On The Nation: Lisa Owen interviews Lauren Duca
On The Nation: Lisa Owen interviews Lauren Duca
Well, playing against type,
Teen Vogue magazine has become a major voice in the
anti-Trump resistance that’s been led by columnist Lauren
Duca. I spoke to her from New York and asked her what
exactly she thinks the threat
is.
Lauren Duca: I think
the greatest threat to our country right now is our
president. The threat is an undermining of democracy – of
the right of the press, of the right for citizens to be
fully informed, and their participation in democracy. I
think that the biggest threat is the way that the legitimacy
of journalism is being challenged. Recently the president
came out against the First Amendment. I’m not really sure
what his intentions were with that quote, but overall,
there’s this kind of fear mongering around ‘fake
news’, and part of our problem is actual fake stories,
but, beyond that, it’s this perception that you can decide
what is true based on what you feel, and the way that facts
have been taken from us, the way we’ve been deceived
repeatedly by the president, who has lied literally
thousands of times, since taking office.
There
are a couple of things there that I want to talk about. The
first one being this idea that he is a propaganda machine
– that’s the allegation in respect of him – throwing
out false information, hundreds of tweets, thousands of
tweets, and in other environments too. So you talk about the
Fourth Estate and what their role is, how does the media
combat that when he tells people that the media is ‘fake
news’ and a whole bunch of people would agree with him. So
how do you fight that?
I
think that journalism as an industry has failed in the sense
that it hasn’t adequately communicated that its role is to
empower citizens with information, that its first and
foremost allegiance needs to be to its citizens, and I think
there’s a lot of confusion about what the purpose of a
journalist is. We hear so much about the ‘lying liberal
media’, and ideas about both sides and equal times. The
truth is not a math equation. We need to have objectivity of
method, and be transparent about how we’re presenting
facts, be clear with our audiences about why we’ve chosen
to give things the way that we’re given them – why
we’ve used anonymous sources in certain cases, why we’ve
provided certain statistics, being really clear about the
editorial decision making within the articles themselves,
not in an editorial piece released days later. I think
creating things that are accessible, easy to understand and
trusting readings, but also meeting them at their level and
doing the works of that political writing is not alienating.
So many of the stories coming out of this administration,
you need to be five kinds of highly specialised lawyer to
fully understand it. And I think another thing that
political journalists need to do better is talking directly
to the people and putting things into terms that they’re
able to understand amid their busy and hectic lives.
Politics shouldn’t have to be a full-time job. We should
all be actively informed, and not just when we have a
Disaster in Chief.
But when you talk about the
fact that he is potentially America’s biggest threat to
democracy, 63 million engaged in that process and voted for
him. They voted for him. He is democratically elected. So
how is that a threat to
democracy?
The way that he
was elected and what he’s doing in office are two
different things. I think that the way he is abusing his
power, the way he is abusing executive orders to hurl bombs
in our culture war, and completely disrespecting the system
of checks and balances, will have a real red alarm if he
tries to fire special investigator Robert Muller, but what
we actually, I think, this week have seen is the way the
system does function. His trans military ban was shut down
in the courts. We have Muller having updates in his
investigation. These are the branches of government working
to check the executive branch, and that is significant. At
the same time, I think that my fellow countrymen need to be
reminded that democracy is not a finished product. It is not
something that was nicely sealed and finished when a bunch
of white guys in wigs finished writing them up. We need to
be involved and participate and stay informed, and contact
our representatives, and, frankly, have a re-democratisation
of our citizenry that is overdue and was still necessary in
happier times under Obama and even George Bush beforehand.
So I think that what Trump is doing to challenge democracy
is undermining the level to which people are able to
participate, challenging our understanding of the truth, and
abusing his power and profiting from, frankly, the
presidency in ways that we have never seen in the history of
the United States.
Didn’t people know that
that was what he was like beforehand? I mean, they heard him
talking about – and I’m using his words when I say this
– they knew he was saying things like about grabbing
women’s pussies. People knew that before they voted for
him, yet they still voted for
him.
The great shame of our
nation is that the things that people were willing to
stomach in order to vote Donald Trump to office, and I think
there were a lot of different motivations for that.
There’s been a lot of coverage of who the people are who
voted for Trump. My parents voted for Trump, and I think
they would’ve voted for anything that ran as a Republican.
There are all kinds of reasonings, but what I- I think the
most concise way to put it is that he seems kind of like a
CSI black light in a hotel room. All the gross white shit
has been revealed now from his election – all of the
bigotry and the sexism, the racism, the homophobia – that
runs to the currents of American culture; the things that
people are willing to stomach for political gains,
especially the Republican Party. The GOP is usually
complicit.
We’re almost out of time, but,
very quickly, I’m quoting you here. You say, ‘The idea
of total civility, in that everyone has to be polite, is
bullshit.’ So in the context of Trump, what exactly are
you asking or giving people licence to
do?
I think that there is a
code of respectability about talking about politics. We’re
told that it’s rude, that you have to be polite, that you
have to respect and honour everyone’s views. I think that
certainly we could all get a little bit better at having
civil conversations, but I think that we need to reject the
idea of being sweet and silent, and- I think we need to
reject the idea of being sweet and silent, and we need to
talk about politics, and we need to ruffle feathers and have
the difficult conversations. I think that anybody that
counts themselves among the resistance to Donald Trump needs
to have those one-on-one conversations with the family
members who maybe did vote for him, and fully understand
what it means to fight for this country, to fight for a
truer democracy and to fight for equity. Those personal
connections – that is how grass root movements start, and
how we can form communities and make change, so I hope that
anybody who is invested in this moment will change the way
they think about having political conversations, and
politeness doesn’t have to be part of them, bravery
does.
Well, I think you might’ve started a
conversation here this morning. Thanks very much for joining
us. Lauren Duca.
Thank
you.
Transcript provided by Able. www.able.co.nz