Last week, Trevor Noah interviewed the conservative commentator Tomi Lahren on The Daily Show. Although I recommend watching the nearly half-hour unedited version, the one that aired is still remarkable to watch.
Lahren, a firebrand conservative who has a show on TheBlaze network, remarked as she started the interview that she had entered “the lion’s den.” The 24-year-old has been extremely popular from her self-titled program Tomi. Her reputation largely has been from her monologues, which are shared by millions on social media. I had never heard of her before this interview, a perfect example of the filter bubble that has polarized online discourse. Although I do not have social media presence, my usual sources of news (NPR, The Atlantic, Slate, The New York Times, and The New Yorker) are left-leaning and are probably equally popular with others of my political stance. Additionally, I am a relatively frequent watcher of The Daily Show, another source of media that is generally friendly to the left.
Tomi Lahren’s interview was the perfect example of the collision of two normally isolated bubbles. She is from a military family and was raised in South Dakota. She has already made a name for herself as a young, female, commentator who is a fresh face to Republican ideas that were once the exclusive domain of old white men. Trevor Noah represents the new, cosmopolitan, multicultural, globalized future of the left. He was born as a mixed-race child in apartheid South Africa and is now based in New York. New correspondents on the show including Ronny Chieng, Roy Wood Jr., and Desi Lydic embody that more inclusive view.
Despite all this, the interview with Lahren was still surprising for her own frankness and Noah’s willingness to push her on some of the more charged statements she made. She argued that black people are 18 times more likely to kill police, a statement that caused audible gasps in the studio audience. Lahren also defended her comparison of the Black Lives Matter movement to the KKK, stating that the movements shared similarities because they occasionally led to looting. She reiterated her criticism of Colin Kaepernick, who protested racial oppression by kneeling during the national anthem, and on her show called him a “whiny, indulgent, attention-seeking cry baby”. When Lahren denied the accusations of racism against her she proclaimed, directly to a biracial man, that she “…doesn’t see color” — to incredulous laughter in the audience and to a visibly wincing Trevor Noah.
There is a real social divide between the kinds of people who regularly watch her videos (and others like it), and the Daily Show. By the end of the interview, the audience was vocal and frequently booed her. I doubt that she came on the show to change anyone’s mind, or even to find a common ground with Noah or the audience. As Vox’s Caroline Framke wrote, “it was clear that trying to sway Lahren was never his intent, or vice versa. Inviting her on was a way to show his viewers exactly the kind of rhetoric and thinking that didn’t just dominate the election, but won it.”
Noah succeeded in achieving this end. It certainly surprised me and sent me down the rabbit hole of exploring the conservative media sphere are hidden from me by algorithms.
This interview brought me back to one of my favorite parts of the old Daily Show with Jon Stewart, which was when Stewart occasionally brought in Bill O’Reilly. The two men disagreed on nearly everything. Despite this there was always an air of mutual respect and the tone remained jovial, however heated the discussion became. I see Trevor Noah’s recent interview as continuing Stewart’s willingness to break out of the liberal bubble and talk to the other side. In this current political climate of anger, distrust, and divide, it’s the least we can hope for.
![1960-kennedy-nixon-debate[1]](https://i0.wp.com/election2016cudenver.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/1960-kennedy-nixon-debate1.jpg?w=75&h=56&crop&ssl=1 "1960-kennedy-nixon-debate[1]")
adelisamuric96
ahill19
chavezla
coleharding24
Coynepurse
daniozaeta
donalynwhite
eajones2016
ehurd3414
Tony Robinson
freedomrings1991
hopsshotfirst
james4768
mattyb21420
mercimbalax26
mcseidel
sarahsargent92
sdraegers
sjdavis14
snarkystark
taylorlugomae
tejaselection2016
Tony Robinson
December 10, 2016
Amazingly interesting post, Tejas. I learned a great deal from this post as I hadn’t seen the show or followed this person at all. You write with confidence and smooth flair in all your blog posts and I greatly enjoyed learning from you.
chavezla
December 13, 2016
This post brought up a lot of important points on the isolated bubbles both sides of the political spectrum are immersed in. The need for productive dialogue is an important part of a functioning democracy that is needed as the country is continuously polarized. Having watched the interview myself, I found that not only did both Trevor and Tomi have different opinions, but were also inhabiting different world views entirely. Her statements on the KKK, as mention in the blog, were not representing an accurate comparison of the two movements. Trevor pointed out the false equivalency in her argument mentioning the violent message the KKK embodied. While the need for a more active dialogue is needed it would also be helpful to correct inflated statements with facts.
adelisamuric96
December 13, 2016
Very interesting post. I think that as much as we like to put ourselves in a bubble and surround ourselves with like-minded people, it is important to look outside our own scope of ideas. Where we get our news from influences us more than we care to admit and in the age of social media, it is interesting to see how much more polarizing the news media is. There is a Gallup study (http://www.gallup.com/poll/195542/americans-trust-mass-media-sinks-new-low.aspx) that shows that an overwhelming majority of people do not trust the mainstream media to get their news. It is no surprise that many people, especially in our generation turn to social media for news as well as people like Tomi and Trevor. I agree with Lauren as well in that although it is helpful to have a dialogue, there is also a line that needs to be drawn between people stating their views and openly spewing false equivalencies or just making things up. It is a very delicate balance that I do not believe we have been able to find yet.
ahill19
December 14, 2016
Great post and interesting video, Tejas! I, like you, had never heard of Tomi Lahren before, but I’m glad I had the chance to watch some of her videos. I think it’s great that Trevor Noah and Tomi Lahren created a space for discussion across the aisle, although I question how productive that discussion is when the audience becomes audibly biased. That’s not to say that the gesture wasn’t worthwhile though. I browsed through a few of the YouTube comments on the video, and (not that YouTube comments are known for being representative) I was struck by how entrenched some commenters still were in their ‘bubble’, even after watching the show. Many comments flat out dismissed Lahren as ‘stupid’ and that Lahren justified their hatred of conservative views. I would hope that a show like this would open conversation, not solidify close-mindedness.
It’s also remarkable to see how combative the two sides are – like you said, the show was a collision of two bubbles, and the bubbles definitely didn’t pop. Neither side was willing to make any concessions when pressed on issues, and I think that’s representative of the deadlock we see in Congress. Even though Noah and Lahren met to discuss, nowhere did they meet in the middle. To me, the interview felt more like two individuals yelling at each other from different sides of the room.
eajones2016
December 14, 2016
Tomi has definitely managed to get not only my attention but many more online followers during the course of this election season. According to her twitter page @TomiLahren she has 424K followers along with almost 3.7 million “likes” on Facebook. Her short videos entitled “Final Thoughts” have covered anything from Hillary bashing, to Colin Kapernick kneeling at football games, mocking the DAPL protesters, and of course her sharing her negative sentiments for the Black Lives Matter movement. Although she falls much more right then I tend to lean, I believe she passionately (sometimes in an angry manner) shares the young right voice. In my opinion even though they disagreed the interaction between her and Trevor was respectful. The top Tomi’s Facebook page says it well “Wheather you love what I’m saying or you hate what I’m saying, you’re having a reaction to it, and that is exactly what needs to happen in this country.” Both her short videos and he interview with Trevor are inciting conversations that need to be happening. I know that at my house this has been the case numerous times during dinner and at the end of dinner we might not agree on everything but it gets conversations started about important issues.
snarkystark
December 14, 2016
You bring up a lot of great points. I personally think that the interview was great while my social media feed seemed to show that a lot of people were angered by it. There are a lot of people on both ends of the spectrum that constantly live surrounded in their own little world. Growing up on the Internet, I’ve noticed that it’s far easier than ever to surround yourself with people who believe in your opinions and nothing else, creating a potentially dangerous filter bubble. There are people on the Internet who belive and spread outlandish things because their obscure online source said it was true. We see this in our current president elect and his cabinet picks. Her videos sharing her opinions usually go beyond one sided and into very unfounded and biased territory. Yet we have to admit that Noah is seen as the exact same way by her supporters. I their meeting was an example that it is possible to sit down with opposing viewpoints and talk.