From The New York Times, this is The Interview.
I'm David Marchese.
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 and 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 Timpf and Tyrus, 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 3 million viewers a night, numbers that dwarf its competitors.
But if Gutfeld, 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.
Yeah.
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 crushed them like bugs, David.
I 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 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 there.
It wanted to 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 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 can 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 I am, If I come off as petty about something that they have to 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.
In fact, if you want to know the people I don't like, it's the people I don't tease.
People know that when- So you must love the women on The View then?
Yes.
I adore, I love Whoopi.
And I like the other lady.
Rosie O'Donnell, you must be a big fan.
But I mean, like personally, 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.
I do think 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, you know, I'd say that Trump derangement syndrome is now an addiction.
It's moved into something that is like it's creating a filter which everything that you look at, the people that you know, your coworkers, your relationships, are all seen through this.
If you don't see this my way, we're gonna have a problem.
So I try to.
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 uh, sympathetic to trump, that's upsetting for people.
I mean not really.
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 influences in both directions.
Yeah i, 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 you're 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, mark it and you know sort of the most blatant counterexample to what you're talking about is you literally use the phrase the left are dumb fascist, mother effers.
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 mean no, but I'm saying I don't remember this specific out of, and was it part of, some kind of amplifying narrative where it's like these people are a threat to democracy and it's gonna 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 in all caps 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.
I know where you're going.
Where do you think I'm going?
I was going somewhere else.
Oh, good, good.
Then go somewhere else. but where did you think I was going?
I thought you were going to bring, cause 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, but 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.
It's like a triumph over.
Yeah, but I'm having fun.
You're having fun.
Yeah.
It's, it's, it's kind of like the same thing that Trump does where he says, I got the biggest crest.
It's just something fun to say, but, um, More people say it to me than I say it to anybody else.
A lot of people.
When they 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 in the trance movie, she obviously is a billionaire.
She can share the risk.
She has FU 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 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 Kimmel, 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 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'm, 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.
It 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 gonna 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 Kat 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 framing, which is, I think you're wrong, you think I'm evil.
And I'm never gonna call somebody fat because they're fat.
I'm gonna call you fat if you called me Hitler.
And the hierarchy of smears, that's way down here.
And the best part about that is it hurts them.
It hurts them more than if they were to call me Hitler, Cause they have to look in the mirror every day.
I know I'm not Hitler.
They know they're fat.
It's funny.
Cause Kat makes charming.
Yeah.
It's a charming way of looking.
No cat.
It makes me, makes fun of me over this is Greg.
You're trying to turn it's calling people fat into what 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, uh, 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 that 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 my soft spot.
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 on 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 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, right?
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've just been using the Lord's name in vain.
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 never.
No well, New York Times, product of the devil david, let's be honest.
But uh, 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 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's name in vain, and then they will try to.
Uh, It's like Penn Jillette said to me, like he's an atheist.
Someone who works at Planned Parenthood might have a different opinion about how polite the religious letter writers are.
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.
Mm-hmm.
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.
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.
If I end up getting super high tonight, I'm not gonna end up on the street tomorrow.
So I have that luxury.
What about everybody else?
Right, it was an easy for you to make argument.
It's an easy thing for me to make.
It's almost like, in a way, it's kind of like a cool virtue signal.
But then 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 orthodoxy.
Oh, okay.
Okay.
Like you're saying the purity test thing is kind of outdated.
Give me an example.
I think, I mean, I think like 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.
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 slant 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.
And so 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, I guess like the flag thing does.
What's the flag thing?
Um...
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 first, 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, you can't stand off on the side and criticize the way we're cleaning it.
So I think, is there a softer approach to maybe?
But it's kind of like you got to build credibility back to be able to criticize that.
Uh, you worked for a long time in men's health, that men's health magazine.
And then also you worked at a prevention magazine.
Yes.
Uh, and I I'm curious to know, given that experience and you know you're familiar and had seen a lot of health fads come and go uh what you make of the Maha movement.
Make America healthy again.
Well, I it's weird because uh, When I was working at prevention in men's health, you would get 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 talked to people and I understand about the grouping because my wife is like this.
My wife worries about the grouping.
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.
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 anti-vax stuff?
And why don't you do it?
I do.
I actually do.
You give a comment every now and then, like you let one slip, but you don't consistently make fun of it.
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 not vaccine related, which 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 Hegseth.
It's kind of like that. a renewed sense of like taking care of yourself.
It's not a bad thing.
From your book The Bible of Unspeakable Truths.
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.
Yes.
No.
And now you're saying at least he's fit.
Yeah.
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 as in conflict.
Could Gutfeld, the show or your career be possible, or could they exist without the opposition toxin?
Yes.
Yeah.
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 always be a party pooper with nuance.
It's not exactly this way.
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.
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 fat, that 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 childcare 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've been uh, My dad's illness probably got me into that, maybe because and I did, you know 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.
10 months?
Yeah.
Are there ways in which being a father has sort of changed your disposition to the world, 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- it's kind of, it makes you forgive everything bad you did prior to that.
Cause 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, like, 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 1215, dude.
I gotta go to work.
I know, we're scheduled for another 15 minutes.
Oh, really?
Those bastards didn't tell me that.
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.
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.
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 is 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 black kid?
Yeah.
It was weird because we were like best friends.
Then like I run into him, I don't know, maybe seven years later or 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, all your... 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.
Yeah, 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 think that's what I.
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?
That, 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.
And now could be until I'm, I don't know, 75.
I think 75 is 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 know, we are speaking a second time.
That's 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.
You got it.
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 again.
I appreciate it.
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 on Gutfeld, 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 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.
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 crackpots, but they're almost.
The crackpottery on the right is usually driven from an internal paranoia, an internal conspiracy.
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 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, oh, that'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.
That example, because what's the Dominion lawsuit involving people saying we need to kill people?
I don't.
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.
Here you go.
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...
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 I didn't want to, 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 anytime 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 walk a tightrope between two buildings when you could just cross the street?
Sorry, Greg, I understand and I appreciate you taking the risk.
And again, I just want to say perhaps my comparison – was 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.
So when I heard that, I thought well, there's evidence the evidence being the Dominion lawsuit that no, Fox doesn't 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, um... Right, G?
Sorry.
I want to move on from this subject.
All right.
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.
Yeah, this is not even your dog, it turns out.
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.
It's a conservative organization.
And get this, these are strays.
These are strays.
And after we use them in the interviews- Put them back on the street.
Yeah, they're back on the street.
But they get a good meal.
All right, go away.
There's an idea that I've heard you express.
It's one that I've heard other comedians express too.
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, it's 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 with your animal house, Dean, is that?
Yes.
Yes.
It's like the 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?
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 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 were represent the scold, the adult symbol of 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, is the comic is there to make the teacher crazy.
Once the left got too comfortable got into power, they realized that 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 Frenchie 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.
That is a concern.
I think that is a concern in every 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 shouldn't, 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 I 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 an 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 is 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?
God, that's a schmaltzy question, but it has a schmaltzy 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 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, uh, that's it.
You probably expected this to go badly and then it went well.
Yes, they 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 uh, then I would be a cranky cantankerous uh, 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 Orme.
It was edited by Annabelle Bacon.
Mixing by Sonia Herrero.
Original music by Dan Powell, Rowan Nemisto, and Marion Lozano.
Photography by Philip Montgomery.
Our senior booker is Priya Matthew, and Seth Kelly is our senior producer.
Our executive producer is Allison 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, Renan Borelli, Jeffrey Miranda, Nick Pittman, Matty Macielo, 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 days 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 hell for leather pursuit of great stuff.
And the offices of Vanity Fair were just the HQ of interesting, adventurous talent.
I'm David Marchese.
And this is the interview from The New York Times.
