Oprah Winfrey had an interview with
Prince Harry and Megan Markle.
A lot of people
are talking about it.
And there was something that was
said by Harry that is worth
exploring and a little more detail.
He talks specifically about
the cozy relationship between
the royal family and
the UK tabloids, take a look.
>> I also am acutely aware of where
my family stand and
how scared they are of the tabloids
turning on them.
>> Turning on them for what?
They're the royal family.
>> Yes, but there is this invisible
what's termed or referred to as the
invisible contracts behind closed
doors between the institution and
the UK tabloids >> How so?
>> Well,
to simplify it's a case of if you
as a family member are willing to
wine, dine and give full access to
these resources,
then you'll get better press.
>> What do you care about better
press if you're Royal?
>> I think everyone needs to
have some compassion for
them in that situation, right?
There is a level of control by fear
that has existed for generations,
I mean generations controlling
generations.
>> But who is controlling whom?
It's the institutions from our
point of view just the public,
it's- >> The institution survives
based on that perception.
>> So you're saying there's this
relationship that Megan was
speaking of.
It's like symbiotic, one lives or
thrives because the other exists,
that's what you're saying?
>> That's the idea.
>> I thought that was
an interesting take especially from
Prince Harry since he knows by
experience as being part of
the royal family what it's like to
deal with the UK press.
But more importantly to see how
that symbiotic relationship really
developed and
continues to thrive in the UK.
And also let's keep it real, one of
the reasons why that stood out to
me is because it's so similar to
what we talked about here in
the context of the United States.
I mean, I immediately think about
the White House
Correspondents Dinner.
What's the point of the White House
Correspondents Dinner?
It's a fancy glamorous event meant
to keep access to the White House,
as long as you play by the rules,
as long as you play ball and
as long as a part of the media
serve as a personal PR arm for
people in positions of power.
And that goes against everything
that journalism is supposed to
stand for.
But Cenk, I'm just going to let you
go off because I know that this is
your wheelhouse and
you love going off on this.
So proceed.
>> Yeah, well,
there's two parts of it,
the part that Ana just talked about
which is so common that everyone in
the press kind of assumes it.
Although they denied feverishly if
ever asked publicly access what
name so honest trading favors for
acts as we would never,
don't be absurd.
Almost everyone in the mainstream
press does it.
And so this is the oldest trick in
the book when you are a politician.
Let's say you're in the White House
and you're a staffer but
a high level one for Trump and
you want to get positive coverage,
you leak to the press.
And then the press frames it as
your right and
everybody else is wrong.
It's happened in
the Trump administration,
Obama administration,
it will happen in the Biden.
It's that, it's politics 101 and
unfortunately, media 101.
Now, if you're the media and
you actually cared about truth and
honesty, you wouldn't do that.
You would tell people who was
actually at fault,
and you wouldn't favor the person
who gave you the leak.
But that is not how they operate.
And as consumers of news,
we want you guys to know that so
that you can correctly analyze.
I was interviewed Noam Chomsky
about this, and I said, how do you
even read the New York Times or
listen to NPR, why CNN?
Because you know, you're the guy
who literally wrote the book on
manufacturing consent and you know
that they've got an agenda.
And he's look the agenda is once
you're trained on
it is super easy to spot.
When you see someone getting
weirdly positive coverage in a
story, that's probably the leaker.
[LAUGH] Okay, but they never share
the secret with you guys.
That's why this is not about
the Royal Family, this is a really
interesting story about how media
interacts with power.
And the second point of it is just,
>> Can you hold that thought Cenk?
Just because you said something
about Chomsky, and
I want to buttress your point.
Chomsky is absolutely right.
So, Manufacturing Consent
is the book that I assigned my
students last semester.
And once you understand the ins and
outs of how the media works and
how it maintains access to power,
you do read articles differently,
right?
And I think this is part of
the media literacy that's kind
of missing from our
educational curriculum.
For instance, when I'm reading
a Washington Post piece and
they reference a nonpartisan
Think Tanks analysis on something.
Well, I know that Think Tanks
are never non partisan,
so immediately I'll go to
the website for this Think Tank.
I'll look at the board and
it's full of former bankers,
former lobbyists, people who
certainly do have a bias.
It might not be a Democrat or
Republican bias, but it's certainly
a pro corporate bias,
which is worth noting in
an article that you're writing
about the upcoming stimulus bill.
You see what I'm saying?
So you just have a better sense of
how things are kind of framed in
a certain way that gives one party,
the benefit of the doubt,
as opposed to the other party.
And you also know that some of
the sources that are used as
credible sources do in fact have
some serious problems and biases,
that should be disclosed in
the piece, but usually aren't.
>> Yeah, let me keep it real to on
how this affects so
much of the media.
It's not just mainstream media.
Look, there's a guy pretending to
be progressive who's constantly
complimenting the people that
come on his show,
politicians that come on the show,
and then is not sophisticated.
And so will scream into the camera,
this politician like
Bernie Sanders, or whoever else
didn't come on my show.
Did he didn't come on my show?
So, I'm going to tell you he's
a bad guy.
You're so stupid, you just admitted
access journalism on your air.
So it affects a lot of
people, right?
We know about it, so
we guard against it to 100% here,
to the best of our efforts.
I remember when someone in
Harry Reid's office told us we were
banned, and that Harry Reid would
never talk to us again because
of our criticism of him.
And that was one of my proudest
moments.
What do I care if Harry Reid
comes on the show or not?
Who cares or access to power?
Keep it, I don't need it.
I just need you guys and we need to
give you the news actual news.
Now the second part of it,
guys, when you see the leaks, it's
comes with a fill with an agenda.
In this case, all the leaks were
against Prince Harry and
Megan Markle.
What does that tell you?
That tells you that
someone in the Royal Family, so
one very powerful or maybe several
people that are powerful,
are trying to undermine him.
The media made a Faustian bargain
in the UK that Prince Harry's
revealing there.
They're saying basically,
we don't care what's true, we view
certain people in the Royal Family
to be more powerful.
So we will now do their bidding by
leaking things true or false about
that couple to try to bury them.
This is so interesting because we
just talked about this in
the Friday postgame last Friday
with David Schuster, who like
me used to be a host on MSNBC.
And we both had stories about how
MSNBC leaked things about us that
were outrageous.
In my case, they leaked ratings
from six months ago to try to bury
me because my ratings were so good,
they had to go back six months.
These are things you could see in
the articles.
If you had all ready seen this and
you read that article, you'll
be like wait, why are they talking
about ratings for six months ago?
This is a leak meant to hurt Cenk.
And the reporter knows that because
you're referencing really old
ratings, but you do that in order
to get more leaks and more access.
In that case, MSNBC Schuster had
his own story by the way, you can
check out that whole post game if
you're a member at TYT.com/join.
But they see our responsibility is
to you guys, and not any of that.
But when you see those leaks be
weary of the both the powerful
person leaking and the reporter and
the institution that is taking part
in that, honestly corruption