Mehdi Hasan calls for politicians' 'lies' to be called out

You may well know him, of course, as the founder of Zoteo, which has launched as of this week in the UK.

Yes, it has.

Soft launch yesterday, thank you.Much with all new media, it's had a global reach already.Tell us why you're launching Zoteo UK specifically.

Specifically, we've done very well.We launched Ateo after I left MSNBC in the United States in 2024.We've been around for a couple of years.I think immodestly, I will say, we've had a pretty big impact in the US, made a lot of noise, won awards, built up a big following, 2 million followers on YouTube, 700 ,000 on Substack.So we were looking around thinking, where do we go next?Not that America doesn't keep us busy with the news, as you know, but where can we expand to?

And we already had our second biggest audience in the UK.I'm obviously biased to the UK, born and raised here, became a journalist here until I left in 2015, so it seemed like the obvious place to expand in the English -speaking world.And I don't think you need me to tell you, Wilf, that there's no shortage of news in this country right now.A few months ago, I was watching the Gorton and Denton by -election, the kind of crazy reaction to that, the rise of the Green Party and the kind of pylons there.Obviously, the coverage of the war in Iran.And I thought to myself, there's a gap in this market.

There are underserved communities, groups, voters, readers, viewers who aren't happy with the British media.Just like you know people are dissatisfied with British politics, people are dissatisfied with the British media.And so I'm not someone who says burn it all down.I'm not one of these people who's anti -mainstream media.I'm sitting with you here today.I used to work here at Sky News many years ago when I had fewer grey hairs.

But I do think there's a gap in the market, and we can complement what mainstream media is doing in the independent space.

That's interesting framing, that there's a gap and you want to complement mainstream media.Because if you look at the sort of opening paragraph on your website, I think it's more bluntly critical of MSN.

Oh, I'm very critical of the mainstream media, yes.That's why there's a gap.It's what you're not doing well that we want to do better.What are we not doing well?I think, for example, when it comes to the rise of the far right and fascism and authoritarianism across the Western world that we're seeing right now, we've seen quote, unquote, liberal media do a very solid job.approach, play both sides journalism on issues that are not really both sides, like racism.

I think the genocide in Gaza was very particularly badly handled by multiple media organizations.And right now, the war in Iran.I think you look at the coverage of the war in Iran, there hasn't been as critical coverage as I would like to see.And again, this isn't a criticism of individual journalists.You know, we're here at Sky, where I think Alex Crawford has done a fantastic job in covering the Middle East.She's a good friend of mine.

But I think overall institutionally, if you look at outlets coverage, that coverage has not been as, what's the word I'm looking for, as blunt about what is going on as some readers and viewers would like to see.I think we're an organisation that's not going to hide behind euphemisms or both sides coverage.

I think there's lots of individual points of what you made there, but I guess the bigger point is this broad MSM negative kind of connotation, accusation, do you not think you then make the job harder of people like Alex Crawford since you singled him out?

No, actually, I think there's a lot of mainstream journalists, former colleagues of mine, people here in this UK media, who think we are a healthy competition, who think we're actually raising the bar, raising the standard.We're also about media accountability.A lot of what we do in the U .S.also is critiquing what some of the bigger media organizations are doing.And I think you've seen that now in a world of social media in general.

As you know I'm sure you're online.There's a new pressure.There's a new directness with viewers.When you get things wrong it's quicker to correct things.In the old days you type in a letter and send a letter to an editor.Now you get kind of instant feedback.

And I think in that space we're helping.And the number of journalists, both here in the UK since yesterday and in the US since we launched in 2024, who reached out to me and said, thank God you guys are around.Thank God you're keeping us honest.I could fill an entire book with those names.

And finally, on this topic, you're kind of critical of people trying to do both sides media?Depends what the topic is.Climate change is not a both sides topic, for example.

No.I think there's a difference.we talk, you and I and journalists in general, we say we're all about finding the truth, right?That is what we're supposed to be about.That's what our viewers want.But then we hit certain topics and we see the truth and we say, we can't say the truth because it might upset this or that faction, this or that person in power.

We have this kind of fake definition of impartiality, which says we must always say the truth.X says something, Y says something, even if Y is lying.And I think we get to a point where we need to call out lies.I think we've seen that in, for example, in the coverage of Gaza.We've seen that in the rise of Trump.In the United States, the media has had to really struggle with a president who lies every day, lies in every breath.

Everyone knows it.Everyone can see it.But, oh, you can't say lie about a politician.You must immediately balance what they've just said.And I think people are fed up of that.And we're seeing that with a number of people deserting mainstream media.

In the US, more people now say they get news from independent media than national news networks.

It's a really interesting nuance, which, you know, just thinking in light of what our top story is today, in light of the biggest story in this country in the last 10 days in Henry Novak, there are also details where we can't, because we want justice to be served, say certain things that are said elsewhere.And that does put mainstream media in a very difficult situation.

I agree with that.I'm not saying it's easy.I'm not saying everyone is doing a bad job.It is difficult.And look, I'm critical of the BBC, for example.But the BBC gets a lot of attack from the right, too, doesn't it?

They get attacked for being liberal.So I get that, that people, you know, big broadcasters like yourself get attacked from all sides.But I also look at kind of objective data.And we look at, you know, certain things like on, for example, Israel, Palestine or Iran.You can look at the numbers.You can look and say, How many guests from one side versus another side?

How is the language used about Ukraine versus Gaza?You know this.Multiple media studies have been done about bias and double standards.And I think, yes, there are certain things you can't say as a broadcaster.I get that.But if you take the Henry Nowak story, for example, a horrific story, what happened to him shouldn't have happened.

And I hope there's investigation.I hope there's accountability, especially the police side of things.But, for example,allowing the right to turn that into an immigration story, when the guy who killed him was born in the UK, his father was born in the UK.

I don't think that's fair though.Which mainstream media organisation has allowed that to be the case?Everyone's pushed back and focused on the facts really, really quite carefully.

No, I think it has very much become a debate about immigration.I was just on Newsnight last night.We were talking about the horrific tragedy in Belfast and that story comes up.I think it's a real problem where when one side is just lying about what is going on.So, for example, do you use the word lie?

Yeah.

You do?

You say to guests you're lying?Well, no, because it doesn't happen very often, but we absolutely...

It doesn't happen very often?Guests don't come on Sky and Lie very often.

I think viewers would disagree.It comes back to the point, tarring everyone with the same brush.No, I'm not.I've specifically said in this interview I'm not tarring everyone with the same brush.you know, go back and watch Sophie did the interview with Zia Youssef the following morning.You know, you can't possibly argue that we don't hold people to account when they say misleading things, they have double standards, criticise a Telegraph headline, but then not accept criticism of your own party's workplace.

So I think it's not fair.And it's a little opportunistic.When, you know, you admit yourself, you have a side in an argument and a take, which many people would disagree with.Because as you say, none of us are perfectly impartial.It's impossible.No.

But I think sometimes we shouldn't pretend that impartiality means that you must take a middle position between two sides.Take the genocide, for example.This idea, and you know this, and again, we don't have time to get into all the stats, but the number of times that Sky and the BBC and other broadcasters have given Israel a pass or, for example, taken an Israeli denial as fact when we know it's not fact, when we know they're lying, when it's been illustrated that they've been lying.And I think that's a real problem.For example, the human of one side of the conflict.I think it's undeniable that the British media humanises Israeli victims of violence more than Palestinian victims of violence.

Look, again, I push back on that, I think.

Well, there's a study being done by News Cord of media bias.People can look at it about Sky and the BBC.There's been a study done by Des Friedman at Goldsmiths College about headlines on Ukraine versus Gaza and Iran.The numbers are all out there, Wolf.

Well, and they're different conflicts with different needs to coverage.And I don't know those reports, but there are other reports the other side and I think really in an unbelievably difficult topic which we talk about sometimes with preparation sometimes without I think all of my colleagues and peers in this organisation and at the rival ones that you mentioned I think do a very very good job under the guidance of trying to be balanced and partial in rules that I help remain even if if you celebrate being free from them.We're kind of out of time, I have lots of other topics I wanted to get to.One final topic, do you think These latest polls, when we see President Trump's polling, his personal popularity, which is not always what manifests when it comes to the party he represents, do rightfully point to a tough midterms?Or do you think the Republicans might surprise again like they did in 2024?

If you look at the polls, he's very unpopular.He's more unpopular now, according to some polls, than the day after January the 6th, which was his previous low point.He's the most unpopular president at this point in a second term.And normally, midterms do reflect a backlash against the party in power.I think the difference this year is, A, in general, American politics is crazy.It's very hard to apply normal rules.

So yes, anything is possible.I don't do predictions anymore since Brexit and Trump term one.But there is a real issue where, for example, gerrymandering is going on.People in the UK don't quite understand what happens in the US.in Canada and France, you have independent bodies draw up the seats.In the US, politicians get to draw up their own seats.

So you have Republican legislators across the country, and some Democratic ones now, just completely redrawing boundaries so that they get all the seats.So you could see a scenario where, in an insane scenario,the Democrats—Republicans lose a popular vote but keep control of Congress because of gerrymandering.And then they're saying they're going to put ICE agents at the polling stations.This is not a guy who accepts defeat very well, as you know.So, let's see what happens in November.

I'm very worried about the state of American democracy if they do pull off some kind of miraculous saving of the legislature, because there needs to be some accountability.

If they do, though, of course, we'll focus on the votes, as we should.Yes.And not really anything else.Mehdi, it's been great to catch up.Thanks for joining us.Thanks so much.

Good to see you.