENIAL.

I'M NOT PRUDISH, THERE'S NOT MUCH I FEEL LIKE I HAVEN'T SEEN, WITNESSED OR HEARD ABOUT.

SO I WAS SHOCKED BY MY OWN -- SHYNESS.

IT SUDDENLY FELT PORNOGRAPHIC AS WORDS OPPOSED TO IMAGES.

>> WORDS PUT DOWN FOR OTHERS TO READ, NOT JUST IN YOUR MIND.

>> YEAH.

>> AND PRUDE IS NOT THE WORD PEOPLE WOULD USE TO DESCRIBE YOU.

GOLDEN GLOBE DRESS WITH VULVAS, AND A LINE OF SODAS CALLED G-SPOT, YOU'RE COMFORTABLE EXPRESSING YOUR SEXUALITY.

BUT GOING BACK TO SHAME.

YOU HADN'T ALWAYS FELT COMFORTABLE WITH YOUR SEXUALITY.

WITH THE "NEW YORK TIMES," YOU SAID SO MUCH OF MY YOUTH WHEN I COULD HAVE, SHOULD HAVE BEEN AS HAPPY AS COULD BE IMAGINED WAS SPENT OVER PERCEIVED FLAWS.

LOCKED IN SHAME, IT'S HARD TO EXPERIENCE PLEASURE.

THERE'S NO CRACK IN THE DOOR FOR IT TO COME THROUGH.

IT'S SO RELATABLE FOR SO MANY WOMEN.

>> MAKES ME SO EMOTIONAL.

>> LOOKING BACK DECADES LATER.

SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, I'M MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE IN MY SKIN AS A 46-YEAR-OLD THAN IN MY 20s.

>> YEAH.

JUST IN MY HEAD THE WHOLE TIME.

AND CERTAINLY COULD PRESENT AS AN ACTRESS AND PERFORM DIFFERENTLY OR SHOW UP AT AWARD SHOWS OR TALK SHOWS OR WHATEVER, AND PRESENT CONFIDENTLY, CERTAINLY IN PLAYING DANA SCULLY, WHO WAS INCREDIBLY CONFIDENT IN HERSELF, YOU WOULDN'T NECESSARILY HAVE SEEN OR GUESSED THAT.

WHICH IS ALMOST MORE SAD IN A WAY.

MAKES YOU THINK OF HOW MUCH OF THAT IS HIDDEN IN THE MINDS OF SO MUCH OF THE YOUTH TODAY.

AND EVEN MORE SO BECAUSE BACK THEN, WHEN I WAS YOUNG, THERE WAS NO SOCIAL MEDIA, SO IT'S IN THE PERFECTIONISM IN YOUR FACE ALL THE TIME, OR THAT KIND OF IDEALIZATION OF THE HUMAN FORM.

PARTICULARLY WOMEN'S FEMALE FORM.

YEAH.

>> YOU MENTIONED PUSHING THIS MESSAGE THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA, SO MANY POSITIVE ATTRIBUTES TO SOCIAL MEDIA, BUT THE DARK SIDE, TOO, AND PRESSURE AMONG GIRLS ON THE SUBJECT OF SEXUALITY, FEELING THEY'RE NOT GOOD ENOUGH.

HOW DO YOU ABSORB THAT TAKING TO A PROJECT LIKE THIS?

>> TO THIS POINT IN THE CONVERSATIONS WE'VE BEEN HAVING SINCE THE BOOK CAME OUT, WHAT I'M HEARING FROM NOT JUST WOMEN WHO ARE READING THIS IS THE DEGREE TO WHICH NOT ONLY DO THEY IDENTIFY WITH ALL ELEMENTS OF THE FANTASIES AND, YOU KNOW, SHYNESS, SHAME, ANY ASPECT IN TERMS OF DESIRE AND FEAR, BUT ALSO THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT, EVEN THOUGH THE WOMEN WHO SUBMITTED DID SO IN THE CLOAK OF ANONYMITY, THEY FOUND THAT INCREDIBLY EMPOWERING IN THE PROCESS.

ADDING IT TO A PLATFORM MADE THEM FEEL SEEN AND HEARD IN A WAY THAT THEY HADN'T PRIOR BECAUSE MAYBE THEY HAVEN'T SHARED THE THOUGHTS, VULNERABILITY OR INTIMACY.

>> YOU SAID PLAYING STELLA GIBSON IN "THE FALL" INSPIRED YOU TO ADVOCATE.

WHAT DO YOU HOPE READERS WILL LEARN FROM THIS?

>> IT'S INTERESTING, I NEVER THOUGHT OF MYSELF AS BEING ON THE QUEST.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING I SOUGHT OUT.

BUT STARTING WITH STELLA IN "THE FALL" AND MYSELF THROUGH HER, LIVING AND WALKING IN HER SHOES, WEARING HER CLOTHES, AND THAT EXPERIENCE AWAKENING A SENSUALITY IN ME THAT I THINK HAD BEEN ASLEEP A VERY LONG TIME, AND EMBRACING THAT.

SINCE THEN, IT HAS BECOME A REGULAR TOPIC OF CONVERSATION THAT I AM PROUD TO HAVE A PLATFORM TO PARTICIPATE IN.

AND I GUESS, MY HOPE IS THAT IT -- THE BOOK AND THE CONVERSATION AROUND IT ENCOURAGES WOMEN TO FIND THEIR VOICE AND DECLARE WHAT IT IS THAT THEY WANT, AND IT'S NOT -- I'M NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT IN BED.

I'M TALKING ABOUT IN ALL AREAS OF THEIR LIVES.

AND AT THE BALLOT BOX.

THIS FEELS LIKE A GOOD MOMENT TO BE HAVING THAT CONVERSATION.

ABOUT THE POWER THAT WOMEN CAN HAVE RIGHT NOW IN THIS MOMENT TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

>> THREE WEEKS AWAY.

GILLIAN ANDERSON, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING THE TIME TO SIT WITH US.

>> THANK YOU.

>>> THAT IS IT FOR NOW.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR WATCHING THE SHOW, GOODBYE FROM NEW YORK.