The Interview - Fox News Wanted Greg Gutfeld to Do This Interview. He Wasn't So Sure.

Episode Date: November 8, 2025

The pugnacious conservative late-night host on his "hierarchy of smears" and the risks of being a scold.Thoughts? Email us at [e-mail] our show on YouTube: youtube.com/@TheInterviewPodcastFor transcripts and more, visit: nytimes.com/theinterview

From the New York Times, this is the interview. I'm David Markezi. Why can't conservatives break through on late-night TV? For years, that was an open cultural question. The left had The Daily Show, and last week tonight with John Oliver, not to mention other liberal-leaning hosts like David Letterman, Stephen Colbert, and Jimmy Kimmel. The right had no one. That is, until Greg Gutfeld.

Formerly a Health in Men's Magazine editor, Gutfeld joined Fox News in 2007 to host a later-than-late-night chat show called Red Eye. Then he worked his way up the schedule until 2023, when his new show, called Gutfeld. It's got an exclamation mark at the end. Moved to weekday nights at 10 on the East Coast and started dominating. Its format is a little different from traditional host-driven late-night shows, because rather than chat with celebrity guests, Gutfeld presides over a roundtable of regular panelists, Kat-Timfinthin, Tite. Iris, chief among them. The overall vibe is insult-heavy, defiantly anti-woke, and relentlessly pro-conservative. It's a highly successful formula. The show averages over three million viewers a night,

numbers that dwarf its competitors. But if Gutfeldt, who also hosts Fox's daytime show The Five, can now credibly call himself the king of late night, his kingdom is in turmoil. Earlier this year, CBS announced it was canceling The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, and, as you probably know, Jimmy Kimmel's show was briefly suspended after comments he made related to Charlie Kirk's murder. Both decisions were viewed by many as politically motivated and also as possible threats to free speech.

This is coming at a time when questions about the future of late night, as well as censorship and comedy, are thick in the air. All of which Gutfeld, in highly provocative fashion, had plenty to say about. Here's my conversation with Greg Gutfeld. Greg. Yes. Thank you for being here. My pleasure. I want to start with the biggest story in late night this year, or biggest stories, I should say, which are the impending cancellation of Colbert and Kimmel's suspension. Do you remember what your immediate reaction to the news of both was? I guess why did it take so long? Because, you know, I had crushed. them like bugs, David. I'd crushed them and I'd thrown them into the wind and they were still

here. I call it entertainment welfare. The only reason why they were around for so long, despite the fact that their numbers were dropping, was that the fact that they kind of like towed the line. So I guess when I heard that they were gone, it really didn't surprise me because the numbers were saying it. I don't think it was political. I didn't know anybody, and I'm counting by many liberal friends who watched them. And I think it's because it wasn't entertainment anymore. It was more like a therapy session for people that were upset at the world. So you don't give any credence to the notion that there were larger corporate political considerations that went into their, went into happen with both Colbert and Kimmel?

I think people kind of understand that there's never been anybody who's ever really folded because of Trump's saying you suck, you know what I mean? If the numbers were there, it wouldn't make any difference. Was it extra noise in the story? Probably. But I honestly think that this stuff was, the grumbling was already there. You described both their shows as being akin to therapy sessions for people who are mad at the world? Yes. Is there not a way in which your show functions similarly? Oh, no. I just, our show is fun. but you're going to be fun and mad at the same time yeah you can but generally i usually like to be at least part of the punching bag and i encourage that among the guests that that i am if i come off as petty about something that they have to like come after me for being equally as absurd and stupid i enjoy that the teasing makes it fun and also i genuinely like people that i tease and

In fact, if you want to know the people I don't like, it's the people I don't tease. And people know that when... So you must love the women on the view then? Yes. I adore... I love Whoopi. But I do...

And I like the other way. Rosie O'Donnell, you must be a big fan. But I mean, like, personally, and I don't... I guess I put the people I don't know are in a different kind of room. But I make fun of everybody that I love. And relentlessly, there are a lot of... And I won't mention it. But there are a lot of, like, say, conservative commentators who will not be teased.

This is a very serious vocation. I think the success of my show and the success of the five is based on the ability to tease. People try to replicate the five, and they don't understand. It's so obvious. The secret sauce is that we make fun of each other. And I think that is something that you don't see in the left at all. And I think we're the only people doing it. you asked me something else i forgot what it was um i do think i do think um there are issues that

upset me but i have to always kind of step back and go this thing cannot take over my life it's like it's like you know i'd say that trump derangement syndrome is now an addiction uh it's moved into something that is like it's creating a filter which every everything that you look at the people that you know your co-workers your relationships are all seen through this if you don't see this my way, we're going to have a problem. So I try to, my, my reflex is to always, no matter what the story is, is to always kind of put it back in its box. So it doesn't become something that I think about and change the way I view people. You don't think there's a way in which your show also sits behind a Trump filter. And if people don't agree fundamentally

with the positions that are sort of sympathetic to Trump that's upsetting for people. I mean, I look at it. It's like you're saying it only works one way. And to my mind, watching the show, it seems like it clearly. I think that the difference is. Trump influences in both directions. Yeah, but there's a key difference here is that let's say I may think you're wrong. You might think I'm evil.

That's where the difference is, the teasing and the ridicule is not your. Hitler or you're a fascist or an authoritarian. If I'm to insult you over the top, it's because it's obviously a joke. But I don't put a target on your back. To be clear, I think you're being a little disingenuous. Am I really? In some of your, I read all your books, you know. Really? Yeah. I would go through and, you know, market and, you know, sort of the most blatant counter-example to what you're talking about is you literally use the phrase, the left are dumb, fascist mother effers. Ah. What book was that?

I want to say it was in your most recent one, The King of Late Night. I could be wrong, but it's in one of your books. Yeah. I'll have to look back at that. What was the context? The left. Yeah. Who was I talking about? The left. No, but I mean,

but I'm saying that what did you pull it out of? And was it part of some kind of amplifying narrative where it's like these people are a threat to democracy it's going to lead to World War III. This is like the most damaging thing that has happened in the United States, I believe, because if you look at everything from the Palisades fire

to Charlie Kirk getting shot, these are all the product of amplified narratives, the repetition, the brainwash, the persuasion of being told over and over again, I'd have to look at that and see what I said. I imagine that it was in some kind of like paragraph of hyperbole where I was having fun because if it was an all-catch,

perhaps especially. Or I could have been mocking the actual language. I don't know. I'd have to trust you on that. You seem like a nice guy for now anyway. Well, anyway, go ahead. Because I know where you're going. Where do you think I'm going? I was going somewhere else. Oh, good. Good. Then go somewhere out. But where did you think I was going to bring, because you were talking about insults. I figured you were going to go into the like the world of insults and ridicule. That was not where I was going. That might come up later. You've been the top rated host in late night for for a minute now. And, you know, you sort of kind of like you did right at the top of our conversation, you hold that up as like a triumph over. Yeah, but I'm having fun.

You're having fun. Yeah, it's kind of like the same thing that Trump does where he says, I got the biggest question. It's just something fun to say, but more people say it to me than I say it to anybody else. A lot of people when they have commented on your success, they folded in with this idea that prior to Gutfeld, there hasn't been a hit conservative. late night show, do you think there's something that you cracked the code with, or do you think it's just your right time, right place because of changes in the culture? Like, why hasn't there been? I think it's a little of both. One is that late night shows were not political, and then they became political. There's half of the, let's say half of the population that doesn't share

those politics. So they're for the taking. They don't want Kimmel or Colbert in their living room, telling them they're stupid for voting for Trump. So there's all those people. But then the other thing is what you said of the change in the culture. It's like everybody was walking around going like, am I going to get canceled? Am I, um, do I have to be scared of not just what I'm saying, but what I'm thinking and do I actually change my behavior? And I had always been about sharing the risk that somebody's got to do it.

Like J.K. Rowling, within the trance movie, she obviously is a billionaire. She can share the risk. She has F.U. money. But I thought like, somebody has. to break the ice and say, I'm here and I'm going to do this. And whether it's, it's Rogan or Tim Dillon or Theo Vaughn, who's the guy that from the show Tires? I always forget.

Shane Gillis. Shane Gillis. Like, Shane Gillis is a great example. He was a guy that was shoved off to the side because he didn't fit the right formula for SNL. And then he comes back, what, four years later and is hosting it. But do you actually see? Kim O'Colbert and Fallon as competition?

Not really. Because you do very different things, but you do seem to need them in a way as foils. Yes, absolutely. In fact, you know, I kind of know myself enough that I do need foils. Why? Like, I talk about this with Jessica Tarloff a lot.

When I'm writing my notes for the five, I have her in my head. Like, she's my muse, you know, that like, okay like what is she reading how is she going to respond to this and it's very helpful just to have that rather than just writing for i don't know you know i write stuff anyway but um when i was in men's magazines my foils were like esquire gq details and i just made fun of them all the time it was just i think it was maybe it helps sharpen my identity and it reminds me of what i am which is not them.

I know that's circular, but... Is there any kind of actual animosity there? No. Because, you know, I just was looking up stuff you said about Colbert. It's like, you know, you call him a smug loser or something like that. The one that stood out for me about Kimmel was, let me make sure I get this right. If that man was any more full of shit, he'd be a colostomy bag. Yes.

Doesn't tip over into personal animosity? No. Or you don't have some... This is where I thought you were going to go earlier. I have this thing called the hierarchy of smears, and that means if you, at the hierarchy of smears, you call somebody a fascist who's going to destroy the world. I can call you anything. I made this point, like, in an article by the New York Times, but they didn't include it,

which bummed me out, which was the cat-timp article, and the writer had asked me, she was in the audience, the Gutfeld audience, watching the show, and she said, you know, during the show, you made like all of these fat jokes there were so many of them and i'm sitting in your audience and i'm saying like you know there's some overweight people and i said yeah but they didn't call me hitler and that's the difference it goes back to the that the framing which is i think you're wrong you think i'm evil and i'm never going to call somebody fat because they're fat i'm going to call you fat if you called me hitler and the hierarchy of smears that's way down here and the best part of about that is it hurts them it hurts them more than if they were to call me hitler because they

have to look in the mirror every day i know i'm not hitler they know they're fat it's funny because it's charming yeah what it's a charming way of looking at me yeah yeah no cat it makes me makes fun of me over this is gregg you're trying to turn it's calling people fat into a heroic endeavor and it's like yeah pretty much but i again like just stop calling me a nazi or hitler or a fascist, and I'll lay off the physical stuff. But the physical stuff doesn't come close to ascribing this moral evil to somebody that then generates animosity among people who might do something to you, who might, you know, come to your house.

That's what I think. I think about that when I call somebody a name, I go like, this fucker deserves this shit. Does that make sense? I understand what you're saying. Yeah. That's not the same as saying. I think it makes sense, but I understand what you're saying. I'll take the, I understand what you're saying, as making sense.

If you were to ask to consult Colbert and Kimmel's writers about how they could make fun of you, what would you tell them? Ooh. Okay, so height doesn't work because a lot of people make fun of my physical stuff, but I do that too. I do that too. So I guess I think you could- Yeah, where's your soft spot? Oh, where is my soft spot?

I don't know. That's funny. I would like to think that you could make fun of me about everything. But at this, I guess, it's weird because I just explained that like

this is the thing, my hierarchy of smears, maybe that is what it is. Maybe it's the, what gets me is when you, when you call me Hitler, that might be. be my soft spots.

That's the line. That's the line, I guess. And I think there's the idea that you're willing to take risks in things you say and push against various orthodoxies. What would be the risky thing to say to your audience? Hmm. And is that, are those risks you're willing to take? Yeah.

What I don't say, Kat says, Kat and I, disagree in a lot of stuff. She's more in the live and let live mode of the kind of the trans stuff. I am not. I believe in live and let live, but I think that there's a compelling pressure behind this kind of preferential treatment that is disturbing and can lead to other things. I'm always trying to figure shit out when it comes to spirituality, but I have offended my audience if I'm too flippant on religion. But I think that my audience is pretty generous because think about it. My audience didn't exist until I got there. And so they're aligning kind of with me in a way. So it would almost like be kind of surprising if I did, like, if there was something we

disagreed on. For example, I mean, I say I'm pro-life. Most of those people are pro-life. Maybe that's why they came to me. Do you remember what it was about religion that you said that offended your audience? God. I might have just been using the Lord's name in vain. That will always, that will always piss people off. Also, religious people are such nice people. They make you feel bad when they, They don't write angry letters. They, no, well, you're, New York Times, product of the devil, David. Let's be honest. But I just, because this is going to be in audio, too.

I just need to make it clear that I made an extremely skeptical face when, Craig, religious people don't write letters. No, no, I said, no, they write letters, but they're so polite. Though, the ones I get, I'm telling you, man, the ones I get, it's like, Greg, we always respect your opinions, but I must ask you, please refrain from using the Lord. name in vain. And then they will try to, it's like, Penn Gillette said to me, like, he's an atheist. Someone who works at Planned Parenthood might have a different opinion about how polite

the religious. Well, I mean, they are killing children, so that's part of the game. In your face. There's a book of yours from 2015 called How to Be Right. Oh, yeah. And in there, you wrote that ideological purity on the right. creeps you out, where do you see that ideological purity on the right today? You know, it's funny. You notice that it's kind of been destroyed. That's weird. I haven't

reread that book because I'm afraid that there'll be things in there that I have changed my mind on. And I should because I've learned more in the last 10 years than I have in my entire life. ideological purity would be like drugs um this is also shows you how you can flip so many times so i went for decriminalization i believed that all drugs should be legalized basically the libertarian position yes yeah the libertarian position in a weird way people like me who make decriminalization arguments have the safety net i'm not getting if i end up getting super high tonight i'm not going to end up on the street tomorrow so i have that luxury what about everybody else right it was an easy for you to make it's an easy thing for me to make it's a and it's it's it's almost like a in a way it's kind of like

a cool virtue signal but then you kind of like you look around you go wow there's a lot of people here that are fucked up but you're bringing this up as an example of sort of an ideological position you held that has changed yes and i'm more curious about ideological positions that you might hold today that don't seem in line with contemporary conservative orthodox oh okay like you're saying the purity test thing is kind of outdated give me an example i think i mean i think like uh foreign policy is a good one like i'm definitely like america first i had to be sold on i'm still wait and see on tariffs i tariffs was an ideology anti tariffs was an ideology i just thought they were bad. Right. Also a libertarian position. Yeah, yeah, exactly. Anti-free trade. Yeah, yeah, anti-free trade.

And yet, did that keep me from, like, wondering if it might work or not? I don't know what happens. I still don't know. I know that it's a tool that you can moderate, modulate, or whatever, but I don't know. You gave two examples, drug decriminalization and tariffs that kind of are, like I pointed out, in line with sort of a libertarian slant to your thinking. And it's clear from reading your books that there has been kind of a libertarian thrust to your political thinking. And it's very easy to make the argument that President Trump's policies are problematic when it comes to libertarian politics. Yeah. I don't think he's in any label. That's the thing that is. And so my my question, though, is knowing that you do have this kind of libertarian slant, are there aspects of

what President Trump is doing that give you pause or cause for concern? Yeah, it's like the flag thing does. What's the flag thing? Going to jail if you burn a flag. I get it if it's somebody else's property, but if it's your flag, you can do whatever you want. That to me is a mistake. It's funny, I still don't really see Trump in any political party. You know, I see him as ultimately the way Trump was before he was in politics was kind of like, do whatever you want.

Just don't bother me. Are there things that President Trump does that infringe on people's freedoms? Let me think. I would, I'd say the flag thing is a potential thing. I think sometimes, you know, he's, when he cleans up a mess, it can look like it is. But it's like, who else is going to do it? It's like we're cleaning up a mess that was for five years. Illegal immigration is a good example of like, dude, you can't, if you made this mess,

so you can't stand off on the side and criticize the way we're cleaning it. So I think, is there a softer approach? Maybe, but it's kind of like you've got to build credibility back to be able to criticize that. You worked for a long time in men's health, that men's health magazine, and then also you worked at Prevention Magazine.

Yes. And I'm curious to know, given that experience, and you're familiar and had seen a lot of health fads come and go, What do you make of the Maha movement, make America healthy again? Well, it's weird because when I was working at prevention in men's health, you would get, there's a, there's like all sorts of movements. And the anti-vax movement was very tough. And they were all, it was always focused around this Lancet study.

There was this one Lancet study that made this tie between autism. I think it's been completely debunked, but it still existed. So that used to drive me crazy. But I talk to people and I understand about the grouping, because my wife is like this. My wife worries about the grouping of vaccines. And there are questions about other vaccines, whether it's COVID or Hep. Is it Hep B or Hep C? But I have a fairly skeptical eye.

There was some weird shit working in health magazines that you come into. The reverse circumcision movement, guys who wanted their foreskin back, that was a thing. There was a woman that once tried to convince me she could use sound waves to cure AIDS. there was like i would run into the weirdest stuff um given your skepticism about that doesn't it seem like there's a lot that's ripe to be made fun of with the maha movement and and anti-vac stuff and why don't you do it i do i i i thought you give a comment every now and then like you let one slip but i don't i've always said i'm critical uh i do the autism thing i'm really worried about but i'm waiting to see what happens what would you need to see happen

that they say that it's it's not vaccine related, which I think it, I don't think it is. But I do think at least the dude's fit. You're talking about RFK. Yeah. And they're talking about exercise and they're talking about diet. It's this whole like weird world, I guess, you know, from the Rogan sphere to RFK Jr. And just Pete Hankseth, it's kind of like a renewed sense of like taking care of yourself. It's not a bad thing.

From your book, the Bible of Unspeakable Truth. I don't know shit when it comes to medicine, but that shit is still more than people like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. And everyone else who thought that vaccines cause autism now. No. And now you're saying at least he's fit. Yeah. This feels this feels like a good trade off to you. You can have two thoughts in your head. I still think I'm still critical of that. And I wonder if he is too. I think he has pulled back from that. But I thought that was like, I felt like a really serious issue because it was feeding into people's beliefs about vaccines. But if he's willing to pull out of that, which I think he kind of is, at least they're investigating it. But I still am very, I still feel the same way. I don't think

there is a, I would be shocked if they find a link. So I stand by that. Nice job, though. I hate to keep just going back to your books, but there was something that, in particular, that was interesting to me in a book you wrote a couple years ago called The Plus, where you sort of lamented a problem that you called the opposition toxin, which is the inclination of the media to always see two groups is in conflict. Could Gutfeld, the show, or your career be possible, or could they exist without the opposition toxin? Uh, yes. Yeah. As long as it's funny, there are so many stories that you can cover without being either or. I mean, I think I do plenty of them. Yeah, it's the thing that you have to like always be a party pooper with nuance.

Like, it's not exactly this way. It's, I call it the prison of two ideas. And almost everything can be placed in that prison. Everything. Foreign policy, feminism, whatever, gay rights, you name it. Anything can go right in there. Either for or you're against. You know, we can't help but view the world through our personal context and particularly our personal emotional context. You know, emotions are kind of where all ideas come from. So I have some questions about your formative years. I know that when you were growing up, your dad was sick with cancer for most of your adolescence. And I think you wrote about how you would come home and help clean his wounds and do physical therapy with him when he was yelling in

pain. Yeah. How does that shape someone? I think, I mean, I think it probably, I mean, maybe kept me from having kids for a while. I think maybe that, like, I try, I, from a personal level, it was probably like, you know, you never know what's going to happen with your family. I don't want to be in you know and maybe i had done my child care when i was young for your dad yeah and maybe that was it um i got i don't know if it like steered me into the health journalism but i was definitely interested in health and i was interested in fitness and that might have been uh that my dad's illness probably got me into that maybe because and i did you know i i had a curiosity about like I remember taking genetics at Berkeley, and it was kind of fairly new, you know, because of that.

So I think it did have a – it made me curious about medicine, and it probably made me, like, reticent about, like, starting families because you never know, which is a really stupid reason not to do it. And so you have a one-year-old now? Yeah, well, she's 10 months. Ten months? Yeah. Are there ways in which being a – father has sort of changed your disposition to the world or or sort of what you would like the world to look like? I don't think it can make me more anti-crime than I already was, you know,

when I'm walking around. I like, go like, is this, do we have to move out of the city? What happens if we get this new mayor? Okay, that's the, you know, whatever. But I, I, it's kind of, it makes you forgive everything bad you did prior to that. Because like, you can't have a regret. you can't have a regret for something if you were to change that this person wouldn't be here like obviously I wouldn't even know that mirror existed and I would have Joey in

Geronimo but the thing is I don't and I have this and I'm like fuck I wouldn't change anything which is great because if you spent decades being a reprobate like I can now say to myself it's like well I was an asshole for these four years, these other years, I was vacant. But it all led to this. By the way,

it's 12.15, dude, I got to go to work. I know we're scheduled for another 15 minutes. Oh, really? Those bastards. Sorry. Sorry to interrupt. Also, just so you know, then we talk a second time. Oh, well, it's fact-checking. Nope. No, it's a whole second part of the interview. No, it's not. Yep. It's shorter. It's shorter. Don't worry. I'm not joking either. I don't believe you. It's true. So I just want to, there were two stories in a book you wrote called Be Cool that stood out for me. And. Or not cool. Not cool.

Not cool. I'm sorry. I have the specific title because the whole title really is important. Yes, yes. Not cool. The hipster elite and their war on you. So in, in, struggled with that one. In that book, there are two anecdotes that you mention still sort of linger with you. And one involved a group of kids in the fifth grade.

Yes. The sharks. The sharks. Do you want to quickly tell that story? Yeah, it's almost like the first real experience I had with Groupthink. I think it was after an episode of Happy Days or something where there was a gang in it and everybody the next day wanted to be in a gang. And they just decided they were the sharks.

But I wasn't going to be one. And I think I was mad because I wasn't even included in it. It was the first time I ever felt that. You were being excluded. Yes, being excluded. And also how stupid they were acting as a mob. And I think that has always been, like, following me around a little bit. In that book, you say your experience with this gang of kids was you were banished and you sort of been banished ever since.

And then you also tell a story about a kid named James. do you want to tell me about James in kindergarten oh yeah yeah boy you're pulling shit out that um black kid yeah it was it was weird because we were like best friends then like i run into him i don't know maybe seven years later something like that and he was like saw me as a completely different person like i didn't exist and it was just like what happened And I think that was what I was talking. Basically, I was talking. And what do you think happened there?

I think that he realized we were two different races. And that, like, he had no need for me. That was basically it. When I read those two stories, and again, it's because you single both them out as being formative in the book, I thought, these stories are about resentment at being rejected. Yeah. I wonder how much resentment and also a desire to preemptively reject before you're rejected drives what you do now and formed your identity. Because the subtext, all your work, I've really immersed myself in it for a while,

it's all F you to this other group, all of it. I think that's simplistic, but there is a kernel to truth. I do think that like almost all resentments have your role in it, right? I think it's fair to say. It takes two to tango. Yeah. And I do think that like, okay, like, why do you get mad when somebody gets a promotion over you or you get fired and you get resentful?

It's usually self-doubt maybe that I may never, maybe I'm not good enough. So I do think there's always, there's always going to be. Is that what you feel? No, I'm saying that that's, I would say that in that example of like, let's say somebody gets a promotion over me. I would say, like, is that person better than me? I think that's a normal human thing, and I think I can feel that. I can feel that.

I don't think I feel that anymore, but I'm sure back in the day I did, it's like, why is this person, like when I would get fired, I would be pissed off, and I would forget the fact that when I would get into my next role, it would be better. I didn't have faith in myself to actually do better. And do you have long-term ambitions beyond what you're doing now? Is this what you want to be doing five years from now? God, I'm 61. There are no long-term ambitions.

I'm happy doing this. And I imagine that the vehicles might change. Like, it feels like things are always going to be changing. So, but I have a feeling this is kind of what I'm doing for now, for, and now it could be until I'm, I don't know, 75. I think 75's a good year. I mean, I look great for 61. Let's be honest. I mean, look at this.

Debatable. Thank you for taking the time today. You got it. We are speaking a second time as part of the deal. You can get mad at your publicist. I am. I'm going to get mad. It'll be next week, so you have a little time.

The walk back to the office is going to be very, very cold and sharp looks back and forth. But thank you again for taking the time. And I'm looking forward to talking with you again. You got it, buddy. Good to see you. Don't forget my pen. After the break, we do indeed talk again. This time I call Greg up at home, and he makes his case for how the right got cool.

What is considered, I don't know, fun is whatever upsets your teacher. This is where I think the real Trump fandom came into play among young people was how much it pissed off their teachers. Hey, Greg, thanks for taking the time to speak with me. My pleasure. So this is something that's been nagging at me. Earlier, you expressed this idea that a lot of damage has been done in the country as a result of what you called amplified narratives, politically oriented repetition, persuasion,

kind of like brainwashing. And the thing that's been nagging at me is help me understand how it's not at least a little bit hypocritical to say that, because even if it's nominally comedy that you're doing on government, you're repeating the same ideas over and over again with like sort of slight variations and those ideas basically being you know the idiots on the left are ruining the country so how are you not part of the problem that you're diagnosing um i do my best not to call people Nazis i do my best not to put targets on people's back now there might be times that i violate that but low but i pretty much try to hold myself to that standard. So I don't think it's hypocritical. And when you call somebody

Hitler, like if I believe that you are Hitler, I would be morally wrong not to do something. And by the way, this is not an uncommon thing. Everything from the Democrats, when it comes to trying to persuade is always, and it's a good way of persuasion, fear. But like, you know, it's a threat to the planet. You know, it's a threat to democracy. It's a threat to your. children. If you do not agree with our beliefs on trans, this child will commit suicide. What would you rather have a live daughter or a dead son? That's the rhetoric that I hear all the time. I try my best not to use it. When you're my dogs, don't throw up. He's listening to me, Gus. the um when people talk to me about you know well clearly there's people on the right that do

this stuff there's no question there are crack pots but they're almost in the crack pottery on the right is usually driven from an internal paranoia an internal conspiracy uh it's not welcome it might be welcome in some chat rooms but it's not welcomed in the media in fact we have a pretty good track record of distancing ourselves from crazy people. Well, the Dominion lawsuit would suggest otherwise. Well, I don't know. That's above my pay grade. And I, uh, I had nothing to do with that, you know?

Why did you bring that up? I mean, it's like, it's kind of like, hey, I mean, you score a point with that, but you know that has nothing to do with me. Well, I think that's kind of like a, it's kind of a, I'm not, it's not a cheap shot. You can ask any questions that you want? You thought it was an unfair comparison. What does that have to do with me? I thought we were talking in a larger context about messages on the right and the left.

But I think, I mean, but I mean, I'm trying to figure out, I'm confused. I'm confused by that example because what's the Dominion lawsuit involving people saying we need to kill people? I mean, I don't, I'm talking about a narrative that causes people. to act violently. I'm, hello. Sorry, I have a little dog here that is driving me crazy. That's okay. I understand the narrative you're bringing up.

And I thought, yeah, sorry, can I just finish? Since you get to bring up something, I get to bring up something, right? Okay, sure, yeah. So when we were leaving the interview, this is the only thing that stuck with me was when we were leaving and you had, and you can tell me if this is off base

and edit it out if you want you said that you have a hard time getting people from the right on your shows and you said it's probably because they feel that they don't need to do it or they know that there's a risk involved and I understand that because I

encountered the same thing with my show there are people that will want to do my show but they won't do it because there's a risk involved but we still do like I still did this interview with you, even though I felt that there was a risk involved

and because of that, I didn't want to do it. But you know who persuaded me to do it? Who? Fox. Oh, huh. Fox wanted me to do this because any time there is something like this, Fox will say, this is a great thing to get out in front of people

and let them hear you. And I'm like, what's the point? I don't see the point. So I think people have to understand that we put ourselves out there when almost, from my personal experience, nobody ever does. By the way, are you okay with me talking about this? I don't know the answer. I apologize.

It's just that it stuck with me because I was thinking, you know what? I didn't want to do this interview because I was weighing the risk benefits. And I couldn't see the benefits, but I could see the risks. I think I said to you, like, why why? a tightrope between two buildings when you could just cross the street and and um no kind of sorry great i i understand and i appreciate you taking the risk and again i i just want to say perhaps my comparison was a not a fair one the reason i brought it up and maybe i was misunderstanding the point you were making but the reason i brought it up is because i interpreted what you were saying as being that

we being fox doesn't have a place for conspiratorial thinking and then And so when I heard that, I thought, well, there's evidence, the evidence being the diminutive lawsuit that, no, Fox did have a place for conspiratorial thinking. Gotcha. Yeah, I was focusing on things that put my life or your life at risk, those kinds of things. That other stuff, the conspiracy type stuff, to me, I'm holding a dog toy. I can't see myself, so I have no idea what I'm doing. But, right, G?

sorry I want to move on from this subject I'm sorry but he's he's driving me nuts and I don't I'm alone so I can't really put him anywhere No it's nice to get a

glimpse of this is what Craig Gutfeld's life is like when he's on his computer if anything it helps create a sympathetic portrait of you I got this from reading a book on power have a dog show up

in the middle of an interview. Right. Yeah. This is not even your dog. No, it's not. It's a prop dog. There's a whole company that rents out prop dogs

for contentious interviews with the liberal media. This is a, it's a conservative organization. And get this, these are strays. These are strays. And after we use them in the interviews. Put it back on the street. Yeah, they're back on the street.

But they get a good meal. Go away. Go away. There's an idea that I've heard you express. It's one that I've heard other comedians expressed to, Andrew Schultz has said it. And that idea is that the right is now the cool side. And the left are the scolds, the wet blankets. And you wrote a whole book about called not cool, you know, sort of defining yourself in opposition to being cool. And I just

want to know, like, how do you think about what cool is now and what benefits it confers on you and also what flaws it might conceal. It's a good question. So I wrote, it must have been like, it could have been 20 years ago. It was called the Dean Wormer effect. And it was about how as, whether you're- Animal House Dean? Is that Dean?

Yes. Yes. It's like the way people view conservatives versus liberals is Dean Wormer and Animal House. The liberals are Animal House. The conservatives are always Dean Wormer. and my goal was to flip that and it had to come down to humor how people take a joke. So I think what is, I don't like the word cool, but what is considered, I don't know, fun is whatever upsets your teacher and when you saw an overwhelming number, this is where

I think the real Trump fandom came into play among young people was how much it pissed off their teachers. And you saw this growth of, I don't know, tape, people recording their teachers that showed up on Twitter and Instagram of a teacher talking about, you know, if you vote for Trump, I'm going to fail you, stuff like that where they think they're not being recorded. They say something funny. Then they get in trouble. So I think what happened was teachers represent the scold, the adult symbol of this, you can't do that. And that creates a whole thing of oh yes we can and that's kind of the flip and in comedy you're supposed to be the one I mean that's where the class clown probably originates as the comic is there to make the teacher

crazy once the left got too comfortable got into power they realized they didn't have to have a sense of humor anymore and that's why you saw you know a lot of people getting canceled and stuff. Let's take that diagnosis to be true. Now that you are the cool one, does that carry any risks or, you know, arguments you made in the past were that the people who are cool end up being condescending, dismissive, exclusionary? I think there's two points to make. I am the last person to think that I'm cool. We can agree on that, yeah. Well, thank you, David. Thank you. And, I mean, I'm 61. And you make Dean Wormer references.

I got a frenzy sleeping at my foot. Yeah. This is not cool. But there is, you know, there is a danger of when you ascend, you replicate the very practices that you hate. Yeah. That is a concern. Like, I try, for example, I try never to say that's not funny because that shouldn't matter. Like if, let's say, let's say Kathy Griffin says, she makes a joke about Donald Trump.

If my first instinct is to go, well, that's not funny. It doesn't, it shouldn't matter whether it's funny or not. That should, it's just like, that's what she says. That's fine. Not my cup of tea. But I'm not going to go and go, you know what? The problem is, that's not funny. It's like, funny is subjective.

I'm telling you, as you probably know, there's a equal number of people who find me unfunny, and that's fine. I'm an acquired taste. So you have to, I have to remind myself as whether I find something funny or not is irrelevant. But just the last question, because I know you have to run. But what are you most idealistic about? Hmm. Ooh, I, God, that's a schmaltzy question, but it has a smaltzy answer.

I really love life. And I used to be somebody that expected things to go my way. And so when things went well, I was, I just expected it. And when things didn't go well, I was pissed off. And now it's a very simple filter flip. And it's now, it's like I expect everything to be difficult. And then when it goes well, I'm incredibly grateful. And that one little switch, it's literally a flip, has changed my life.

I don't know if that's, I guess I'm ideal. Yeah, that's probably it. I should shut up because that's it. You probably expected this to go badly and then it went well. Yes, exactly right. If I expected coming into this interview that this thing was going to somehow change my life and I was going to own the libs, then I would be a cranky, cantankerous asshole. But in this case, I'm like, you know, we'll see what happens.

He'll probably have some penetrating questions. He'll probably try to psychoanalyze me. He might even bring up dominion, you know, but I can, but knowing that ahead of time, I'm like pleasantly surprised. David is not a bad guy. He doesn't mind my dog. That's Greg Gutfeld. To watch this interview and many others,

you can subscribe to our YouTube channel at YouTube.com slash at Symbol The Interview Podcast. This conversation was produced by Wyatt Orm. It was edited by Annabelle Bacon, mixing by Sonia Herrero, original music by Dan Powell, Rowan Nemistow, and Marion Lazzano.

Photography by Philip Montgomery. Our senior Booker is Priam Matthew, and Seth Kelly is our senior producer. Our executive producer is Alison Benedict. Video of this interview was produced by Paola Newdorf, cinematography by Zebediah Smith, with additional camera work by Andrew Smith and Thomas Trudeau. Audio by Nick Pittman.

It was edited by Caroline Kim. Brooke Minters is the executive producer of podcast video. Special thanks to Rory Walsh, John Borelli, Jeffrey Miranda, Nick Pittman, Maddie Masie Masiello, Jake Silverstein, Paula Schumann, and Sam Dolnick. Next week, Lulu talks with journalist Tina Brown about the Royals, Jeffrey Epstein, and how the magazine world has changed since her day's editing Vanity Fair and The New Yorker in the 80s and 90s. This was when work was so much fun. It's like all the fun has come out of work. This was a period that I lived through, where it was this hellful,

the pursuit of great stuff. And the offices of Vanity Fair were just the HQ of interesting, adventurous talent. I'm David Marquesie, and this is the interview from The New York Times. Thank you.