♪ ADAM: TONIGHT ON "TALKING POLITICS."

HOW SHOULD THE MEDIA COVER FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP WHEN HE SHARES VIOLENT, POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS MESSAGES WITH HIS FOLLOWERS?

>> IF IT IS TRUE A MOVE LIKE THIS IS CONCERNING.

WE BELIEVE IN.

THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.

ADAM: THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT IS TAKING STEPS FROM KEEPING AL JAZEERA FROM BROADCASTING IN THE COUNTRY.

TWO LONG-TIME JOURNALISTS JOINED ME TO WADE THROUGH THE ISSUES.

THE MASSACHUSETTS GOVERNMENT IS TIGHTENING ITS BELT.

LAWMAKERS WERE TO ADJUST THE BUDGET AND GOVERNOR MAURA HEALEY IS CUTTING BACK COSTS IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, ANNOUNCING A PARTIAL HIRING FREEZE.

THE CITY OF BOSTON IS FACING SIMILAR CONCERNS AS EMPTY OFFICE SPACE MEANS LESS REVENUE COMING IN FROM COMMERCIAL PROPERTY TAXES.

TO KEEP RESIDENTS FROM PAYING MORE THE MAYOR IS -- HOW ARE THE POLITICS OF AUSTERITY PLAYING OUT ON BEACON HILL AND IN CITY HALL?

I’M JOINED BY COMMONWEALTH BEACON REPORTER GIN DUMCIUS AND GREATER BOSTON MEDIA FOUNDER DAVID FOLKENFLIK.

GOVERNOR HEALY AND HER ADMINISTRATION ARE STRESSING THIS IS NOT A HIRING FREEZE.

THEY PREFER THE PHRASE HIRING CONTROLS.

THAT BEING SAID, THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE CRYING FOUL OVER THIS SINGABLE LIMIT HER ABILITY TO GET THINGS DONE.

I WANT TO READ A STATEMENT FROM THE GROUP PROGRESSIVE MASSACHUSETTS FROM THEIR POLICY DIRECTOR.

HE SAID THE GOVERNOR CANNOT FULFILL PROMISES OF IMPROVING THE T WITH A HIRING FREEZE.

WE CANNOT DELIVER ON A ROBUST PUBLIC SERVICES IF WE ARE ALLOWING THE GOVERNMENT TO SHRINK BY ATTRITION WHICH WAS ALMOST -- ALSO A HALLMARK OF THE BAKER ADMINISTRATION.

HE OBJECTED TO STATE POLICE GETTING A -- THE GOVERNMENT WILL BE ABLE TO HIRE IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA.

DO YOU THINK THESE CUTS ARE AS BIG OF A DEAL AS OF THE CRITICS ON THE LEFT ARE SUGGESTING?

YAWU: UNDERGIRDING THE CRITIQUE, THE TAX CUTS, SPECIFICALLY THE TAX CUTS ON CAPITAL GAINS AND TAX CUTS THAT WERE TARGETED AT THE WEALTHY, FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE, THESE CUTS THAT WE ARE GOING THROUGH NOW ARE ENTIRELY UNAVOIDABLE.

ADAM: OR IF WE HAD NOT CUT TAXES -- YAWU: WE WOULD NOT BE IN THIS POSITION OF A TEMPORARY HIRING FREEZE THAT COULD BE RENEWED IN JUNE WHEN IT IS SET TO EXPIRE.

ADAM: DO YOU SEE THE CUTS AS DRASTICALLY LIMITING GOVERNMENT’S ABILITY TO DO WHAT NEEDS TO DO?

IT IS A TEMPORARY FREEZE AND NOT EVERYONE IS A PART OF IT.

YAWU: AGAIN, IT IS PERHAPS AVOIDABLE BUT -- PART OF WHAT PROGRESSIVE MASS WAS SAYING IS IF YOU ARE GOING TO ACHIEVE EVERYTHING YOU WANT TO ACHIEVE WITH REFORMING THE MBTA, CAN YOU DO THAT WITHOUT HIRING?

WHY IS PUBLIC SAFETY BEING HELD HARMLESS WHEN CRIME RATES ALL OVER THE COUNTRY, AND CERTAINLY IN MASSACHUSETTS, ARE DECLINING, WHY DOES THE BUDGET HAVE TO KEEP GOING UP?

ADAM: QUESTIONS WORTH PONDERING.

THIS COMES AS TAX REVENUES HAVE BEEN COMING IN LOWER THAN EXPECTED FOR THE BETTER PART OF A YEAR.

TO MY RECOLLECTION EVEN WHEN PROJECTIONS ARE DOWNGRADED THEY CONTINUE TO COME IN LOWER-THAN-EXPECTED.

THAT BEING SAID, IS PART OF THE CONTEXT THE BIG COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH MANAGING THE MIGRANT CRISIS IN MASSACHUSETTS?

THAT IS NOT CHEAP FOR THE HEALY ADMINISTRATION.

GIN: THAT IS PART OF IT.

IT IS IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND WE HAVE A FEW MORE MONTHS OF REVENUE TO LOOK AT, AS WELL.

THEY DO HAVE SOME RUNWAY AS THEY ARE PREPPING RIGHT NOW NEXT YEAR’S FISCAL BUDGET WHICH STARTS IN JULY.

THE HOUSE WILL TAKE A CRACK AT WHAT THEY THINK REVENUES WILL BE.

AND THEN THE SENATE IS NEXT.

AND THEN THEY HASH OUT.

THERE IS SOME TIME TO FIGURE OUT WHAT NEXT YEAR LOOKS LIKE, AS WELL AS WHAT THE REST OF THE YEAR FINISHES OUT.

THIS IS AN ONGOING ISSUE.

THE MEDIA OBVIOUSLY IS COVERING IT PIECE BY PIECE BUT THERE IS A LARGER PICTURE AND A LARGER FISCAL PICTURE THAT WE NEED TO ZOOM OUT ON.

ADAM: LET’S SHIFT GEARS AND TALK ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON AT CITY HALL.

THE TERRY MOVE IS TRICKIER TO UNPACK CONCEPTUALLY.

IT COMES ON THE HEELS OF A REPORT IN FEBRUARY THAT FOUND THAT THE VALUATION OF COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE IN THE CITY WOULD BE DROPPING AND THAT WOULD LEAD TO LESS TAX REVENUE BEING GENERATED.

WITH THE VALUE OF OFFICE SPACE EXPECTED TO DECLINE 20% TO 30% BY 2029 AND COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE PRICES BY 12% TO 80% THERE COULD BE A REVENUE SHORT FILL BETWEEN -- SHORTFALL BETWEEN $1.2 BILLION AND $1.5 BILLION.

WHAT WOULD IT DO FOR MAYOR WU AND THE CITY IF SHE COULD INCREASE TAX RATES BY THE TIME THE VALUATION IS GOING DOWN?

YAWU: SHE HAS THREE CHOICES.

ONE IS TO DO NOTHING WHICH WOULD LEAD TO MAKING CUTS IN CITY GOVERNMENT.

ANOTHER WOULD BE TO INCREASE TAXES ACROSS THE BOARD AND THEREBY INCREASING TAXES ON PROPERTY OWNERS IN BOSTON, INCLUDING MANY PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE.

ADAM: RESIDENTIAL.

YAWU: RESIDENTIAL, WHICH COULD FORCE UP RENTS.

EVERYBODY’S TAX BILL WOULD INCREASE.

YOU ARE POTENTIALLY ALIENATING VOTERS, VERSUS WHAT SHE IS PROPOSING, WHICH IS TO PUT MORE OF THE BURDEN ON THE BUSINESS.

PROBABLY, POLITICALLY, THE MOST EXPEDIENT THING TO DO WOULD BE TO TRANSFER THIS BURDEN ONTO THE BUSINESS SECTOR.

ADAM: HOW DOES THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY FEEL ABOUT THIS?

THE ANNOUNCEMENT RELEASED BY THE WU ADMINISTRATION INCLUDED QUOTES FROM SOME MEMBERS OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY.

GIN: THERE IS MIXED FEELINGS.

THE GREATER BOSTON REAL ESTATE BOARD IS UNHAPPY.

THEY ALREADY CLASHED WITH THE MAYOR OVER HER PROPOSAL FOR RENT CONTROL.

THERE IS A FEELING AMONG SOME IN THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY THAT THEY ARE BEING ASKED TO DO EVEN MORE AS THEY ARE STRUGGLING WITH A DOWNTOWN THAT HAS NOT SEEN ALL THAT MUCH FOOT TRAFFIC SINCE THE PANDEMIC.

IT IS A COMPLICATED FORMULA.

CITY HALL WILL PUSH BACK ON THE WORD SHORTFALL.

IN THEIR VIEW THE REVENUE WILL KEEP COMING IN.

IT IS JUST A QUESTION OF, HOW DO YOU SLICE THAT PIE?

WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO DO WITH THIS MEASURE, SIMILAR TO WHAT A PREVIOUS MAYOR DID, IS SHIFTED ONTO BUSINESS.

ADAM: IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU MEAN WHEN YOU USE THE TERM "SHORTFALL."

IT HAS DIFFERENT CONNOTATIONS FOR DIFFERENT PEOPLE.

THE MAYOR SIGNED AN ORDINANCE CREATING A BRAND-NEW CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN BOSTON.

THE OLD BOSTON PLANNING AND DEVELOPING AGENCY WHICH WAS PRECEDED BY THE BOSTON REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IS NOT TOTALLY GONE BUT IT IS PRETTY CLOSE TO TOTALLY WITHERED AWAY.

HOW WILL THIS CHANGE DEVELOPMENT IN BOSTON AND HOW IT WORKS?

YAWU: IDEALLY, IT IS SEPARATING PLANNING OUT OF THE DEVELOPMENT FUNCTIONS.

THERE WOULD BE MORE SEPARATION THAT DEVELOPERS, THEREFORE, ARE NOT DRIVING WHAT HAPPENS IN BOSTON, WHAT BOSTON LOOKS LIKE BUT A COMBINATION OF RESIDENTS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS COULD SORT OF DO MORE THOROUGH PLANNING AND AVOID SITUATIONS LIKE THE ONE WE ARE IN, PERHAPS WHERE WE HAVE ALL OF THIS LAB SPACE THAT NOBODY WANTS.

THAT IS THE IDEAL OUTCOME, I THINK, FOR MANY PEOPLE IN BOSTON.

ADAM: YOU SOUND A LITTLE SKEPTICAL.

ARE YOU?

YAWU: I THINK A LOT OF THE DETAILS WILL BE HASHED OUT.

WE WILL SEE WHAT THIS ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE.

IT IS A VERY DIFFERENT PLAN THAN WHAT MAYOR WU IS PROPOSING THEN WHEN SHE WAS ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL.

I THINK THE PROOF WILL BE IN HOW IT ACTUALLY WORKS.

ADAM: THE VOTE HERE WAS SPLIT.

EIGHT COUNSELORS SUPPORTED THE CHANGE, FIVE DID NOT.

THE EITHER VOTED NO, DID NOT VOTE OR VOTED PRESENT.

IT WAS A MIX OF THE MOST CONSERVATIVE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL AND SOME OF THE MOST PROGRESSIVE VOICES ON THE COUNCIL.

WHAT IF ANYTHING SHOULD WE MAKE OF THAT?

ARE THESE THE IDEOLOGICAL SECTIONS THAT WILL BE SUBJECTING THE NEW STATUS QUO THE CLOSER SCRUTINY OR IS THERE SOME OTHER TAKEAWAY?

GIN: IT IS WORTH NOTING ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO VOTED AGAINST IT WAS A STAFFER.

ADAM: JOHN FITZGERALD.

GIN: HE REPRESENTS DORCHESTER.

HE IS PART OF A GROUP THAT DEFENDS WHAT THE BE PDA -- THE BPDA HAS DONE IN THE LAST DECADE.

ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL, MY SENSE WAS IN 2021, A LOT OF PEOPLE -- IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A PUNCHING BAG THROUGHOUT MULTIPLE MAYORAL ELECTIONS.

FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE WHEN YOU SAY BD -- BPDA REFORM, THAT CAN MEAN A LOT OF THINGS.

WE ARE SEEING WITH THAT OVERHAUL LOOKS LIKE.

THERE ARE SOME FOLKS, IF THEY ARE SEEING A LOSS OF CONTROL, TO THEM IT IS CONCERNING.

THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS AS THE OLD SAYING GOES.

I DID RE-BREED A DOCUMENT FROM -- I DID RE-READ A DOCUMENT FROM 2019.

SHE DID WRITE IT IS A " -- CHANGES, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE CITY COUNCIL AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, THERE WILL BE SOME CHANGES.

IT IS REALLY UP TO THE VOTERS WHICH HE IS RUNNING FOR REELECTION TO HOLD HER TO ACCOUNT IF SHE FEELS SHE DELIVERED ON WHAT SHE PROMISED.

ADAM: I HAVE TO JUMP ON THAT LAST STATEMENT.

WE HAVE ABOUT 30 SECONDS LEFT.

YOU SAID WHEN SHE RUN FOR REELECTION NEXT YEAR.

SHE HAS NOT OFFICIALLY SAID SHE IS RUNNING.

SHE MADE A POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT CHOICE GOING TO BEACON HILL LOOKING FOR AUTHORITY TO INCREASE TAXES ON COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE HOLDERS.

DO BOTH OF YOU ASSUME SHE IS RUNNING AGAIN NEXT YEAR?

YAWU: YES, ABSOLUTELY.

GIN: YES.

ADAM: THERE IS.

LET’S CONSIDER THIS A FORMAL ANNOUNCEMENT.

GIN DUMCIUS, YAWU MILLER, THANK YOU BOTH.

NEXT UP, COVERING DONALD HAS ALWAYS BEEN COMPLICATED.

NOR MORE SO THAN WHEN HIS POLITICAL ATTACKS TAKE ON VIOLENT CONNOTATIONS.

LIKE A RECENT VIDEO HE SHARED ON TRUE SOCIAL SHOWING AN IMAGE OF PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN TIED UP IN THE BACK OF A PICKUP TRUCK.

WHEN A FORMER PRESIDENT WHO INCITED A VIOLENT RIOT WITH VIOLENT RHETORIC STARTS SENDING POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS MESSAGES, HOW CAN THE MEDIA RESPOND AS POSSIBLE?

I AM JOINED BY NPR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT DAVID FOLKENFLIK AND LYLA ALPHONSE, THE NEW HAMPSHIRE AND RHODE ISLAND EDITOR FOR THE BOSTON GLOBE.

THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING HERE.

DAVID, FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS A LONG HISTORY OF SAYING THINGS THAT OTHER PRESIDENTS NEVER WOULD HAVE SAID.

DO YOU THINK THAT SHARING THIS PARTICULAR IMAGE OF PRESIDENT BIDEN IS YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THAT WORK HAS A BEN CROSS HERE?

DAVID: CAN I GO WITH BOTH?

ADAM: ABSOLUTELY.

DAVID: THIS IS DEEPLY PROBLEMATIC FROM A POLITICAL STANDPOINT, YOU CAN SEE IT AS WE USE THE PHRASE RED MEAT FOR THE HARD COURT FROM SUPPORTER, TRYING TO ACTIVATE THEM, GET THEM OUT, MAKE BIDEN AS SOMETHING OF A JOKE.

RED MEAT IS ESSENTIALLY DESTROYED/THAT WAS A BODY AT SOME POINT.

WHAT YOU SEE IS THE SITTING PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, A LIVING PERSON ESSENTIALLY HOG-TIED IN THE BACK OF A PICKUP TRUCK AS IF THAT IS SOMETHING TO BE CHEERED.

ESSENTIALLY A THREAT AGAINST THE PRESIDENT WITH ANY CREDIBILITY IS INVESTIGATED BY THE SECRET SERVICE.

WHEN KATHY GRIFFIN DID THAT WITH A MASK OF TRUMP, SHE WAS INVESTIGATED AND BECAME TABOO, EVEN IN HOLLYWOOD, A HOTBED OF ANTI-TRUMP SENTIMENT.

THIS IS NOT JUST CAVALIER BUT TRULY INTENTIONALLY REPUGNANT SUGGESTING THERE BE VIOLENCE DONE TO ONE’S POLITICAL ENEMIES.

I THINK YOU ARE ASKING, SHOULD WE STILL BE REPRODUCING THIS?

SHOULD WE STILL BE SHOWING THIS IN SOME WAYS?

IN SOME WAYS THERE IS CAUSE TO DO SO GENTLY AND BRIEFLY AS YOU JUST DID SO PEOPLE CAN EVALUATE IT FOR THEMSELVES.

IT IS PART OF OUR RHETORIC AND OUR TIME.

ADAM: I WOULD LIKE TO GET YOUR TAKE ON HOW WE SHOULD REPORT ON SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

DO YOU THINK THAT AN IMAGE LIKE THIS SHOULD BE SHOWN AS WE REPORT ON WHAT THE FORMER PRESIDENT DID?

SHOULD WE DESCRIBE IT IN VIVID TERMS WITHOUT ACTUALLY SHOWING IT BECAUSE SHOWING AMPLIFIES IT?

THE FORMER PRESIDENT IS SEEKING TO PUT OUT A MESSAGE.

LYLA: THIS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF HOW THE MEDIA IS NOT A MONOLITH.

YOU LOOK AT THE DIFFERENT OUTLETS AND HOW THEY HAVE TREATED THE STORY.

THE AP HEADED STRAIGHTFORWARD, THIS IS VIDEO OF A TRUCK ON A HIGHWAY.

I HAVE SEEN A SIMILAR DECAL ON A TRUCK THAT SHOWED A WOMAN TIED UP IN THE BACK.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS OUT THERE.

FIVE BYLINES ON THEIR STORY.

AL JAZEERA JUST DESCRIBED PLAINLY WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE IN THEIR SEGMENT.

PERSONALLY, I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WHERE YOU ARE CAUGHT BETWEEN, DO WE SHOW THIS IMAGE, WHICH IS MEANT TO INCITE A VERY EMOTIONAL AND STRONG RESPONSE, OR DO WE IGNORE IT?

WE ARE CAUGHT IN A TRAP OF, THIS IS THE FORMER PRESIDENT.

WHEN THE FORMER PRESIDENT SAYS SOMETHING, YOU NEED TO CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT IT IS NEWSWORTHY OR WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE GOING TO LET PEOPLE KNOW IT HAPPENED.

THERE IS A FINE LINE THAT CANNOT BE CROSSED BETWEEN AMPLIFYING THE MESSAGE AND INFORMING PEOPLE ABOUT WHAT THE FORMER PRESIDENT HAS SAID.

IT IS TOUGH TO DO BOTH.

I PERSONALLY WOULD NOT SHOW THE IMAGE.

I WOULD DESCRIBE IT, THOUGH.

I WOULD NOT DESCRIBE THE IMAGE IN DETAIL BUT OFFER AS MUCH CONTEXT AS I COULD.

THIS WAS ON THE BACK OF A PICKUP TRUCK.

IT WAS AN IMAGE THAT WAS PAINTED WERE A DECAL ON THE TRUCK.

I HAVE HEARD THAT IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS MANUFACTURED BY THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN.

ADAM: I HAVE NOT HEARD ANY INDICATION OF THAT.

LYLA: THAT IS CONTEXT THAT IS VALUABLE.

ADAM: THAT IS A GOOD POINT.

I WANT TO ASK DAVID ON HIS TAKE OF WHAT THE CALCULUS SHOULD BE BUT BEFORE I DO THAT, LET’S TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT HOW A FEW DIFFERENT OUTLETS -- CNN, CBS AND MSNBC -- THE WAY THEY APPROACH THIS.

>> THIS WAS CAPTURED ON THURSDAY ON LONG ISLAND.

IT SHOWS TWO TRUCKS TRAVELING ON A ROAD, DECKED OUT IN TRUMP FLAGS AND DECALS.

ON THE SECOND TRUCK THERE IS A PICTURE OF JOE BIDEN HOG-TIED.

>> ON FRIDAY TRUMP POSTED ON SOCIAL MEDIA A VIDEO OF AN EFFIGY SHOWING BIDEN RESTRAINED IN A PICKUP TRUCK.

WE ARE CHOOSING NOT TO SHOW YOU.

.

THAT VIDEO >> THE FORMER PRESIDENT SHARED AN IMAGE OF PRESIDENT BIDEN RESTRAINED IN THE BACK OF A PICKUP TRUCK.

ADAM: DAVID, LYLA OFFERED HER TAKE ON THE APPROACHES THAT SHOULD BE USED, HOW DO YOU SEE THE CALCULUS AROUND SHARING OF MORANT MESSAGES THAT ARE BEING DISSEMINATED BY THE FORMER PRESIDENT?

WHAT SHOULD WE MAKE A POINT OF DOING AND WHAT SHOULD WE AVOID DOING?

DAVID: WHAT YOU DO NOT WANT TO DO IS BE YANKED THIS WAY AND THAT WAY BY WHATEVER IMPULSE TRUMP AND HIS CAMPAIGN ARE INDULGING AT THAT MOMENT AND WHATEVER AT THIS MOMENT, INFLAMMATORY RHETORIC OR IMAGERY THEY ARE USING.

YOU DO NOT WANT TO BE A CONSTANT HUMDRUM OF CHASING THEM.

WHEN THERE IS PERCEPTION UPFRONT ABOUT THE IDEA OF A LINE BEING CROSSED AND THE IDEA THAT IF ANOTHER PERSON WERE TO DO IT, AS APPARENTLY THIS DRIVER DID, IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT GETS LOOKED AT.

IT IS WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT.

WITH THE SITTING PRESIDENT, THERE ARE ADDITIONAL IMPLICATIONS WRITTEN IN THE LAW.

IT IS WORTH LOOKING AT.

THERE ARE TIMES WHERE SOME NEWS OUTLETS WILL DO WELL TO PRESENT IT.

YOU KNOW IF MSNBC IS DOING IT, THEIR AUDIENCE LIENS SHARPLY LEFT AND IS NOT LIKELY TO SHOW SOMETHING DEGRADING ABOUT THE PRESIDENT.

THERE ARE MOMENTS WHEN THE FRAMING MATTERS.

THE LANGUAGE MATTERS.

HOW LONG YOU DO IT.

HOW MANY TIMES YOU DO IT.

THE CHOICES YOU MAKE ARE IMPORTANT.

IT IS NOT SIMPLY A BLANKET YES, SHOW IT EVERY HOUR, IT IS MEASURED AND CONTAINED UNCONTROLLED SO WE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

ONLINE YOU CAN OFTEN HAVE WARNING SIGNS.

WHAT WE NOW CALL TRIGGER WARNINGS.

YOU SAY THIS MIGHT BE DISTURBING.

THERE ARE WAYS TO DISTRIBUTE THIS.

WHAT WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND IS WHAT IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING.

IF THIS IS OK WITH A CERTAIN SECTOR OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY, WE NEED TO BE AWARE OF THAT TO NOT COMPLETELY AVERT OUR EYES.

ADAM: I LIKE THE IDEA OF FINDING A WAY TO SHOW IT AT LEAST ONCE SO PEOPLE CAN GET THE FULLEST SENSE OF WHAT THE IMAGE IS IF THEY WANT TO.

I ALSO LIKE THE IDEA OF MAXIMIZING CONTEXT AND PERHAPS OFFERING A TRIGGER WARNING, NOT MAKING IT A NONSTOP EVERY HOUR, TOP OF THE HOUR, THERE IT IS AGAIN.

THINKING THROUGH THE PRESENTATION.

DAVID: ON CBS THEY HAD A CAPTION ONLINE THAT SAID CONTROVERSIAL.

WE UNDERSTAND IT IS BEYOND CONTROVERSIAL.

IT IS INCENDIARY, INFLAMMATORY.

WE NEED TO ACKNOWLEDGE IT, EVEN WITHIN OUR CAPTIONING.

LYLA: I COMPLETELY AGREE.

SOMETIMES WE TRY TO PROTECT OURSELVES BY COUCHING THE CAPTION BECAUSE YOU DO NOT WANT TO SAY SOMETHING IS OFFENSIVE BECAUSE MAYBE IT IS NOT TO SOME VIEWERS.

I LIKE HOW THEY SHOW THE TRUCK THAT WAS IN FRONT FIRST WITH JUST THE FLAGS.

YOU REALIZE THIS WAS AN INCIDENT THAT HAPPENED OUT IN THE WILD, SO TO SPEAK.

SOME PEOPLE ARE TERRIBLE.

THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO WILL BE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS.

NOT SHOWING THAT LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT WERE NOT DESCRIBING IT LET’S YOU IMAGINE THINGS THAT ARE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THE REALITY IS.

DAVID: IN JUST 10 SECONDS ON THIS, WE NEED TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN ACKNOWLEDGING WHAT THIS IS AN THINKING THAT MAKES A NEWS ORGANIZATION PRO-TRUMP OR ANTI-TRUMP.

THIS IS ABOUT FOCUSING WITH CLARITY ON THE SPECIFICS OF THIS INCIDENT, OF THIS IT PUTS SO, THE IMPLICATIONS OF IT AND WHAT IT SAYS ABOUT US IN THE MOMENT AND IT REFLECTS ON THE CAMPAIGN AND THE CANDIDATE AND PEOPLE GET TO EVALUATE THAT FOR THEMSELVES.

BUT IT DOES NOT TAKE SIDES ON A PARTY OR A CANDIDATE TO BE PRECISE AND FAIR IN PROVIDING AN ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF WHAT ACTUALLY OCCURRED.

ADAM: I WANT TO SWITCH YEARS AND TALK ABOUT ANOTHER TOPIC -- I WANT TO SWITCH GEARS AND TALK ABOUT ANOTHER TOPIC.

ISRAEL HAS PASSED A LAW THAT WOULD GIVE THE COUNTRY THE AUTHORITY TO BASICALLY STOP THE NETWORK AL JAZEERA FROM OPERATING IN ISRAEL.

AL JAZEERA HAS BEEN AGGRESSIVELY COVERING THE WAR IN GAZA.

THEY ARE ONE OF A FEW OUTLETS THAT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT.

PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU SAID AL JAZEERA IS A TERROR CHANNEL THAT FACILITATED THE OCTOBER 7 ATTACK AND WANTS TO USE THIS NEW LAW TO BAN THE NETWORK.

WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THIS?

IS THIS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT TRYING TO CONTROL THE NARRATIVE COME OUT OF GAZA OR IS THERE SOMETHING NEW AFOOT?

LYLA: PERSONALLY, IT SEEMS TO ME IT IS ANOTHER ASPECT OF TRYING TO CONTROL THE MESSAGE.

NOT JUST THE MEDIA ABOUT THE MESSAGE OVERALL AND THE MESSAGING.

THE LAW IS ON THE BOOKS.

IT HAS NOT BEEN IMPLEMENTED YET, WHICH MAKES THIS FILE GET IN LINE OR I WILL STOP YOU FROM BROADCASTING.

IN GENERAL, REGIMES THAT ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF DOING SOMETHING THAT IS UNPOPULAR DO NOT LIKE IT WHEN INDEPENDENT MEDIA SHOWS WHAT IS GOING ON ON THE GROUND.

I THINK THAT IS WHAT WE ARE SEEING HAPPENING HERE AND THE EFFORT TO CONTROL WHAT IS COMING OUT OF ISRAEL.

ADAM: DAVID, AL JAZEERA HAS RUN INTO TROUBLE WITH NOT JUST THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT -- I SHOULD MENTION THIS SIGNIFICANT POINT, ISRAEL -- THE ISRAELI MILITARY HAS KILLED AND INJURED MULTIPLE JOURNALISTS FROM AL JAZEERA BOTH PRIOR TO THE WAR IN GAZA AND DURING THE WAR IN GAZA.

THERE ARE DISPUTED NARRATIVES.

AL JAZEERA SAYS A CORRESPONDENT OF THEIRS WAS TARGETED AND INTENTIONALLY KILLED BEFORE THE WAR IN GAZA.

THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT SAID IT IS ACCIDENTAL.

THAT IS CONTEXT WORTH BEING PUT OUT THERE.

AL JAZEERA HAS RUN INTO TROUBLE WITH ARAB GOVERNMENTS IN THE PAST AND WITH THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT.

IS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT AL JAZEERA’S M.O.

THAT MAKES THEM A LIGHTNING ROD WHEN IT COMES TO GOVERNMENTS TRYING TO IMPEDE THEIR OPERATION?

DAVID: I THINK IN SOME WAYS IT IS THAT AL JAZEERA IS CAPABLE OF DOING SOME GOOD INDEPENDENT AND FAIR-MINDED REPORTING THAT MAKES THEM PERHAPS MORE THREATENING TO THE NETANYAHU GOVERNMENT OR PARTICULARLY THE PRIME MINISTER HIMSELF.

I DO THINK THERE CAN BE SOME TRUTH TO THE IDEA THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HOW AL JAZEERA REPORTS ITSELF AND IN ENGLISH AND IN ARABIC.

I ALSO THINK NETANYAHU AND THE ISRAELI INTERESTS ARE MOST LIKELY TO BE REPRESENTED FAIRLY IN ARABIC SPEAKING COUNTRIES BY AL JAZEERA THAN ALMOST ANY OTHER SOURCE, NOT THAT THE AP OR OTHER WESTERN-BASED OUTLETS ARE CAPABLE OF DOING THAT BUT THEY ARE TRUSTED IN A LOT OF THESE PLACES.

THEY HAVE COME UNDER ATTACK BUT A LOT OF AUTOCRATIC ARAB REGIMES BECAUSE THEY DO INDEPENDENT REPORTING.

LET’S REMEMBER, ISRAEL HAS DECLARED WAR.

IT IS A TIME OF WAR.

WE HAVE NOT IN THE UNITED STATES FOUGHT WAR ON OUR SOIL SINCE WORLD WAR II.

IT MATTERS THAT WE HAVE NOT DECLARED WAR SINCE THEN AND THE CONFLICTS WE HAVE ENGAGED IN IN THE CONVENTIONAL SENSE BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE CENSORSHIP RULES THAT COME INTO EFFECT DOMESTICALLY.

ISRAEL, IN A TIME OF WAR, CAN DO THAT AND SAY THIS IS THE WAY COUNTRIES WAGE WAR.

IN UKRAINE THERE ARE LIMITATIONS ON PRESS, AS WELL.

HOWEVER YOU HAVE THIS INTERESTING WRINKLE -- A NUMBER OF THEM IT SEEMS TO BE AT THE MOMENT -- WHERE YOU HAVE NETANYAHU DOING SOMETHING THAT HAS ATTRACTED WORLD CRITICISM AND TO VARYING DEGREES.

YOU HAVE A POPULACE IN ISRAEL THAT WAS INCREASINGLY HOSTILE BEFORE THE OCTOBER 7 DEADLY TERRORIST ATTACKS.

IT HAS BECOME SO AGAIN BECAUSE OF HIS SEEMING INTENT TO PURSUE MILITARY DESTRUCTION AS OPPOSED TO FIGURING OUT A WAY TO NEGOTIATE THE RELEASE OF ISRAELI HOSTAGES.

THIS IS VERY UNCOMFORTABLE FOR A WAY OF SIGNALING THIS IS OUR PROBLEM, WE ARE GETTING BAD PRESS FROM INSIDE THE COUNTRY, WE WILL GO AFTER IT.

HE IS LIKELY TO GET THE MOST FAIR HEARING FROM AL JAZEERA EVEN IF IT IS ON WELCOMED.

JOURNALISTIC TRADITION IS TO INCORPORATE A LOT OF DIFFERENT VOICES INCLUDING UNCOMFORTABLE VOICES, INCLUDING VOICES OF HAMAS IN OP-ED PAGES OF MAJOR ISRAELI NEWSPAPERS.

THE IDEA OF HAVING THESE OTHER VOICES IS NOT UNFAMILIAR TO THE ISRAELI EXPERIENCE.

WHAT NETANYAHU IS SAYING IS SHOWING AN AUTOCRATIC SPIRIT.

ADAM: LAST WORD FOR YOU.

THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN CRITICIZED FOR ITS TREATMENT OF JOURNALISTS.

ABOUT 90 PALESTINIAN JOURNALISTS HAVE BEEN KILLED, A COUPLE OF ISRAELI JOURNALISTS.

GIVING THAT THE WAGING OF THE WAR IS A HOTLY CONTESTED TOPIC, IS THERE ANYTHING MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS OR GOVERNMENTS SHOULD DO IN RESPONSE?

LYLA: THEY SHOULD SPEAK OUT AND CALL FOR PROTECTION OF THE JOURNALISTS.

THE PROPOSED BAN OF AL JAZEERA SAYS A LOT MORE ABOUT THE COUNTRIES THAT WANT TO BAN THAT IT DOES -- THAN IT DOES ABOUT AL JAZEERA ITSELF.

THE ORGANIZATION SHOULD CONTINUE TO TRY TO GET ACTUAL INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON ON THE GROUND IN ISRAEL AND GAZA AND FAIRLY REPORT ON WHAT THEY SEE BECAUSE WHAT THEY ARE GETTING FROM DIFFERENT GOVERNMENT ENTITIES IS NOT THE WHOLE PICTURE.

ADAM: LYLA ALPHONSE, DAVID FOLKENFLIK, THANK YOU BOTH.

THAT IS IT FOR TONIGHT BUT DO COME BACK NEXT WEEK AND LET US KNOW WHAT YOU THINK.

THE EMAIL IS TALKINGPOLITICS@ WGBH.ORG.

THANK YOU FOR WATCHING.

GOOD NIGHT.

♪ ♪ ♪