Return to Transcripts main page

Quest Means Business

ABC Suspends Jimmy Kimmel After Threats from Regulator; Trump Dismisses Free Speech Concerns After Kimmel's Suspension; Trump Ends U.K. Visit with Press Conference Alongside Starmer. Trump Appears to be Running Viktor Orban's Playbook; Ringo Starr Touring with His "All Starr Band". Aired 4-5p ET

Aired September 18, 2025 - 16:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[16:00:12]

RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST, "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS": Closing bell ringing on Wall Street. It has been a good day for the Dow and the market

is up, as you'll see in a moment. The market is up. I mean, across the board, throughout the course of the session. We will work out what is in

the record and what isn't, and trading comes to an end and the gavel is hit. Good Lord, you could take somebody's eye out with that sort of

gaveling.

The trading is over. Those are the markets and these are the main events we are talking about.

President Trump suggests the federal government could revoke licenses for broadcast networks if they air mostly negative coverage of him.

On the streets of France, anger as hundreds of thousands of people are protesting against potential austerity measures.

And Ringo Starr is with me. We talk painting, A.I., and why he won't retire.

We are live in New York on Thursday, September the 18th. I am Richard Quest and I mean business.

Good evening.

We begin tonight with a warning from President Trump that broadcast television networks could lose their broadcasting licenses if they are, in

his words, against me. The President welcomed ABC's decision to take comedian, Jimmy Kimmel off the air indefinitely after pressure from the FCC

chairman and affiliates.

The former president, Barack Obama, is amongst those criticizing ABC's move as censorship. He said media companies need to start standing up to the

Trump administration rather than capitulating. The President and his FCC Chair criticized Kimmel for some of the comments he made following the

killing of Charlie Kirk.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIMMY KIMMEL, "JIMMY KIMMEL LIVE" HOST: We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who

murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and doing everything they can to score political points from it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

QUEST: Now, whilst the FCC was against it, some of ABC's affiliate groups, they provide the money in a sense, also took offense at Kimmel's comments.

One of those large affiliates, 24 stations, Nexstar is in the midst of a $6 billion merger with Tegna.

That merger, of course, needs the Trump administration to approve the takeover, and that includes the FCC.

Stephen Collinson is with me. Let's unpack this.

Essentially, we will deal with the President's comments in a minute. The bit that they're going after ABC and Kimmel is what? That it is indecent --

the Decency Clause.

STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN POLITICS SENIOR REPORTER: Well, they are saying that it was a sick thing to do to make these comments about the killer of

Charlie Kirk. Kimmel wasn't actually talking about Charlie Kirk in those comments, but it has now been conflated, and what the administration is

trying to do is built upon the outrage on the right to use this as a political issue to do what it has been trying to do for a long time, and

that is bring down these late night T.V. hosts who are always critical of Trump, and they very much annoy the President, and I think what they're

doing, you mentioned that Nexstar merger there, the administration has worked out that it has got a lot of power because all of these mergers,

like the Paramount one that involved sanctions against CBS, that the administration was able to get that that gives them this opening to use the

power of government to try and dictate the content going forward on these stations.

So a lot of what the Trump administration does all the time is finding a point of leverage to apply massive presidential power and when you're the

target of that, it is very difficult and it could cost you a lot of money.

QUEST: And we've seen also the president today with ABC and indeed the broadcast network saying that 90 odd percent of their coverage is negative

to him. I guess for that one, just they're going for the equals clause where the broadcast networks have to be neutral, and therefore he is

saying, look, you know, paraphrasing the President, by all means criticize me, but this is not criticism, this is sort of just wholesale, all you ever

do is criticize and now he is threatening the license.

COLLINSON: Yes and these are public airwaves, so that's the distinction here. If you're on a cable network, you have much more latitude and have

more protection from the FCC going after you.

[16:05:10]

But the idea is, this is a public resource and so it should be a lot fairer.

Now, these late night comics have been, you know, mocking presidents as long as they've been on air. I remember back in the Clinton administration

every night, especially during the impeachment saga, all of the late night comics came on with their round of jokes about Bill Clinton.

Trump is very sensitive. Now, you could argue quite reasonably, I think, that almost all of their content about Trump is negative. There is also an

argument and your point about the affiliates is very on point here, because a lot of those affiliates are in small rural areas where a lot of the

voters are actually Trump voters, so you could ask yourself, what is the business proposition for a small television station, say, in Idaho or the

middle of Ohio, for having a comic come up every night lampooning President Trump?

QUEST: Right.

COLLINSON: So there is like tension here as well. It is not just a Trump administration propaganda push.

QUEST: But this is sort of -- President Obama says companies need to start standing up to the administration rather than capitulating. You've just

written a very interesting article on cnn.com, Trump's Kimmel shutdown shows how corporate America is catering to him.

So we've seen it with universities. We've seen it with law firms. We've seen it with many bodies, but it seems to me the pusillanimous way in which

many corporations are rushing to keel over is disturbing.

COLLINSON: Yes, and they are obviously putting profit first, which is what corporations do, but the downside of that is, especially when you're

talking about media industries, that triggers an ongoing damage to democracy. If the only thing you can see on your T.V. is pro-Trump news,

that is going to be very detrimental to American free speech and the political system.

Let's remember, though, five years ago, a lot of those same corporations were rushing to adopt DEI programs. They were being much more considerate

of liberal causes you know, after the killing of George Floyd and during a Democratic administration. So there is, I think, some sense here of a

cultural shift and these corporations are rushing to catch up.

The issue, though, I think just with the media question is things could go so far that it would be impossible for the pendulum to swing back, and so

many media organizations could end up in corporate hands, and a lot of those corporate chieftains have been gathering around Donald Trump in the

last six months.

QUEST: Stephen, I am grateful. Thank you, Stephen Collison.

The FCC chair is Brendan Carr, and he rose to prominence in 2024 for criticizing what he called censorship of right-wing voices. Now, once he is

in office, he vowed to dismantle the censorship cartel. Arguably, this is part of it. ABC suspended Kimmel shortly after these comments by Carr were

made on a right-wing podcast.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BRENDAN CARR, FCC CHAIRMAN: You know when you look at the conduct that has taken place by Jimmy Kimmel, it appears to be some of the sickest conduct

possible. I mean, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way.

These companies can find ways to change conduct, to take action. Frankly on Kimmel or, you know, there is going to be additional work for the FCC

ahead.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

QUEST: Nothing like an open threat. Who will rid me of these troublesome priests comes to mind. These kind of threats are not traditional for the

FCC.

For most of its 90-year history, it regulated indecent material. So '73, it took action for a radio station airing comedian, George Carlin's Seven

Dirty Words Monologue. A listener complained when his son heard the profanity. The case went all the way to the Supreme Court.

In 2004, the FCC was responsible for fining CBS after Janet Jackson's infamous wardrobe malfunction during her Super Bowl Half Time Performance.

She fell out of her dress, basically.

Tom Wheeler was chair of the FCC under President Obama, now visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution.

The reality is, we can play this anywhere -- as the Chair said, any which way you like, you can interpret it any way you like. You can be as hard as

you like, as soft as you like, as draconian as you like, it just depends on who is in the chair and how they view it.

TOM WHEELER, FORMER CHAIR OF THE FCC: I think, Richard, I think you have just hit the key thing that Brendan Carr keeps going around talking about

the "public interest, convenience and necessity" and he says, we need to act that that public interest, but he doesn't define that public interest

other than what appeals to him and to President Trump.

You know, interestingly enough, shortly after he was appointed to chair, nominated as Chairman he gave an interview to CNBC in which he said, you

know, we really should have a rulemaking at the FCC that adds more precision to what that term public interest really means. He is yet to do

anything about it, but he has been terrific at bending whatever that means to his own will.

QUEST: So let's take Kimmel's words. In your view, and there are two aspects to it. There is the commercial aspect in terms of affiliates

pulling out because they don't like it on a commercial basis, but from a regulatory point of view, do you believe what Kimmel said comes anywhere

close to sort of requiring regulatory action at the top level?

WHEELER: Well, I think the thing that I am qualified to opine on is not necessarily to parse what Kimmel was saying, but to parse what Brendan Carr

has been saying and you played an excerpt. But he went on to say that talking to licensed broadcasters, that he licenses, he said, this is

garbage, and you need to step up.

Now, that is about as coercive, as intimidating as you can possibly get for a regulator to say to those he is regulating.

QUEST: So when the public interest requirement of the FCC's mandate comes into conflict with the First Amendment right of a of a network, to say no,

I mean, what this is in the public interest, and anyway, even if it is not really in the public interest, we have a First Amendment right to say so,

which in the competing balance of rights, who wins?

WHEELER: Well it is great -- it is interesting that you raise that because if in fact, the affiliates or ABC had stood up and said, okay, try to do

that. You do that, we will see you in court. There is no doubt in my mind that the court would have said that's a violation of the First Amendment,

and that's a violation of the FCC's statute, Section 326 of the statute, and one of the brilliant things that Brendan Carr has been doing is he has

been exercising this kind of coercive intimidation without getting to the point where he gives the other side something to appeal to the courts.

And the courts, as you know, have been the great leveler in the Trump administration, and Brendan Carr has developed this coercive technique

where, you know, he is saying -- you know, you talked about, you know, you listen to him say the easy way or the hard way. You know, it is kind of

like the mob -- kind of like the mob boss saying, that's a nice license you've got here. It would be a shame if something happened to it.

QUEST: I am grateful to you, sir. Thank you. I think you've just put it beautifully. Just what we needed to hear tonight. Thank you for joining us.

I appreciate it.

WHEELER: Thank you.

QUEST: So it was by any stretch of the imagination, an extraordinary, lavish, unique state visit to the United Kingdom by the U.S. President, but

all right, what was achieved? Does it matter?

Sir Peter Westmacott is with me after the break. He will help us understand.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:16:41]

QUEST: President Trump is flying back to Washington after the state visit to the United Kingdom.

Before leaving, he was at the British Prime Minister's country home, Chequers, to sign a technical or tech investment deal with Sir Keir

Starmer, the British Prime Minister. The two then fielded questions on everything -- TikTok, economics, international relations, the lot.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: The Russia situation, I hope we are going to have some good news for you coming up.

But again, it doesn't affect the United States and he look, it doesn't so much affect you. Of course, you are a lot closer to the scene than we are.

We have a whole ocean separating us.

KEIR STARMER, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: We have to put extra pressure on Putin and it is only when the President has put pressure on Putin that he

has actually shown any inclination to move.

So we have to ramp that pressure up.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

QUEST: Now, also during the visit, U.S. companies pledged to invest more than $200 billion in Britain. A lot of it is going into data centers and

A.I.

NVIDIA has got $680 million to help scale a British cloud company to build the largest supercomputer. The chief executive, Jensen Huang, said the U.K.

could be an A.I. superpower.

Sir Nick Clegg, formerly president of Meta and Deputy Prime Minister in David Cameron's government, offered a more pessimistic view. He said the

U.K. has become a vassal state when it comes to technology.

Sir Peter Westmacott was the British Ambassador to the United States and watched this with a seasoned eye.

So, Peter in your view, was this -- was this a success on all fronts?

PETER WESTMACOTT, FORMER BRITISH AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED STATES: Well, good evening, Richard.

I think it depends of what you think the real objectives of it were. It seemed to me that by offering this unprecedented as he kept calling it

second state visit to President Trump, the Prime Minister wanted to get in early on during the second term of the Trump presidency, and he wanted to

create the atmospherics and a good bilateral relation given that a lot of Labour Party people had been quite rude about Trump in previous years and

wanted to, if you like, lay the groundwork for making progress on some of the really substantive issues.

Now, on all that, on the pomp, the protocol, the lavishness, the gold carriages, the banquet, the state dinner, the time with the Royal family, I

think it was an unmitigated success. I thought the President looked thrilled and he does clearly enjoy the company of members of the Royal

family and we pushed the boat out in the U.K. big time.

The only thing we didn't have was a blue sky. But, you know, apart from that, I thought it was great.

On the other things, the investment numbers, you know, will they turn out to be real or not? Let's wait and see. But they are, in a sense, manna from

heaven for a government which is very short of inward investment, very short of economic growth, got too much inflation, not enough employment.

And, you know, not doing very well. We are a bit in the doldrums business- wise and investment-wise.

So I think they were understandably focused big time on having the Big Tech industrialists coming to the U.K., but on the foreign policy stuff, whether

it was on Gaza, Israel or whether it was on Trump -- and whether it was on Putin and Ukraine, I am afraid, you know, there wasn't much progress to be

pointed to.

[16:20:08]

But there wasn't a public falling out either.

QUEST: Yes, now, see, that's the point. I noticed President Trump saying, look, the Prime Minister and I disagree. And the Prime Minister sort of

said, we don't agree on this, but it is almost by disagreeing publicly, they can sort of say, well, we know where we all stand. Let's move on. It

is not a sore -- it is not a running sore that threatens to blow up. It doesn't help, I grant you. It doesn't help.

But from Britain's point of view, this is something that they can move on from.

WESTMACOTT: Well, I think from Britain's point of view, yes, in one sense they can move on, but except that we cant. I would argue that maybe Middle

East and the whole relationship with Israel. Is the U.K. really capable of putting pressure on Prime Minister Netanyahu that the Americans can't or

won't? Not really, but I think there was a hope that, at least on making President Trump understand what was at stake by being jerked around by

Putin, that there might have been some forward movement from The White House on willingness to sanction Putin and move towards an acceptable

settlement.

It doesn't look like there was much progress there, but I would rather hope that during the 50 minute or so tete-a-tete they had, that what the Prime

Minister would have been doing is explaining to President Trump that this is about Europe's security and America's security, and that it is not in

any of our interests to allow this guy to help himself to the neighboring territories of the Russian federation.

QUEST: Do you think -- I mean, a lot of special relationship, a lot of nonsense spoken about it and good stuff spoken about it and you must have -

- you must always have special relationship tattooed somewhere on you. You must have heard it so many times.

But do you think that the U.K. -- Starmer has put the U.K. in a unique position vis-a-vis the United States, regardless of the political

difficulties that he will have back home?

WESTMACOTT: I think probably, yes. When you hear the President of the United States saying words to the effect of no two countries in the history

of the world have done as much good as our two, you know, and that the relationship is not just special, but even greater than that, and we have

always been close allies and we always will be and we speak the same language and so on.

Yes, I think all of that is very much a plus, and it is a welcome distraction from some of the domestic political problems that the Prime

Minister has had at home. He will have been relieved as well, that there was almost no conversation about Lord Mandelson, even in the press

conference, it was brushed aside.

So, yes, I think, you know, creating the atmospherics for making progress, not just agreeing to disagree, but making progress on the things that

really do matter, I think it was good. Obviously, they got nowhere on climate change. Perhaps they were never going to, but it does sound as

though they had some sort of conversation about that in private.

And it may be that over time, especially as, and I am hearing this from Republican friends, the President of the United States feels that he is

being made to look a fool by being played by Putin, that with a little bit of encouragement and a little bit of explanation as to why this really

matters to U.S. interests as well as to European interests, perhaps there will be some forward movement in terms of putting pressure on Putin.

QUEST: I am grateful. Peter, thank you very much. I am sure you've sat through more of those state dinners than breakfast and enjoyed them all at

one at a time. Thank you very much.

WESTMACOTT: Not that many, but they're always fun.

QUEST: Thank you very much indeed. Fun! Lovely. Thank you.

Now, NVIDIA is taking a $5 billion stake in intel, joining the U.S. government as a major shareholder. Intel up 22 percent on the news.

Anna Cooban is at an event with the CEO of NVIDIA, Jensen Huang. The event is just concluded, and she sent us this dispatch from London a few moments

ago.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ANNA COOBAN, CNN BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS REPORTER: Yes, Richard. Well, I have just come out of this building you see behind me. In it, we've got CEO

of NVIDIA, Jensen Huang talking with Howard Lutnick, the Commerce Secretary of the United States. Now they're talking about the A.I. industry, how it

is booming. And of course, earlier today we saw NVIDIA promise to buy $5 billion worth of Intel's shares, the U.S. chipmaker.

But what I found interesting in their conversation earlier is, the conversation around the environment. We know that A.I. takes a lot of

energy to use. It is very environmentally costly and Huang was saying that he is very happy with this current Trump administration and their attitude

towards energy. He no longer feels like, as a tech CEO, as an A.I. CEO, he is going to be vilified for talking about needing extra energy use.

And we saw Howard Lutnick also talk about environmental stuff, holding back sort of industrial development. So we will have to see how this all pans

out, but a very interesting conversation here in London tonight -- Richard.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

QUEST: Anna reporting just a few moments ago.

Now in France, massive anti-austerity protests organized by labor unions have been taking place across the country. Teachers, train drivers,

hospital staff are among those on strike.

[16:25:09]

Clashes erupted between the police and demonstrators in some areas. Only a week ago, the French government collapsed after the Prime Minister lost a

confidence vote.

The newly appointed Prime Minister, Sebastien Lecornu, now faces that same pressure. The protesters have several key demands. There are calls to scrap

previous government budget cuts and spend more money on public services. They want higher taxes on the wealthy and the reversal of the decision to

make people work longer for their pensions.

Axel Persson of the CGT Railway Workers Union joins me now. Good to see you, sir. Thank you for joining me tonight from Paris.

Look, France is in a really bad economic state, and the debt is high and the agencies are downgrading the debt of the country. So is this the time

for your members to be asking for more?

AXEL PERSSON, CGT RAILWAY WORKERS UNION: Well, we are asking for more, because contrary to what you may think, actually, the major corporations in

France including the corporation for which I work for which is the railway, have been actually boasting about record profits. They've been gathering --

they've been boasting about them for the past years and what we've observed for the past year is that the corporate income tax have been lowered

drastically for the past decades, and also the social contributions the employers are required to make to the Social Security System have been

lowered drastically, which has led not to a situation where there is less money, but that the corporations, the banks, the insurances, basically

those who basically owns the means of production have been asked to contribute less and less to the collective well-being, despite the fact

that this wealth is being created by our labor.

So this is a situation where we are in right now, which has led us to take to strike action, withdraw our labor, and say that enough is enough. And

now we are drawing a line in the sand and saying, we won't take a step back, and we will reclaim everything they've taken from us in the past

years. That's the attitude which we are boarding, which we have been leading the strikes with.

QUEST: So as President Macron loses government after government and prime minister after prime minister, what do you think he should do? Do you think

you just battle on or do you think it is time either for him to go or call elections?

PERSSON: Well, the first and most important aspect is that the policies he is implementing on behalf of the wealthiest in the society need to go. And

if this needs to be embodied by him resigning, so be it. But it is the policy that he is implementing that needs to go.

That is why people are still taking to the streets, despite the fact that government after government is being forced to resign through the social

and political pressure that is being applied on them, but the fact is that Macron, for now at least refuses to submit and admit defeat and change

radically the policies he has implemented.

So the logical conclusion to that is he either has to go or the policies in implementing has to go, so it is really up to him to choose through which

way he has to satisfy this demand. That's up to him to decide.

QUEST: You know, I am of an age where I remember in the 1970s and 80s, we used to talk about the British disease. You might recall when the British

were always on strike or whatever. Is this rapidly turning into a French version of that? French workers either protesting, the jackets or they're

protesting over this, that or the other? There seems to be a never ending - - I realize you're not here to call sort of defend trade unionism in France. I understand that, but there does seem to be an industrial unrest

in France that we are not seeing elsewhere.

PERSSON: Well, we actually do see it actually, elsewhere. Of course, the form it is taking may be a bit different depending on the countries, but if

you look all across Europe, be it, for example, in Spain, be it in the United Kingdom, there has been massive demonstrations these past years over

pretty much similar issues.

But it is true, though, that the French Labor Movement has a long history of militancy and is also much what explains to the fact that French workers

may benefit from some rights that other workers either had before, or haven't yet managed to conquer, because at the end of the day, we only

manage to get what we take through our collective action, and that is what trade unionism is about, collective strength that we wield through

industrial action. That is what trade unions are about.

QUEST: And I am very grateful, Axel that you've come in and help us understand it all tonight. Next time we speak to you, hopefully I will be

in Paris and we can talk face-to-face. Thank you, sir, for joining us on QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.

PERSSON: Hope so, too.

QUEST: Coming up, the Trump administration is going after the media organizations and observers say, or some say the moves mirror those of the

Hungarian strongman, Viktor Orban. In a moment.

[16:30:10]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

QUEST: QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. Hello, I'm Richard Quest.

In a moment, we'll hear from Brian Stelter, who's going to tell you why Donald Trump's media crackdown comes straight from the playbook of the

Hungarian strongman, Viktor Orban. And the Beatles legend Ringo Starr tells me what keeps him touring at age 85. He doesn't look and he doesn't sound

it. And why he loves artificial intelligence.

We'll get to Ringo, et al, after the headlines. This is CNN, and here the news will always come first.

President Trump says TV broadcasters could lose their licenses for overly critical coverage of him. He's welcomed ABC network's decision to take the

talk show host Jimmy Kimmel off air indefinitely. The FCC chair, Brendan Carr, and affiliates have criticized the comedian's comments following the

murder of Charlie Kirk.

President Trump wrapped up his two-day state visit to the United Kingdom with a joint news conference with the British prime minister, Sir Keir

Starmer. The president admits that he disagrees with Sir Keir's decision to acknowledge a Palestinian state, and says he wants the Israeli hostages

released right now.

Protesters in France are urging President Macron and his new prime minister to scrap looming budget cuts. Hundreds of thousands of people have taken

part in anti-austerity protests on Thursday. More than 180 people were arrested after sporadic clashes with the police.

Some observers say President Trump's pressure on media companies takes a page straight from one of his allies, Viktor Orban, the Hungarian prime

minister.

[16:35:06]

Over many years, Prime Minister Orban has weakened public broadcasting and attacked independent media through various financial incentives, through

allies who own companies, and with threats. Now, with Donald Trump's lawsuits and his administration's role in media mergers, along with the

FCC, some say he's carrying out what's been called Orbanism.

Brian Stelter is with me.

Brian, I sort of know something about this having been to Hungary a gazillion times and sort of covered this in detail, and it's sort of the

insidious way it's done because at any given moment you say, there's nothing wrong with this. All they're doing is enforcing the law, or all

they're doing is letting people do, blah, blah, blah. It's only in the -- it's only when the sun sets you look back and you realize the whole thing

has changed.

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Right. There's always a reason. There's always an excuse. There's always an official proclamation or a

cover story. But I do think that what we're seeing from President Trump and his allies is a very close resemblance of what happened in Hungary about 15

years ago. Whether it gets all the way to that point that Orban reached, a much more authoritarian model with real consolidation of media power, well,

we don't know what's going to happen in the U.S.

But we can learn from the Hungary playbook. I was speaking with a former Hungarian member of parliament who described it to me as a system of

autocratic carrots and sticks. The sticks are pretty obvious, you know, public pressure, lawsuits, other weaponization of government regulation

systems. But there are also carrots. You know, when you -- when you acquiesce, when you give in to the government's demands, you're rewarded.

When you're one of the favored networks, you get more access and more of all the rest. And we certainly have seen some of that in the United States

already. So as we see President Trump file lawsuits against the likes of "The New York Times," as we see him reach settlements with companies like

Paramount, as we see him pressure companies like Disney, and now Comcast, the owner of NBC, which airs Jimmy Fallon's "Tonight Show," we should

recognize that this has happened before.

It's happened in other countries. And maybe America is not as exceptional as we sometimes like to think, or I sometimes like to think.

QUEST: Well, the key, I think, to what you've just been saying, though, is also there does have to be a groundswell of some sort of support for this.

So in Hungary it is the rural voters. It's not the elites, so to speak, in Budapest or Balaton or anywhere like that. And it's the same in this

country, in the United States. There is a large body of people, well, for example, the Nexstar Group, they obviously are appealing to and responding

to what their viewers in those primarily conservative areas are saying.

STELTER: Yes, this is partly about a red America versus blue America divide.

QUEST: Exactly.

STELTER: The local station owners that came out the strongest against Kimmel are the ones with stations that are largely in conservative markets.

That's not entirely the case, but it is largely true. And it does speak to different tastes, different expectations, different standards, different --

you know, expectations of what's normal and appropriate in this fraught political environment.

I think when we look at Hungary as an example of what might be happening in the U.S. right now, we should recognize a lot of it is about pressuring

media companies into self-censorship.

QUEST: Exactly.

STELTER: That's certainly the case with Disney and ABC yesterday, right? It was no actual government action taken by FCC chair Brendan Carr. It was

just the threat of action. It was the public pressure. Carr is putting the bully in bully pulpit. And that's what Trump has done so well for the past

decade. He has convinced tens of millions of people that real news is fake, and some of the downstream consequences are being felt now.

QUEST: On this point, and it's the same in Hungary and it's the same here, it's not the real truth of it, that there is a culture war underway. And

whether it's Kimmel or whatever it might be, they are merely the battles in this war. You know, who said what about what at any given moment. But the

reality that people just don't necessarily -- they want to -- they recognize there is a culture war, but they don't necessarily want to accept

the fact that it's taking place in front of our very eyes, and that there will be a winner and a loser at the end of it.

STELTER: Right. Arguments about power are often cloaked under phrases like free speech.

QUEST: Exactly.

STELTER: And that's what we're seeing happen right now. You know, President Trump came back to office saying he was going to champion free speech and

end censorship. But a lot of what he's done since then has actually eroded free speech in the U.S. and has caused a chill among free -- a lot of

concerns among free speech and free expression groups. So it's not really about free speech. It's about power.

And really the power dynamic is what the culture wars are all about. Who has the power, who sets the agenda, who decides what the cultural norms

are. And in a country like the U.S., which is so fragmented, so fractured, there really is no one to decide. But President Trump is trying to fill

that void.

[16:40:02]

He does not want to come out of office after a second term, having only succeeded politically. He wants to succeed culturally as well. And on days

like today with Jimmy Kimmel off the air, he's succeeding.

QUEST: And that's exactly the Viktor Orban, although I will say, Orban is facing a very difficult election next year.

Brian, thank you. Yes. Thank you. We'll talk more about that. Excellent. Thank you.

Now, in a moment, well, you know, I was born in Liverpool, so anything to do with the Beatles is going to find favor with me. So to talk to Ringo

Starr, the Beatles drummer, we talked about his new art collection and how his work brings joy to others. He even offered to paint my shirt.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RINGO STARR, MUSICIAN: I'll put paint on it for you.

QUEST: All right.

STARR: Just for 50 grand and it's all yours.

QUEST: Now, now, now, I don't know.

STARR: That one, yes. I'll put it while it's on you. I'll do it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

QUEST: It is "Call to Earth," and it once ruled the Andes and then faded from the skies. Now one of the world's largest flying birds is making a

comeback. On "Call to Earth," we follow a biologist who is helping the Andean condor soar again. It's part of the Rolex Perpetual Planet

Initiative.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LUIS JACOME, CO-FOUNDER, FUNDACION BIOANDINA (through translator): For me personally, when we are able to release the condor, I feel enormous hope.

It opens my heart to see them return.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Argentine biologist Luis Jacome has dedicated more than 30 years to saving one of the world's largest flying birds, the Andean

condor.

JACOME (through translator): It's a species with an ancestral bond with humans going back thousands of years. It has always been a sacred animal

occupying a central place in our culture. It also plays an irreplaceable central role in environmental balance.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Once dominant across South American skies, The Andean condor has suffered a dramatic decline from poisoning, shrinking habitats

and other manmade threats.

[16:45:09]

It's listed as vulnerable on the IUCN Red List.

JACOME (through translator): I mean, it's a powerful animal. It looks at you and you know who's boss. There is no doubt about it.

These huge birds can reach a three-meter wingspan from tip to tip, 1.2 meters tall, about 15 kilos in weight, and its home range, the area it

covers, can span more than 160,000 square kilometers.

Its survival depends on human actions that allow it to keep flying. In more than 33 years of work we've fortunately managed to establish a very

effective rescue system. Incredibly effective.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Through his foundation, Bioandina, Luis says they've helped save more than 500 condors in Argentina to date through rescue and

rehab programs.

JACOME (through translator): Satellite technology for spaces as big, vast and remote as the Andes guides us on how to approach condor conservation

and which places are critical to protect it. Today we work with a condor that's been in rehabilitation for six months. It had injuries to its wing

and chest.

That led us to choose a monitoring system with a harness and a satellite transmitter, which uses cellular signals so we can track the huge distances

condors travel. What we did was attach the harness and the transmitter to its back, and if everything goes well, tomorrow, we'll release it with this

technology.

Its release is unique, and so far we've released a whopping 257 condors. And yet each one brings adrenaline. Each one brings anticipation, hope. If

all goes well, it will settle. Its feathers stretch a bit after being in the box and then fly. And so it flies away. And that's when the dream

begins that it returns to the wild.

How wonderful. It's incredible how the condor mobilizes all this. How it brings us together, how it moves us and gives us the chance to reflect and

rethink how we live.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

QUEST: And now, please do let us know what you're doing to answer the call. And you can do so with the hashtag, as always, "Call to Earth."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:50:38]

QUEST: Ringo Starr is showcasing his original artwork for the first time, and the proceeds from the Las Vegas exhibition will go to his charity, the

Lotus Foundation. The former Beatle is also touring with his All Starr Band and all at the age of 85.

Ringo Starr told me he's not stopping anytime soon.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

STARR: I retire every year. My children are fed up with me. That's it. I've had enough. Oh, you said that last year, dad. But we're in the middle of a

tour. We will finish this one at least. And I'm already booked next year.

(LAUGHTER)

STARR: So it won't be all of next year. I had great plans. I'll do a -- 84, when I'm 84 tour. Then I love my birthday. And then we'll do another tour

when I'm 85. I thought that was all exciting. We did May and we did -- we're doing September now, and I'm booked for next year.

You see, it's what I do. The dream and the joy of playing. But the dream of getting some drums. I only wanted drums and playing them. And I play with

anybody. And, you know, I've got several of my grandchildren are playing drums, and I keep getting a band. Get up there. Just get in with other

people. And some of them are doing it.

It's just what I love to do. I can moan my ass off and then I sit behind the kit and I'm full of joy. It's just good. It's just something I love.

QUEST: I was looking at some of your comments particularly about A.I. and music. You're betwixt and between, aren't you? In the sense of, you know,

it's going to be good --

STARR: I love A.I.

QUEST: Go on.

STARR: Yes, but I love A.I. I love it because we're at this track with John, you know, "Now and Then."

(MUSIC)

STARR: Everything we could do and people we knew could do to get John's voice, it didn't make it. And Peter Jackson had A.I. and he separated

John's voice on a cassette, not on like, you know, a tape or something. There was no other track on a cassette, and he lifted John and he sounds

like John, like he's in the room. So great. So I love it for that.

QUEST: This exhibition of artwork that's open -- that's opening, the, first of all, let's deal with -- let's talk about the Lotus Foundation, for which

it is being sold and the charitable work of your foundation. Then we'll talk about the art. Tell me why you decided to have this sale of this art

for the foundation.

STARR: I have a small room in my -- in our house in L.A., and it was actually getting full. And you know, I've been painting art and we've been,

like, printing them on drumheads to sell to the fans, you know, when I do a gig somewhere and we haven't really dealt with them as real paintings. We

just used them ourselves. And these are all original. And I thought, you know, I can easily do this because they actually wanted eight paintings and

I gave them 12. I need the room.

QUEST: And the foundation, the work of the Lotus Foundation, and we -- I was reading about, I was reading about it and it seems to me that the work

of this foundation is ever more important today particularly with, A, you know, the demands of social welfare and the problems that people are facing

and the limited resources and help people get. So this is even more important now, isn't it?

STARR: Well, you know, we don't look at it like it's important. It's something we do and we want to help. One of the great uses we did with the

Lotus Foundation was there was a school in England for handicapped kids, and one of them was so handicapped he was in a bed. And so we decided we're

not going to get him, you know, a new regular bed. We'll have one made.

[16:55:01]

And we had this, like, motorbike bed made and he was just over the moon. So it's just great to see joy, you know, even with the hindrance of being

bedridden.

QUEST: Well, I was looking through your art, and I always think it's very - - whenever I talk to an artist, it's very easy to start sounding highfalutin about what it is they intended or what it was all about or that

sort of thing. But what I really want to know is what you -- what you intend to express.

STARR: The first thing I said to myself is, look, enjoy, do what you can do. You're not Rembrandt. And so I'm never on there thinking, yes, I just

do what I have joy doing. And you know, the spin art is just one of them. I mean, I do paint on canvases. You know, I couldn't look at you and paint

you looking like you. But it would look like something.

QUEST: How often do you paint? And how long do you paint?

STARR: No, I couldn't give you a time. I can only give you a place. It's whenever I go in, I feel like it. Halfway through. Maybe I don't, or I want

the spin machine is broken, you know, whatever. But the last time I went in, someone had left a T-shirt, and I painted all over it, and it's great.

You know? So it's like, I have that ability just to go where I'm going.

QUEST: Perfect.

STARR: You know.

QUEST: The --

STARR: I don't know if that answered your question.

QUEST: It does, it does. I'm just trying to think of a delicate way of asking if I send you my shirt, will you paint it?

STARR: I'll put paint on it for you. For 50 grand and it's all yours.

QUEST: Oh, now, now, now, I don't know.

STARR: That one, yes. I'll put it while it's -- while it's on you. I'll do it.

QUEST: When I'm in L.A. I'll hold you to do that.

I'm grateful, sir. I will take you up on the offer. I'm going to keep this shirt. When I'm in Los Angeles I shall stand there in front of you to paint

me.

STARR: And we'll have more cameras than you've got, I'm telling you.

QUEST: Thank you very much, sir. Honored to talk to you tonight. Thank you very much.

STARR: All right. Peace and love.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

QUEST: For a Liverpudlian like myself the thought of him painting it, bring it on.

We'll have a "Profitable Moment" after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

QUEST: Can you prove or disprove a negative? Tonight's "Profitable Moment." Was it worth it for the British to put out all that pomp and ceremony for

President Trump as part of the state visit? Will it make a special relationship even more special as both president and king said last night?

See, the problem is we'll never be able to know one way or the other because whatever happens could either be regarded as being a benefit of

what the state visit generated, or at least people will go, well, it would have been a great deal worse if we hadn't had that state visit. And that,

I'm afraid, is how we can really look at the events of the last 48 hours between king and president.

And that's QUEST MEANS BUSINESS for tonight. I'm Richard Quest in New York. Whatever you're up to in the hours ahead, I hope it's profitable.

END