The cohost of The Five and star of Gutfeld! talks to VF about his off-the-wall new game show, What Did I Miss?, in which contestants held in monthslong isolation are challenged to distinguish between real and fake news.
“We live in a time where we have a president that’s making news every day,” says Fox News’ Greg Gutfeld, “and some of it is just unreal, and some of it is unbelievable.”
The rapid-fire, often mind-boggling nature of the Donald Trump news cycle is an asset to Gutfeld in putting contestants through the paces on What Did I Miss?, his zany new Fox Nation game show. The streaming program, which will have a three-episode run starting on May 12, is also something of a social experiment, featuring four people who have opted to remain in complete isolation from Inauguration Day until mid-April, with no media consumption or contact with the outside world. They’re welcomed back into society by coming face-to-face with Gutfeld and a live studio audience for a showdown to see who is best at separating actual news stories from bogus ones.
I recently caught up with the busy Fox News personality as he was in a car traveling from the network’s Midtown headquarters, where he cohosts The Five and late-night show Gutfeld!, to his home in the city. I was curious if Gutfeld, beyond making the show for its pure entertainment factor, was trying to drive home a larger point about the credibility of the news media. “Not a lot of deep thinking” was involved in the making of the show, says Gutfeld, who adds: “I think you can draw conclusions that in this world, it’s hard to tell what’s real and what’s not.”
Gutfeld, a former top editor at Men’s Health, Stuff, and Maxim UK, and a TV host who mixed comedy with conservative politics on his old wee-hours Fox News show, Red Eye, arguably blazed a trail for today’s manosphere, which we discussed, along with why he considers it “incredibly healthy” to question the legitimacy of the media; how Fox News fits into that equation; and, of course, Trump. Gutfeld, a Trump supporter, says that as far as politics and entertainment go, the president didn’t just blur the line—“he erased it.”
This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
Vanity Fair: I watched the first screener, and you called it the “strangest game show ever created.” I have to know—where did the idea come from, and how involved were you in shaping the format?
Greg Gutfeld: We had a couple of meetings on it, and I think originally we wanted to do it before the election because we thought the big question would be who becomes president. But these things take forever, so we ended up doing it in the new year. The contestants went in on Inauguration Day. Fox approached me with the idea, and I was like, I can’t believe this hasn’t been done before. It combined the reality show feel with a game show. And the idea that we get to make stuff up is fun too.
Was it meant to be purely funny, or was there an intention to say something deeper about the insanity of the news cycle or the media?
I think that’s a byproduct. It was just, Let’s do it. The concept itself didn’t need any heavy thinking. It was like, These people are going to miss the news; let’s talk about the news. And it just so happens that we live in a time where we have a president that’s making news every day, and some of it is just unreal, and some of it is unbelievable. That just added to the charm of it. Whatever you saw there was just us having fun, not a lot of deep thinking. But I think you can draw conclusions that in this world, it’s hard to tell what’s real and what’s not.
This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
Vanity Fair: I watched the first screener, and you called it the “strangest game show ever created.” I have to know—where did the idea come from, and how involved were you in shaping the format?
Greg Gutfeld: We had a couple of meetings on it, and I think originally we wanted to do it before the election because we thought the big question would be who becomes president. But these things take forever, so we ended up doing it in the new year. The contestants went in on Inauguration Day. Fox approached me with the idea, and I was like, I can’t believe this hasn’t been done before. It combined the reality show feel with a game show. And the idea that we get to make stuff up is fun too.
Was it meant to be purely funny, or was there an intention to say something deeper about the insanity of the news cycle or the media?
I think that’s a byproduct. It was just, Let’s do it. The concept itself didn’t need any heavy thinking. It was like, These people are going to miss the news; let’s talk about the news. And it just so happens that we live in a time where we have a president that’s making news every day, and some of it is just unreal, and some of it is unbelievable. That just added to the charm of it. Whatever you saw there was just us having fun, not a lot of deep thinking. But I think you can draw conclusions that in this world, it’s hard to tell what’s real and what’s not.
The term fake news is used a lot in the show, and Trump has used that for years to attack the mainstream media. Are you deploying the phrase in the same way here? And also, do you agree with him doing that?
I’ve been on both sides of the pen. I’ve been an editor and a writer for, I don’t know, it might have been 15 years before I got into TV, maybe even longer. I do believe it’s healthy not to trust the media. I think the concept of fake news, or calling the news fake, is incredibly healthy for people to understand that they should not be believing everything or anything they read.
And I assume that goes for Fox as well?
I think Fox is really great about presenting both sides. If you look at something like The Five, I think we’re the only show that does that. We also do something that neither CNN or MSNBC do, which is, we label our views and our commentators. When I’m talking, I’ve got an opinion. I’m not a reporter; I’m a guy with an opinion, sitting around a table like I’m at a bar. We don’t pretend to be anything else.
What do you see as your role at Fox? Are you a comedian, a political commentator? A mix of both?
I’m basically doing whatever I feel like doing. People ask my opinion, and I give it. Sometimes it’s serious, sometimes it’s funny, sometimes it’s bold. I never ever said I was a comedian, because I’ve never performed as a comedian. I was an editor and a writer for many years. I’ve always felt that I was a writer first. So basically, I’m just a guy who likes to talk and has a good time doing it.
Have you ever been told by anyone at Fox, executives or producers, to tone it down or avoid certain topics?
Never. I’ve never had anyone tell me to change an opinion at all. The only times might be about language, if I get a little too coarse. But that’s tiny, and it doesn’t affect me. I usually just do it. I think people have learned not to give me guidance, because I always end up leaning into the opposite.
Do you think your success is a signal of how audiences are changing and how they want to consume news in this era?
Well, I think it was there for the taking. All I did was comment on what I saw. A brutal honesty about the world is necessary. I’m probably the harshest critic on media and I’m in media. I think that’s healthy.
What are your thoughts about the role of comedy in politics right now? People like Elon Musk have said something to the degree of “legalize comedy.” Do you agree with that sentiment? Is comedy under threat?
I think people self-censored each other. They were worried that they would lose gigs or would lose their status. The late-night shows were very careful to stick to one side because that was the prevailing assumptions of the industry they’re in. The proof is in the explosion of people like Joe Rogan, Shane Gillis, Theo Von, and me. It’s like people needed it.
I’ve been on both sides of the pen. I’ve been an editor and a writer for, I don’t know, it might have been 15 years before I got into TV, maybe even longer. I do believe it’s healthy not to trust the media. I think the concept of fake news, or calling the news fake, is incredibly healthy for people to understand that they should not be believing everything or anything they read.
And I assume that goes for Fox as well?
I think Fox is really great about presenting both sides. If you look at something like The Five, I think we’re the only show that does that. We also do something that neither CNN or MSNBC do, which is, we label our views and our commentators. When I’m talking, I’ve got an opinion. I’m not a reporter; I’m a guy with an opinion, sitting around a table like I’m at a bar. We don’t pretend to be anything else.
What do you see as your role at Fox? Are you a comedian, a political commentator? A mix of both?
I’m basically doing whatever I feel like doing. People ask my opinion, and I give it. Sometimes it’s serious, sometimes it’s funny, sometimes it’s bold. I never ever said I was a comedian, because I’ve never performed as a comedian. I was an editor and a writer for many years. I’ve always felt that I was a writer first. So basically, I’m just a guy who likes to talk and has a good time doing it.
Have you ever been told by anyone at Fox, executives or producers, to tone it down or avoid certain topics?
Never. I’ve never had anyone tell me to change an opinion at all. The only times might be about language, if I get a little too coarse. But that’s tiny, and it doesn’t affect me. I usually just do it. I think people have learned not to give me guidance, because I always end up leaning into the opposite.
Do you think your success is a signal of how audiences are changing and how they want to consume news in this era?
Well, I think it was there for the taking. All I did was comment on what I saw. A brutal honesty about the world is necessary. I’m probably the harshest critic on media and I’m in media. I think that’s healthy.
What are your thoughts about the role of comedy in politics right now? People like Elon Musk have said something to the degree of “legalize comedy.” Do you agree with that sentiment? Is comedy under threat?
I think people self-censored each other. They were worried that they would lose gigs or would lose their status. The late-night shows were very careful to stick to one side because that was the prevailing assumptions of the industry they’re in. The proof is in the explosion of people like Joe Rogan, Shane Gillis, Theo Von, and me. It’s like people needed it.
It was very sad to watch comedians have to walk back things they said in the past, which is the most absurd practice ever. It was pathetic and cowardly when comedians would do that.
You mentioned people like Joe Rogan. Do you see yourself in that world of media, which many are calling “the manosphere”?
I don’t know because I’ve never aimed for anything. I’ve always done my thing and let the world—the entertainment consumption—come to me. I think things just happen, and then the media struggles to find a way to describe it so it makes sense to them. They’ll dismiss it—“Oh, it’s the manosphere.” We were discussing Vanity Fair and their piece on how protein is part of the manosphere. Why is everything healthy now a part of MAGA? Why are you giving that up? It was like, Fitness is now conservative. No, it wasn’t. Why are you politicizing it? [Editor’s note: Thanks for reading, Greg!] You’re going to end up on the outside of that, doesn’t do anybody any favors. There should be more liberal podcasts. Why isn’t there? I don’t know. I think it’s more of an organic thing that just happened, rather than me choosing it.
Speaking to MAGA, do you personally think Trump is good for the country?
Oh, awesome. Definitely.
Did you vote for him?
Yeah, I voted for him. He’s the first nonpolitician that I’ve ever seen. He’s probably the most persuasive leader I’ve seen. He’s also, I would say, apolitical. I have conservative friends who are appalled by his trade stance. But my argument with Trump? You have to accept the total package because there’s so many good things in it that you’re bound to be upset by one thing or another.
Do you have a personal relationship with him at all?
I know him and I’ve met with him more than a few times. We talk infrequently. I guess I would say I have a relationship with him, but I wouldn’t want to overplay it. He’s done my show a couple of times and we get along. I was very critical of him for a long time, but I changed.
Where would you say you sit on the political spectrum? Do you identify with the Republican Party?
I kind of outgrew the whole party thing, and I feel like it’s a mono-party, which is why Trump is attractive—because he’s outside the mono-party.
I always felt that I was a libertarian, but I’m coming to question that. I’ve always been for the decriminalization of drugs, and maybe I still am, but I have to be honest with myself. I look at the streets of New York and LA and other cities. Was that a good idea? Can I still hold on to those beliefs, seeing what it’s done to the nature of how we live in these cities?
You said that you see Trump as apolitical in a way, but I think some would argue that there’s a blurring of the lines between politics and entertainment.
You mentioned people like Joe Rogan. Do you see yourself in that world of media, which many are calling “the manosphere”?
I don’t know because I’ve never aimed for anything. I’ve always done my thing and let the world—the entertainment consumption—come to me. I think things just happen, and then the media struggles to find a way to describe it so it makes sense to them. They’ll dismiss it—“Oh, it’s the manosphere.” We were discussing Vanity Fair and their piece on how protein is part of the manosphere. Why is everything healthy now a part of MAGA? Why are you giving that up? It was like, Fitness is now conservative. No, it wasn’t. Why are you politicizing it? [Editor’s note: Thanks for reading, Greg!] You’re going to end up on the outside of that, doesn’t do anybody any favors. There should be more liberal podcasts. Why isn’t there? I don’t know. I think it’s more of an organic thing that just happened, rather than me choosing it.
Speaking to MAGA, do you personally think Trump is good for the country?
Oh, awesome. Definitely.
Did you vote for him?
Yeah, I voted for him. He’s the first nonpolitician that I’ve ever seen. He’s probably the most persuasive leader I’ve seen. He’s also, I would say, apolitical. I have conservative friends who are appalled by his trade stance. But my argument with Trump? You have to accept the total package because there’s so many good things in it that you’re bound to be upset by one thing or another.
Do you have a personal relationship with him at all?
I know him and I’ve met with him more than a few times. We talk infrequently. I guess I would say I have a relationship with him, but I wouldn’t want to overplay it. He’s done my show a couple of times and we get along. I was very critical of him for a long time, but I changed.
Where would you say you sit on the political spectrum? Do you identify with the Republican Party?
I kind of outgrew the whole party thing, and I feel like it’s a mono-party, which is why Trump is attractive—because he’s outside the mono-party.
I always felt that I was a libertarian, but I’m coming to question that. I’ve always been for the decriminalization of drugs, and maybe I still am, but I have to be honest with myself. I look at the streets of New York and LA and other cities. Was that a good idea? Can I still hold on to those beliefs, seeing what it’s done to the nature of how we live in these cities?
You said that you see Trump as apolitical in a way, but I think some would argue that there’s a blurring of the lines between politics and entertainment.
He just happens to be very entertaining and persuasive, and he likes to get shit done. That pretty much muscles out the politics. I don’t see him as a political animal at all. I’ve been around enough politicians. I can see why they have so much discomfort with him, because he’s an entertainer and a persuader and a businessman who entered their world, and he doesn’t go by their rules, and that has made them uncomfortable.
It’s not the blurring of the lines. I think he erased it.
And you see that as a positive?
Definitely. Politicians suck. They’re designed to employ language to obscure truth. He doesn’t do that. He uses the language we use. He’s the most transparent leader I’ve ever seen.
You want to know what he’s thinking? Ask him. He’s going to tell you and he’s not going to shut up. He’s the opposite of every politician. They’re all so careful about what they’re going to say. It’s funny that people are critical of him for basically having the time and generosity to tell you everything, so much you might not even like him. But he doesn’t care; he’s just going to tell you. That is a tremendous respect for people that he tells you what he thinks. I’d take that over a politician any day—left, right, you name it.
Those are pretty big shoes to fill. Who could possibly be next?
That’s the question. It could be somebody on the left because, like you said, those lines, they don’t really exist anymore. [Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] has been pushed because she does have charisma, and that matters. I honestly don’t know. He’s kind of broken the mold.
What does your media diet look like?
When I get up in the morning, I work out to podcasts. I will listen to Scott Adams. He’s the guy behind “Dilbert.” I’ll listen to the All-In podcast. I will see who was on Lex Fridman. I love Tim Dillon’s podcast, which is always great. I’ll go on YouTube and look for the people that I’m interested in, whether it’s Peter Thiel being interviewed or—I don’t listen to short-form stuff. I don’t get news that way. I deliver it in that way, but I like listening to people who are interesting talk about stuff. Could be Jordan Peterson one day. I like Bret Weinstein and his wife, Heather; it’s called the DarkHorse Podcast. They talk about biology and social issues, and I find that really interesting. I obviously always check Rogan. I listen to Red Scare because they’re really funny.
The left has been behind in this because they don’t trust themselves to go beyond a sound bite. I think that’s why Kamala [Harris], they were fighting so hard to keep her off Joe Rogan because they didn’t trust that she could do it. Whereas Trump sat down and went, like, for two and a half hours. They couldn’t trust her to go beyond what the handlers wanted her to do.I think you’re going to know who that person is. Maybe it is Stephen A. Smith. Somebody who could talk and is not afraid of taking a risk on an idea. You have to take risks for people to trust you, to be authentic. You’ve got to defend some people. And I think the left got too scared of the woke to actually defend themselves against the woke. I think there’s going to be a push away from identity politics. That’s going to be a really healthy thing for the Democratic Party to start thinking about.
Are you still living in New York City? I’m curious if you have any thoughts on the mayoral race?
Yeah, I’m still living in the city. I don’t know what to make of it. To be honest with you, I have a feeling that it’s probably going to be [Andrew] Cuomo, if he wants it. I do know that whoever is tough on crime is going to win.
Any closing thoughts on Cuomo?
He’s got some baggage, but desperate times, you know—people may overlook that baggage, whether it was the COVID rest home stuff or the sexual harassment. [Cuomo has denied all allegations against him.] People are worried about walking to work, using the subway. I think we need to get the citizens to regain confidence that they can go outside and use the subway without worrying.
I’m pulling up!
Just in time.
https://archive.is/MvDYN#selection-465.0-2643.13
It’s not the blurring of the lines. I think he erased it.
And you see that as a positive?
Definitely. Politicians suck. They’re designed to employ language to obscure truth. He doesn’t do that. He uses the language we use. He’s the most transparent leader I’ve ever seen.
You want to know what he’s thinking? Ask him. He’s going to tell you and he’s not going to shut up. He’s the opposite of every politician. They’re all so careful about what they’re going to say. It’s funny that people are critical of him for basically having the time and generosity to tell you everything, so much you might not even like him. But he doesn’t care; he’s just going to tell you. That is a tremendous respect for people that he tells you what he thinks. I’d take that over a politician any day—left, right, you name it.
Those are pretty big shoes to fill. Who could possibly be next?
That’s the question. It could be somebody on the left because, like you said, those lines, they don’t really exist anymore. [Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] has been pushed because she does have charisma, and that matters. I honestly don’t know. He’s kind of broken the mold.
What does your media diet look like?
When I get up in the morning, I work out to podcasts. I will listen to Scott Adams. He’s the guy behind “Dilbert.” I’ll listen to the All-In podcast. I will see who was on Lex Fridman. I love Tim Dillon’s podcast, which is always great. I’ll go on YouTube and look for the people that I’m interested in, whether it’s Peter Thiel being interviewed or—I don’t listen to short-form stuff. I don’t get news that way. I deliver it in that way, but I like listening to people who are interesting talk about stuff. Could be Jordan Peterson one day. I like Bret Weinstein and his wife, Heather; it’s called the DarkHorse Podcast. They talk about biology and social issues, and I find that really interesting. I obviously always check Rogan. I listen to Red Scare because they’re really funny.
The left has been behind in this because they don’t trust themselves to go beyond a sound bite. I think that’s why Kamala [Harris], they were fighting so hard to keep her off Joe Rogan because they didn’t trust that she could do it. Whereas Trump sat down and went, like, for two and a half hours. They couldn’t trust her to go beyond what the handlers wanted her to do.I think you’re going to know who that person is. Maybe it is Stephen A. Smith. Somebody who could talk and is not afraid of taking a risk on an idea. You have to take risks for people to trust you, to be authentic. You’ve got to defend some people. And I think the left got too scared of the woke to actually defend themselves against the woke. I think there’s going to be a push away from identity politics. That’s going to be a really healthy thing for the Democratic Party to start thinking about.
Are you still living in New York City? I’m curious if you have any thoughts on the mayoral race?
Yeah, I’m still living in the city. I don’t know what to make of it. To be honest with you, I have a feeling that it’s probably going to be [Andrew] Cuomo, if he wants it. I do know that whoever is tough on crime is going to win.
Any closing thoughts on Cuomo?
He’s got some baggage, but desperate times, you know—people may overlook that baggage, whether it was the COVID rest home stuff or the sexual harassment. [Cuomo has denied all allegations against him.] People are worried about walking to work, using the subway. I think we need to get the citizens to regain confidence that they can go outside and use the subway without worrying.
I’m pulling up!
Just in time.
https://archive.is/MvDYN#selection-465.0-2643.13
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.