>> HELLO, EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO "AMANPOUR & CO. "

HERE'S WHAT'S COMING UP.

NVIDIA TECH CEO JENSEN HUANG RESIGNS AFTER A SECOND AFFAIR ALLEGATION, THE FIRST WITH A SUSPECTED CHINESE SPY.

SO AS AMERICA'S LARGEST PRODUCER OF CHIPS THAT FUEL ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS EMBROILED IN SCANDAL, WE DISCUSS NATIONAL SECURITY IMPLICATIONS AND THE U. S.

-CHINA AI RACE.

> >> THEN TWO BRITISH COMEDIANS FACE A RECKONING.

RUSSELL BRAND CONVICTED OF ASSAULT AND RAPE AND DAVID WALLIAMS ACCUSED OF SEXUAL ASSAULT AND GROOMING YOUNG GIRLS.

HE DENIES IT.

BUT WHAT IS HAPPENING INSIDE THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY A DECADE AFTER ME TOO.

I ASK UK LAWMAKER JESS PHILLIPS.

> >> PLUS, TEN LIVES: HOW WHAT WE HAVE SHAPES WHO WE ARE".

ILLUSTRATOR AND DATA JOURNALIST MONA CHALABI JOINS HARI SREENIVASAN TO DISCUSS HER NEW BOOK ABOUT ECONOMIC INEQUALITY.

?

?

> >> "AMANPOUR & CO. "

IS MADE POSSIBLE BY --THE ANDERSON FAMILY ENDOWMENT JIM ATTWOOD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS CANDACE KING WEIR CHARLES ROSENBLUM NORMA C. WARNER AND PAUL D. WARNER MONIQUE SCHOEN WARSHAW THE SYLVIA A. AND SIMON B. POYTA PROGRAMING ENDOWMENT TO FIGHT ANTISEMITISM THE STRAUS FAMILY FOUNDATION THE PETER G. PETERSON AND JOAN GANZ COONEY FUND KOO AND PATRICIA YUEN, COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITIES BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG AND BY CONTRIBUTIONS TO YOUR PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

THANK YOU.

> >> WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM, EVERYONE.

I'M CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR IN LONDON.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TO AFFAIRS A SUSPECTED SPY AND NOW A RESIGNATION.

WE BEGIN WITH THE NVIDIA SCANDAL WHICH HAS FORCED CEO JENSEN HUANG TO STEP DOWN AFTER "THE NEW YORK TIMES" REPORTED THE EXECUTIVE HAD HAD ANOTHER AFFAIR, THIS TIME WITH AN NVIDIA EXECUTIVE.

IT'S A STUNNING FALL FROM GRACE FOR THE TECH TITAN, WHO HAS BEEN UNDER INTENSE SCRUTINY FOLLOWING REPORTS THAT HE WAS THE TARGET OF A CHINESE ESPIONAGE HONEY TRAP.

CHINA DENIES IT AND HUANG HAS APOLOGIZED FOR THE AFFAIR.

BUT THE CORPORATE EARTHQUAKE HAS THROWN STOCK MARKETS INTO A FRENZY.

NVIDIA SHARES FALLING AS MUCH AS 14% AFTER TODAY'S OPENING BELL.

THE FIRM SAT THE HEART OF THE AI BOOM, PRODUCING SOME OF THE INDUSTRY'S MOST ADVANCED CHIP, AND IT'S ALSO PUTTING A SPOTLIGHT ON PRESIDENT TRUMP, WHO WAS REPORTEDLY BRIEFED MONTHS AGO THAT HUANG WAS INVOLVED WITH A POTENTIAL CHINESE SPY.

SO WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR THE U. S.

- CHINA AI RACE?

AND HAS AMERICA'S NATIONAL SECURITY BEEN COMPROMISED?

NICHOLAS THOMPSON IS CEO OF THE ATLANTIC, AND HE JOINS THE SHOW FROM NEW YORK.

WE'RE ALSO JOINED BY CONNOR LEAHY, U. S. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AT CONTROL AI.

WELCOME, BOTH OF YOU.

NICK THOMPSON, LET ME ASK YOU.

WHAT IS THE THING THAT STANDS OUT TO YOU MOST?

IS IT THE FALL FROM GRACE OF A GREAT TITAN?

IS IT -- I'M GOING TO SAY STUPIDITY OF BEING CAUGHT IN A HONEY TRAP, ALTHOUGH THEY BOTH DENY IT?

IS IT THE NATIONAL SECURITY IMPLICATION?

WHAT IS IT?

>> OH, IT'S ABSOLUTELY THE THIRD THING.

THE FIRST TWO PARTS ARE INTERESTING, EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, BUT THE NATIONAL SECURITY IMPLICATIONS ARE MASSIVE.

JENSEN'S ROLE IN NVIDIA IS HUGE.

NVIDIA'S ROLE IN THE U. S. ECONOMY IS HUGE, IN THE AI ECONOMY IS HUGE.

AND THE ONE AREA WHERE THE UNITED STATES HAS A REALLY SUBSTANTIAL LEAD OVER CHINA IN AI IS IN CHIPS IN HARDWARE.

AND IF THAT WAS COMPROMISED BY A SPY OPERATION, AND IF THAT CHANGES THE DYNAMICS OF THE BALANCE OF POWER IN AI, AND IF NVIDIA'S TROUBLES POST JENSEN CHANGE THE BALANCE OF POWER, WE HAVE A VERY DIFFERENT POLITICAL SITUATION ON AI.

>> JUST EXPLAIN TO US, WHAT IS THE GEOPOLITICAL SITUATION THAT YOU ENVISION IF ALL THIS HAPPENS?

AND WHY IS IT SO DETRIMENTAL TO THE UNITED STATES?

>> WELL, TWO THINGS.

SO NUMBER ONE, THE BALANCE OF POWER COULD SHIFT.

SO THERE IS BELIEF IN THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL SECURITY INSTITUTIONS THAT WHICHEVER COUNTRY HAS A LEAD IN AI, PARTICULARLY AS WE GET TO A MOMENT WHERE THE IMPROVEMENTS IN AI ARE MASSIVE, WE REACH A MOMENT OF RECURSIVE SELF-IMPROVEMENT, WHICHEVER COUNTRY WILL ACCRUE ECONOMIC POWER, WILL ACCRUE POLITICAL POWER.

SO IF THE UNITED STATES' LEAD IN THIS ONE MAJOR CATEGORY DROPS SUBSTANTIALLY BOTH BECAUSE NVIDIA IS WEAKENED, AND PERHAPS BECAUSE SOME OF NVIDIA'S INTELLIGENCE HAS BEEN PASSED TO CHINA YOU HAVE A VERY DIFFERENT BALANCE WHICH THEN --NOW WHETHER YOU BELIEVE THAT THEORY OR NOT, IT LEADS TO DIFFERENT ACTIONS BY THE UNITED STATES.

I THINK YOU -- WE HAVE SEEN A LOOSENING, A LITTLE BIT OF LOOSENING IN THE WAY THE ADMINISTRATION HAS BEING THINKING ABOUT EXPORT CONTROLS ON CHINA.

I THINK YOU'LL SEE A SUBSTANTIAL TIGHTENING, PARTICULARLY IF THE ALLEGATIONS ABOUT ALICE HUANG WORKING FOR CHINESE SECURITY ARE PROVEN BEYOND ANY DOUBT TO BE TRUE.

>> OKAY, SO LET ME JUST READ THIS LITTLE BIT ABOUT ALICE HUANG, OBVIOUSLY NO RELATION.

SO SHE WORKS FOR A COMPANY CALLED MEGA SPEED WHOSE MAIN BUSINESS IS RENTING AI CHIPS TO CHINESE COMPANIES, A ROUGHLY $5 BILLION BUSINESS.

NOW IT'S A SIGNIFICANT LOOPHOLE IN U. S. EXPORT CONTROL.

SO LET ME ASK YOU, CONNOR LEAHY, BECAUSE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SECURITY AND TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO MAKE AI SOMEHOW HAVE A GOVERNING STRUCTURE THAT STOPS IT BEING AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT.

WHAT -- WHAT RIGHT NOW WOULD YOU SAY ABOUT -- ABOUT ALICE HUANG'S ACTUAL WORK AND HER ACTUAL JOB?

>> I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO UNDERSTAND FUNDAMENTALLY IS THAT CHIPS AND AI AND THIS WHOLE TECHNOLOGY POSES THE GREATEST NATIONAL SECURITY RISK THAT OUR NATION IN THE UNITED STATES BUT ALSO THE GLOBAL ORDER HAS FACED IN LIVING MEMORY.

AI WILL DETERMINE OUR SECURITY IN MANY, MANY WAYS.

BOTH WHETHER WE CAN KEEP CONTROL OF IT OR NOT, AS MANY EXPERTS WARN THAT LOSS OF CONTROL OF AI SYSTEMS COULD LEAD TO THREATS UP TO AND INCLUDING HUMAN EXTINCTION, AND AS MANY PEOPLE LIKE TO POINT OUT, THAT THERE IS A RACE WITH CHINA.

AND AS AN AMERICAN WHO HAS A LOT OF EXPERIENCE TALKING TO PEOPLE WHO PROVIDE DATA CENTERS, WHO BUILD THESE CHIPS, LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING, WE ARE NOT IN A RACE WITH CHINA BECAUSE WE ARE FULLY COMPROMISED.

THIS IS JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF HOW COMPROMISED THE AMERICAN AI SUPPLY CHAIN IS BY CHINESE INTELLIGENCE.

OUR DATA CENTERS, COMPROMISED.

ALL OF OUR MODELS, STOLEN.

AND THIS IS JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF OUR CHIPS BEING SIPHONED OFF, OUR MOST VALUABLE MILITARY HARDWARE BEING SIPHONED DIRECTLY TO CHINESE ACTORS IN ORDER TO KEEP PACE AND THREATEN AMERICAN DOMINANCE IN AI.

REALLY, THIS IS JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF HOW MUCH THESE COMPANIES HAVE NO LOYALTY TO THE UNITED STATES, NO LOYAL COMPANY TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WOULD ALLOW SOMETHING LIKE MEGA SPEED TO EXIST.

I MEAN, AS WE CAN SEE WITH MR.

HUANG, HIS LOYALTIES AND HIS INTERESTS DEFINITELY LAY OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES.

>> WOW, THAT IS QUITE A CLAIM, CONNOR LEAHY, GIVEN THE FACT THAT HE SEEMS TO BE BY ALL, YOU KNOW, EVIDENCE, A VERY CLOSE, MAYBE THE CLOSEST TECH ADVISER TO PRESIDENT TRUMP.

TRUMP, LET ME REPLAY FOR BOTH OF YOU WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID WHEN HE WAS ASKED ABOUT HUANG ON MONDAY BEFORE THE RESIGNATION.

HERE'S WHAT HE SAID.

>> I ASKED HIM TODAY, BECAUSE I DID SPEAK TO HIM TODAY JUST TO SEE IF HE IS FEELING ALL RIGHT, HOW ARE YOU DOING.

AND I ASKED HIM ABOUT THAT.

AND HE SAID HE HAD ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA THAT THE PERSON IN QUESTION WAS A SPY.

I ASKED THEM THAT QUESTION, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA SHE WAS A SPY?

HE SAID "I HAD NOD SHE WAS A SPY," AND I REALLY BELIEVE HIM.

>> SO BEFORE I GO BACK TO NICK THOMPSON, LET ME JUST CONTINUE WITH YOU, CONNOR, FOR A MOMENT.

IS THAT EVEN CREDIBLE?

>> WHETHER OR NOT SHE WAS A SPY, THE FACT THAT WE WERE ALLOWING NVIDIA TO SELL THIS MILITARY RELEVANT HARDWARE TO A MALAYSIAN COUNTRY IN ORDER TO SUBLET FURTHER TO CHINESE ACTORS, WHETHER OR NOT THESE CHIPS WERE STOLEN AND SMUGGLED IN CHINA IS ALREADY IN ITSELF RIDICULOUS.

IT'S RIDICULOUS THE LEVEL OF RELIABILITY AND SECURITY THAT WE CURRENTLY PUT ON AI COMPANIES.

IF YOU TAKE A COMPANY, SAY LOCKHEED MARTIN, OR ANY OTHER DEFENSE CONTRACTOR THAT IS WORKING ON A MILITARY RELEVANT TECHNOLOGY, WHETHER IT'S HYPERSONIC MISSILES, AIRCRAFT, SOMETHING ELSE, THERE IS INCREDIBLY HARSH STANDARDS FOR BACKGROUND CHECKS, FOR SECURE ACCESS, DATA CENTER SECURITY, ET CETERA.

NO AI COMPANY, NVIDIA OR OPENAI OR ANTHROPIC OR ANY OF THESE COMPANIES FOLLOW ANY OF THESE LEVELS OF RESTRICTIONS.

THEREFORE, ALL THIS INFORMATION AND THIS IP HAS BEEN LEAKING FREELY TO CHINA FOR YEARS.

SO IF IT TURNS OUT THAT SHE WAS A SPY, THIS MAKES THE SITUATION WORSE.

BUT INHERENTLY, WE WERE ALREADY IN A BAD SPOT.

EVEN JUST BY THE PUBLICLY VERIFIABLE DETAILS, WE WERE ALREADY IN A VERY, VERY BAD SPOT WHEN IT COMES TO OUR ABILITY TO KEEP OUR MILITARY RELEVANT TECHNOLOGY SAFE FROM SPYING AND ACCESS BY CHINESE ACTORS.

>> NICK THOMPSON, YOU KNOW, IT'S REALLY HARD TO SORT OF DELVE INTO WHAT TRUMP KNEW, WHEN HE KNEW IT, ET CETERA.

LET ME READ YOU A COUPLE OF FACTS.

U. S. NEWS AND WORLD REPORT CLAIMS THAT TRUMP HOLDS MORE THAN $10 MILLION IN NVIDIA STOCK, OKAY.

THAT HE TRADES ON A REGULAR BASIS.

WE KNOW IT'S PLUMMETED OR PLUNGED SINCE ALL THESE REVELATIONS.

BUT HE ALSO APPARENTLY WAS WARNED AT LEAST A YEAR AGO THAT HUANG, ALICE HUANG, MAY BE COMPROMISED, OR THAT JENSEN HUANG WAS COMPROMISED, RATHER.

SHORTLY BEFORE THE SUMMIT WITH XI JINPING, HE WAS BRIEFED AGAIN.

MARCO RUBIO PREPARED A MEMO SAYING ALICE HUANG IS A SPY FOR CHINA'S INTELLIGENCE SERVICES.

NONETHELESS, AS WE ALL KNOW, AIR FORCE MAKES A SPECIAL STOP IN ALASKA AS THE PRESIDENT IS ON HIS WAY TO THIS SUMMIT.

AND JENSEN HUANG COMES ON BOARD, AND THEY GO OFF TO BEIJING TOGETHER.

SO JUST TELL US ABOUT SNOW IN RETROSPECT, WHAT YOU THINK AND WHAT YOU MIGHT HAVE THOUGHT BACK A YEAR AGO WHEN JENSEN HUANG WAS ON THAT PLANE TO GO TO BEIJING FOR THE SUMMIT.

>> THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST CURIOUS ELEMENTS OF THE CASE.

WHY WAS JENSEN NOT TOLD ABOUT THE SUSPICIONS OF INTELLIGENCE OPERATORS ON THE WOMAN WHO WAS HIS PARAMOUR?

ONE POSSIBLE THEORY IS THEY DIDN'T WANT TO INTERRUPT OR SHOW SOURCES AND METHODS THAT THEY WERE FOLLOWING, THAT THEY HAD ACCESS TO HER PHONE, AND THAT WE, THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, WAS USING THIS AS A WAY TO LEARN ABOUT CHINA.

THAT IS A POSSIBILITY.

IT ALSO CAN BE THE CASE THAT THE FRIENDSHIP BETWEEN DONALD TRUMP AND JENSEN HUANG PREVENTED THAT INFORMATION FROM GETTING FROM JENSEN.

IT IS VERY CURIOUS.

TO ME, ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS WE'RE GOING LEARN IS WHAT WAS ALICE HUANG'S OBJECTIVE, RIGHT.

VARIOUS PEOPLE THINK SHE IS TRYING TO PUSH JENSEN TO SELL MORE CHIPS TO CHINA, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS TRUE AT ALL.

IT IS IN HIS BUSINESS INTEREST, AND HE BELIEVED IT WAS IN THE INTEREST OF THE UNITED STATES TO SELL MORE NVIDIA CHIPS TO CHINA.

SO WHAT WAS SHE AFTER?

WAS SHE AFTER ACTUALLY THE WIRING DESIGNS?

WAS SHE JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE DYNAMICS OF THE AI COMPANIES AND THE U. S. GOVERNMENT?

THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS THE NVIDIA BOARD WAS LOOKING INTO.

I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS WHICH WILL DETERMINE THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE TO THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT'S ACTIONS.

>> LET ME ASK YOU, CONNOR.

SO HUANG, TO FOLLOW ON WHAT FROM WHAT NICK JUST SAID, HAS BEEN ACTUALLY QUITE DISMISSIVE OF THE EXISTENTIAL THREAT OF AI.

A LOFT THE OTHER AI FOUNDERS HAVE SPENT THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS CALLING FOR GOVERNANCE SO THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, CAN BE CONTROLLED BEFORE THIS ALL GETS OUT OF CONTROL AND OUTSIDE THE HUMAN LOOP.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE HEARING THAT IT'S GETTING SHORTER AND SHORTER, THAT TIMELINE AS THE TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPS.

AND RESEARCHERS WARN THE SUPERINTELLIGENCE COULD ARRIVE WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR.

AFTER THAT, EFFORTS APPARENTLY TO CONSTRAIN AI WOULD BE MOOT.

SO CONNOR, AND THEN TO NICK, WHAT IMPACT DO YOU THINK, NOW IN RETROSPECT, OR EVEN AT THE TIME, JENSEN'S VIEW OF NOT RESTRICTING OR SLOWING DOWN OR PACING AI DEVELOPMENT, NOT HAVING THE GOVERNANCE GUIDELINES, WHAT IMPACT DO YOU THINK THAT HAS HAD ON WHERE WE ARE NOW?

>> , UPTON SINCLAIR IT'S HARD TO MAKE A MAN UNDERSTAND WHEN HIS SALARY DOES NOT DEPEND ON IT.

JENSEN HUANG WAS ONE OF THE LOUDEST VOICES IN DISMISSING THE RISKS OF EXTINCTION THAT ARE POSED BY UNCONTROLLABLE AI SYSTEMS.

THAT MANY EXPERTS BELIEVE WE COULD REACH THE POINT OF NO RETURN ON IN AS SOON AS ONE YEAR.

SO MY HOPE IS THAT POTENTIALLY MORE PEOPLE CAN REEVALUATE HOW MUCH THEY WOULD TAKE MR.

HUANG'S WORD SERIOUSLY OR TRUSTWORTHY OR HAVING THE BEST INTEREST OF THE SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES IN MIND.

IT IS PIVOTAL FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND OTHER COUNTRIES TO PREVENT THE CREATION OF SUCH UNCONTROLLABLE RUNAWAY AI SYSTEMS.

IF WE DO NOT PREVENT THIS, OUR SECURITY IS NOT GUARANTEED, NOT JUST OF OUR NATION, BUT OF PEOPLE EVERYWHERE.

AND, WELL, I WOULD SAY THAT HOPEFULLY THAT ONE MORE CRITIC IS NOW EXPOSED FOR WHO HE REALLY WAS.

>> TO RESPOND TO THAT -- >> NICK THOMPSON -- >> YEAH, YEAH.

I WAS GOING TO ADD TO YOU THE FACT THAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE TAKING OVER CONGRESS.

WOULD THERE BE A BIGGER AND MORE ATTEMPT TO PUT GUARDRAILS AROUND?

>> WELL, YES.

SO I THINK JENSEN, AND MANY PEOPLE IN AI GENUINELY BELIEVE THAT THE TECHNOLOGY IS MUCH FOR THE GREATER GOOD, THAT THERE ARE RISKS.

JENSEN DISMISSES THE EXISTENTIAL RISKS, ALWAYS HAS, BUT THE BENEFITS HUGELY OUTWEIGH THE RISKS.

AND THAT'S WHY THEY'RE PUSHING.

IT WAS IN THEIR FINANCIAL INTEREST, BUT THEY ALSO TRULY BELIEVE IT.

TO THAT KEY QUESTION, I'LL SAY TWO THINGS.

ONE, ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING IMPLICATIONS OF THIS IS THAT JENSEN'S FALL COULD TRIGGER A MAJOR SLOWDOWN IN AI.

REMEMBER, NVIDIA IS AN INVESTOR IN ALL THESE COMPANIES.

IT'S FUNDING AND SUPPORTING THE DATA CENTER ROLL-OUT.

IT'S TIED IN INTEGRAL WAYS WITH ALMOST EVERY SINGLE MAJOR AI COMPANY.

SO IF NVIDIA LOSES SOME OF ITS MOJO AFTER JENSEN, OR IF PEOPLE DON'T TRUST NVIDIA, YOU COULD ACTUALLY SEE STRANGELY THE SLOWDOWN IN AI THAT MANY CRITICS OF AI HAVE BEEN CALLING FOR.

SO THE DEMOCRATS, YES, ABSOLUTELY.

RIGHT, THIS IS NOT A WHOLLY PARTISAN ISSUE.

THE PUBLIC IN GENERAL IN THE UNITED STATES IS TURNING AGAINST AI.

BUT I DO THINK THE DEMOCRATS HAVE TURNED MORE THAN THE REPUBLICANS.

THEY'RE GOING TO USE THIS MOMENT TO PUSH FOR MORE AI RESTRICTIONS AND TO SLOW DOWN THE AI ACCELERATION EVEN MORE.

>> AND LASTLY TO YOU, CONNOR, OF COURSE YOU'VE SEEN THE ELECTIONS AND THE STATEMENT BY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ABOUT AI AND WANTING TO CONTROL IT MORE.

IS THAT GOING TO HAVE SOME KIND OF BUBBLE EFFECT?

WILL THERE BE, YOU KNOW, A CRISIS IN THE UK OR U. S. ECONOMY OR MAYBE EVEN THE GLOBAL ECONOMY?

BUT MORE TO THE POINT, ALSO, DOESN'T JENSEN HUANG STILL OWN THE MAJORITY SHARES IN NVIDIA?

AND AS SUCH, WHAT IS HIS POWER?

>> I THINK THE GREATEST POWER THAT HUANG WILL HAVE ON THE MARKET OR THE GREATEST EFFECT HE WILL HAVE IS SYMBOLIC.

A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE NERVOUS AROUND A LOT OF FINANCIAL ENGINEERING THAT IS CURRENTLY HAPPENING IN THE MARKET, AND THIS MIGHT BE A SYMBOLIC MOMENT FOR CERTAIN ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN OR FOR, YOU KNOW, CERTAIN MARKET CORRECTIONS TO START HAPPENING THAT WERE GOING TO HAPPEN SOONER OR LATER.

WHAT I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND IS WHETHER OR NOT FINANCIAL ENGINEERING AND BUBBLES BURST OR WHATEVER, THE TECHNOLOGY WILL CONTINUE TO ADVANCE.

THE TECHNOLOGY WILL CONTINUE TO IMPROVE.

WE ARE ON THE CRUCEOF RECURSIVE SELF-IMPROVEMENT, THE POINT WHERE AI CAN IMPROVE ITSELF, WHICH MANY EXPERTS BELIEVE IS THE POINT WE WILL TRULY LOSE CONTROL.

AND THAT IS POSSIBLE EVEN JUST WITH THE AMOUNT OF HARDWARE CURRENTLY ON THE GRID.

EVEN IF ALL INVESTMENT IN AI DRIES UP, NO FURTHER DATA CENTERS ARE BUILT, IF WE DON'T PASS LEGISLATION AND TAKE DECISIVE ACTION TO PREVENT CONTINUED IMPROVEMENTS IN SOFTWARE, WE STILL WILL SEE THESE KINDS OF UNCONTROLLED AI SYSTEMS THAT WE FEAR.

AS SUCH, WE CAN'T LEAVE THAT OUT OF SIGHT.

>> AND JUST FINALLY, I THINK, NICK THOMPSON, I SAW YOU SHAKE YOUR HEAD.

AM I WRONG ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF STOCK HE OWNS?

>> I THINK HE ONLY OWNS ABOUT 3.

8%.

HE MAY BE SIGNIFICANT, THE LARGEST SHAREHOLDER, BUT HE DOESN'T HAVE CONTROL OVER THE COMPANY.

AND HE HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE BOARD, WHICH IS AN INTERESTING THING THAT HAPPENED THIS MORN AS WELL AS LOSING HIS CEO ROLE.

>> OKAY.

THIS IS REALLY SUCH AN INTERESTING CONVERSATION, AND REALLY SO IMPORTANT.

SO WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE BEEN ABLE TO HAVE YOU GUYS DISCUSS AND SHARE YOUR EXPERTISE WITH US.

THANK YOU, NICK THOMPSON AND CONNOR LEAHY.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHRISTIANE.

> >> NOW TO A STORY THAT HAS ROCKED BRITAIN THIS WEEK, A STORY OF LEGAL JUSTICE FUELED BY INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM.

THIS WEEK, COMEDIAN TURNED CONSPIRACY THEORIST RUSSELL BRAND WAS SENTENCED TO OVER TEN YEARS IN PRISON AFTER HE WAS FOUND GUILTY OF RAPE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT.

ONE DAY LATER, THE WELL-KNOWN COMEDIAN PRESENTER AND CHILDREN'S AUTHOR DAVID WALLIAMS WAS ACCUSED OF PREYING ON AND GROOMING YOUNG WOMEN AND TEENAGERS FOR SEX.

ACCUSATIONS REVEALED IN A MAJOR INVESTIGATION BY THE GUARDIAN AND ITV NUMBERS.

WALLIAMS DENIES ALL THE ALLEGATIONS AND HAD ATTEMPTED TO STOP THEIR PUBLICATION THROUGH A COURT INJUNCTION.

BUT THE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST BRAND AND WALLIAMS WERE DESCRIBED AS OPEN SECRETS FOR YEARS.

NOW THE GOVERNMENT IS STEPPING IN, GIVING THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY AN ULTIMATUM, STRENGTHEN PROTECTIONS FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN OR FACE REPERCUSSIONS.

MINISTERS ARE CALLING FOR ACTION TO PREVENT NDAs SILENCING SURVIVORS.

ISSUES OF UNCHECKED CELEBRITY AND THE STRUGGLE FOR ACCOUNTABILITY ARE DISTURBINGLY FAMILIAR, MANY DRAWING PARALLELS WITH HARVEY WEINSTEIN'S MOMENT OF RECKONING.

SO IS THIS BRITAIN'S ME TOO MOVEMENT?

LET'S BRING IN JESS PHILLIPS, A LABOR MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT WHO IS PREVIOUSLY CHARGED WITH SAFEGUARDING WOMEN AND GIRLS.

JESS, WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM.

LET ME ASK YOU ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT STEPPING IN.

WHAT HAS CHANGED SINCE THESE COURT CASES AND NOW SINCE THE OUTING OF DAVID WALLIAMS, WHO DENIES IT, BUT NONETHELESS, A HUGE SEA CHANGE OVER THIS LAST WEEK.

>> YEAH, LOOK, WHAT HAS CHANGED IS PUBLIC DEMAND MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE, EXACTLY LIKE THE ME TOO MOVEMENT.

ALSO, HERE IN THE UK, WE HAD A VERY HARD PROFILE MURDER DURING THE COVID LOCKDOWN, A WOMAN KILLED BY A POLICE OFFICER.

AND THESE MOMENTS WHEN THIS PEAKS IN OUR NEWS IN A BIG WAY, AND THE RUSSELL BRAND STORY CAME JUST --THE SENTENCING OF RUSSELL BRAND CAME JUST THE DAY BEFORE THE BREAKING OF THE INJUNCTION THAT WAS KEEPING DAVID WALLIAMS' NAME OUT OF THE NEWSPAPERS, SO IT'S ALL HAPPENING AT ONCE.

AND THIS PUBLIC DEMAND RAMPS UP TO DEMAND THAT THE GOVERNMENT DO MORE.

>> I WANT TO PLAY FOR YOU, ACTUALLY, A VERY INTERESTING IN LIGHT OF AS WE KNOW HOW SO OFTEN THE VICTIMS, THE SURVIVORS GET BLAMED.

IT'S LIKE THEY'RE PUT ON TRIAL BY THE DEFENDANTS' ATTORNEYS.

THIS IS WHAT THE JUDGE SENTENCING BRAND SAID.

>> WHATEVER WOMEN WEAR, WHEREVER THEY GO, INDEED, WHATEVER THEY DRINK, THEY RETAIN THE RIGHT TO SAY NO AND TO DEMAND JUSTICE FROM THE CRIMINAL COURTS WHEN SEXUAL PREDATORS LIKE YOU, RUSSELL BRAND, ACT WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT.

>> WHAT WAS IT LIKE TO HEAR THAT?

I'M NOT SURE I'VE HEARD THAT FROM, YOU KNOW, A JUDGE IN SUCH A TRIAL BEFORE.

>> WELL, LOOK, WE'VE ONLY JUST RECENTLY ALLOWED THE FILMING OF THE SENTENCING OF OUR INNER COURTS.

AND SO MAYBE IT HAS BEEN SAID BEFORE, BUT IT FELT INCREDIBLY EMPOWERING FOR THE NATION'S WOMEN TO HEAR THE EXACT THINGS, THE EXACT REASONS WHY WOMEN DON'T COME FORWARD ABOUT THESE CASES.

AND ALMOST CERTAINLY WHAT HAD BEEN PLAYING OUT IN THE TRIAL AN ELEMENT OF VICTIM BLAMING.

AND IT WAS THE JUDGE ASSERTING TO THE COURTROOM AND NOW TO THE COUNTRY THAT WOMEN HAVE A RIGHT TO SAY NO.

AND IT'S A BIT LIKE GISELE PELLICO.

BLAME CHANGES SIDES.

HE WAS EMPOWERING THE WOMEN IN THAT STATEMENT.

SO LOTS OF WOMEN IN THE UK, IT HAS BECOME LIKE A TALISMAN OF HOPE.

>> IT IS ACTUALLY REALLY INTERESTING THE WAY THINGS ARE MOVING.

THE IDEA OF INJUNCTIONS.

I THINK IT'S VERY BRITISH, RIGHT?

I'M NOT SURE THAT THE SAME IS.

>> YEAH.

>> LEGALLY ACCEPTABLE IN THE UNITED STATES.

SO IN THIS CASE, I'LL JUST READ THE FACTS.

WALLIAMS TRIED TO STOP THE INVESTIGATION FROM COMING OUT WITH AN INJUNCTION.

THE JUDGE LIFTED IT.

THE REPORTING WAS ESSENTIAL, LIKE BRAND'S VICTIMS MAY NOT HAVE COME FORWARD WITHOUT THE SUNDAY TIMES, CHANNEL 4, DISPATCHES INVESTIGATION.

NOW JUSTIN TRUDEAU, THE JOURNALIST OF THE PRIVATE EYE, THE SATIRICAL POLITICAL MAGAZINE ALLEGE THERE IS ANOTHER MAN WHO HAS OBTAINED AN INJUNCTION.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY THAT'S EVEN ALLOWED?

AND DO YOU THINK THOSE INJUNCTIONS SHOULD BE LIFTED AND BANNED?

>> LOOK, INJUNCTIONS OBVIOUSLY WE DON'T HAVE THE FIRST AMENDMENT IN OUR COUNTRY.

OBVIOUSLY, WE HAVE A RIGHT TO THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, AND THAT IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF BRITISH LAW.

HOWEVER, YET LOCAL LAW AND THE MANNER IN WHICH PRESS CAN BE SILENCED IN OUR COUNTRY IS CONSIDERABLY I WOULD SAY A MUCH HIGHER LEVEL THAT THEY CAN BE SILENCED IN OUR COUNTRY THAN THEY CAN IN THE U. S. THESE INJUNCTIONS ARE COMPLETELY LEGITIMATE INJUNCTIONS TO PROTECT PEOPLE'S PRIVACY, BUT THEY WERE DRAFTED INTO OUR LAWS WITH THE GOOD MEANING OF GENUINELY SEEKING TO PROTECT ORDINARY PEOPLE FROM AN OVERZEALOUS INTERRUPTION INTO THEIR LIFE.

HOWEVER, ORDINARY PEOPLE CAN'T ACCESS, YOU KNOW, BIG FANCY LAWYERS TO GET THESE SORTS OF INJUNCTIONS.

SO THEY HAVE BECOME ABSOLUTELY THE PLAY THING OF THE PLAYBOY, IF YOU WILL, AND, YOU KNOW, WE SAW BIG CASES IN THE UK WHERE THESE INJUNCTIONS WERE SET TO SILENCE WOMEN WHO WERE ACCUSING BIG COMPANY CEOs.

WE SEE THEM IN THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY.

THERE ARE UNDOUBTEDLY MORE ON THE BOOKS, AND AS A LAWMAKER, WHAT I WOULD ABSOLUTELY DO IN THE WAKE OF THIS IS TO GO AWAY AND SEEK TO ENSURE THAT INJUNCTIONS CANNOT BE USED IN THESE SORTS OF CASES.

THAT WAS NOT WHAT THEY WERE INTENDED FOR.

>> AND YOU MENTIONED ALL THE DIFFERENT INDUSTRIES.

I THINK OBVIOUSLY FOR OBVIOUS REASONS, THE FOCUS IN THESE CASES HAVE BEEN ON THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY.

WE'VE HAD SOME OF THE ENTERTAINMENT CHIEFS SAYING THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A LOT MORE GOVERNANCE, FRANKLY.

HOW IT IS POSSIBLE THAT IN SOMETHING LIKE AN ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE CAN ALLEGEDLY -- SUPERSTARS CAN ALLEGEDLY GROOM YOUNG KIDS IN FULL VIEW, THAT THESE THINGS HAVE BEEN DESCRIBED AS SORT OF OPEN SECRETS.

THERE ARE CERTAIN PEOPLE WHO ARE COMING OUT NOW SAYING OH, I'M SHOCK AND HORRIFIED.

PEOPLE WHO WORKED WITH BOTH OF THESE MEN, I'M SHOCKED, I'M SHOCKED, I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT.

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM THAT CAN BE FIXED IN THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY?

LET'S JUST FOCUS ON THAT.

AND DO YOU THINK IT'S PARTICULARLY VULNERABLE OR ENABLING OF THESE KINDS OF SITUATIONS AND ALLEGATIONS?

>> YEAH, LOOK, SO I THINK IT IS PARTICULARLY VULNERABLE.

THERE ARE OTHER VULNERABLE INDUSTRIES.

POLITICS, THIS RAPPED ON THE DOOR OF POLITICS NOT THAT LONG AGO.

IT'S ANYWHERE WHERE THERE IS PEOPLE WITH QUITE A LOT OF POWER AND WORKING IN A HIERARCHY VERY, VERY CLOSELY AND WITH ACCESS TO PEOPLE MUCH, MUCH FURTHER DOWN TO THEM.

SO YOU'VE GOT FREELANCE, NOT PROPERLY EMPLOYED CAMERA PEOPLE OR RUNNERS ON A TV SHOW WORKING ALONGSIDE, YOU KNOW, AN ABSOLUTE LIKE HOUSEHOLD NAME SUPERSTAR.

AND SO THE IMBALANCE OF POWER CREATES A POTENTIAL FOR PROBLEMS.

AND THEN ALSO OPPORTUNITY.

THESE PEOPLE ARE FAMOUS.

THEY CAN ASK --THEY HAVE DRESSING ROOMS AND RUNNERS BRINGING PEOPLE IN THERE.

THEY GO OUT AROUND THE COUNTRY.

THEY'RE DOING EVENTS.

THEY HAVE ACCESS TO A HUGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE.

A HUGE NUMBER OF ADORING PEOPLE AS WELL, ESPECIALLY YOUNG PEOPLE.

CAN BE VERY ADORING.

SO THERE IS A REALLY SPECIFIC THING.

WHAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT THIS, THEY JUST NEED TO PUT IN PLACE REALLY QUITE BASIC HR FUNCTIONS, HUMAN RESOURCES FUNCTIONS THAT WOULD EXIST IN AN EMPLOYMENT SITUATION SO THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A LINE OF COMPLAINT.

AND THAT NEEDS TO BE VERY, VERY CLEAR.

AND THERE NEEDS TO BE A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE WHO HAVE JUST HEARD THINGS THAT HAVE MADE THEM FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE, WHERE THAT INFORMATION CAN BE COLLECTED.

IT ALSO NEEDS TO BE HANDLED INDEPENDENTLY.

SO IN THE UK, THE HEAD OF BAFTA, WHICH IS LIKE OUR OSCARS, THE WOMAN WHO USED TO WORK AT BAFTA, SHE HAS SET UP A SPECIFIC INDEPENDENT STANDARDS AUTHORITY THAT CAN BE BROUGHT IN INDEPENDENTLY IN THESE CASES.

AND THAT'S --IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE.

IT JUST DOESN'T EXIST CURRENTLY IN THAT PARTICULAR INDUSTRY IN THE UK.

I THINK IT IS --I THINK POST WEINSTEIN, IT HAS MASSIVELY IMPROVED IN THE U. S. , AND PEOPLE I'VE KNOWN WHO WORKED ON HBO DRAMAS, FOR EXAMPLE, OR OTHERS SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS --THIS LION WHERE YOU'RE TOLD TO GO IF THERE IS A PROBLEM.

THAT HASN'T REALLY PICKED UP IN THE UK.

>> BUT I UNDERSTAND IN WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THIS CREATIVE INDUSTRIES INDEPENDENCE STANDARD, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS CESA, IN THE UK, YOU CAN'T EVEN GET NOMINATED FOR A BAFTA IF YOU HAVEN'T SIGNED UP FOR IT, RIGHT?

THAT'S SOME PROGRESS.

>> YEAH, BUT THAT'S ONLY BECAUSE THE WOMAN FROM BAFTA DID IT.

>> YES.

>> BUT I ACTUALLY THINK IT SHOULD BE MANDATORY AND THE GOVERNMENT, THE SECRETARY OF STATE WHO LEADS ON THIS POLICY IS MEETING BOTH WITH INDUSTRY HEADS AND WITH CESA NEXT WEEK AND THEY WILL URGE THE COMPANY TO MAKE IT COMPLETELY MANDATORY THAT IF YOU'RE MAKING TELEVISION OR ENTERTAINMENT IN THE UK, IT IS MANDATORY THAT YOU PAY INTO THAT ORGANIZATION AND THAT YOU'RE A PART OF IT.

IT'S GOOD THAT YOU CAN'T WIN A BAFTA UNLESS YOU'RE PART OF IT.

>> I MEAN, AT LEAST THAT.

BUT, LOOK, AGAIN, IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO REALIZE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, THAT AS INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE TRYING TO DO WHAT THEY CAN.

AND AS YET, WE DON'T HAVE A SYSTEM.

CAN I ASK YOU ABOUT THIS, THEN?

BECAUSE I'VE HEARD YOU TALK ABOUT THE ISSUE OF GROOMING SOME OF THE ACCUSERS IN THE DAVID WALLIAMS INVESTIGATION SAY THEY WERE 15 WHEN THEY MET HIM.

AGAIN, HE DENIES THE ALLEGATIONS.

GROOMING HAS ONLY BEEN IN BRITISH LAW SINCE JUNE OF THIS YEAR.

IT WASN'T A CRIME --OR MAYBE ISN'T EVEN A CRIME.

CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT THAT ASPECT?

BECAUSE IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME WE'VE HEARD ABOUT GROOMING.

>> YES.

GROOMING IS AN AGGRAVATING FACTOR AGAINST OTHER CRIMES.

SO IF YOU SEXUALLY ABUSE A CHILD IN OUR COUNTRY, YOU CAN GET A LONGER SENTENCE BECAUSE IF THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT YOU GROOMED THEM.

BUT IN AND OF ITSELF, TO GROOM, WHICH IF YOU LOOK ACROSS THE WALLIAMS CASE VERY, VERY, VERY METICULOUSLY DONE BY ITV NEWS AND THE GUARDIAN, IT'S HARD TO REFER TO THAT AS ANYTHING ELSE, WHICH HE OBVIOUSLY HAS DENIED.

BUT IT'S HARD TO REFER TO IT AS ANYTHING ELSE.

IT'S A MODUS OPERANDI.

HE IS BUYING GIFTS.

HE IS TRYING TO HELP WITH PEOPLE'S CAREERS.

HE'S INVITING PEOPLE BACK TO HIS HOUSE.

HE'S LETTING THEM STAY THERE WHEN THEY'VE FALLEN OUT WITH THEIR FAMILIES.

IT HAS ALL THE CHARACTERISTICS OF GROOMING.

BUT GROOMING IN AND OF ITSELF IS NOT A CRIME IN THE UK.

AND SO LOOKING AT WHAT THE BEST OPTIONS ARE, WE HAVE SOME LAWS THAT ARE AROUND A BREACH OF TRUST LIKE FOR TEACHERS, FOR EXAMPLE.

IF DAVID WALLIAMS HAD BEEN THESE GIRLS' TEACHERS, THERE WOULD BE A CRIMINAL BAR THAT HE WOULD HAVE MET.

BUT I THINK THAT THAT'S WHERE WE NEED TO LOOK AT WHERE THE LAW IS.

BUT THESE CASES WOULD BE INCREDIBLY HARD TO TAKE WITHOUT MULTIPLE VICTIMS COMING FORWARD.

>> UH-HUH.

OKAY.

SO I WANTED TO ASK YOU ABOUT THE ISSUE OF NDAs, RIGHT.

BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN USED NOW TO SILENCE CERTAINLY, CERTAINLY MANY, MANY VICTIMS, SURVIVORS.

AND YOU KNOW, YOU COULD BE --YOU COULD BE TAKEN TO COURT IF YOU BROKE YOUR NDA.

BUT NDAs EXIST ACROSS MANY, MANY MEDIAS AND OPERATIONS, AND ALSO ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT INDUSTRIES.

WHAT DO YOU THINK THE FUTURE OF THE NDA LOOKS LIKE?

BECAUSE SOME VERY BRAVE PEOPLE LIKE ZELDA PERKINS, AND I KNOW YOU WORKED WITH HER TO THE HARVEY WEINSTEIN THING DID IT AND HELPED BRING HIM DOWN IN FRONT OF THE LAW, IE IN COURT.

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE CONTINUED POWER OF THE NDA?

AND CAN IT BE OBLITERATED?

SHOULD IT BE?

>> YES, IT SHOULD ABSOLUTELY BE OBLITERATED.

A NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT, IF YOU HOLD CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION IN YOUR ORGANIZATION IS A COMPLETELY LEGITIMATE THING TO HAVE.

BUT AGAIN, COMPLETELY LEGITIMATE LAWS HAVE BEEN USED.

AND LOOK, THE COUNTRY'S WOMEN YEOH ZELDA PERKINS A HUGE DEBT OF GRATITUDE.

NOT ONLY DID SHE HELP TO PUT HARVEY WEINSTEIN AWAY, SHE CHANGED A LAW IN OUR COUNTRY THAT MEANS NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS CANNOT BE USED IN CASES OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN EMPLOYMENT LAW ANYMORE.

THEY CANNOT BE USED.

ALTHOUGH THE LAWYERS WHO DO THEM, YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE --ANY LAWYER WHO HAS SAT IN FRONT OF THE SAME MAN WHO IS ON HIS THIRD, FOURTH SILENCING OF A TEENAGED GIRL REALLY NEEDS TO I MEAN THINK WHEREBY THAT WAS WHY THEY WENT INTO THE LAW.

WAS THAT THE NOBILITY THEY WERE HOPING FOR IS WHAT I WOULD SAY, BECAUSE I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT GETTING RID OF NDAs ALMOST COMPLETELY, ALTHOUGH I THINK THAT GETTING RID OF THEM AS WE HAVE DONE ON ZELDA'S COMMAND SO FAR IS CERTAINLY HOPEFULLY GOING TO BE MUCH, MUCH BETTER.

BUT ALSO I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE STANDARDS OF THE --OF THOSE PRACTICING THE LAW IN OUR COUNTRY.

>> WELL, TALKING ABOUT THAT, AND I WANT YOU TO EXPAND ON THAT, THE STANDARDS OF THOSE PRACTICING THE LAW.

YOU HAVE OBTAINED IT UPON YOURSELF TO GO TO COURT ON SOME OF THESE CASES.

TELL ME WHY.

BUT I THINK IT'S TO LET THE COURT AND THE LAWYERS AND THE JUDGES KNOW THAT YOU ARE THERE WATCHING HOW THEY TREAT THE VICTIMS.

>> YES.

YOU KNOW, IN MY CONSTITUENCY WHERE I REPRESENT AND SOMETIMES OUTSIDE OF IT, WHEN WOMEN COME FORWARD AND THEY ARE GOING TO COURT, WHERE I CAN ATTEND COURT WITH THEM, I WAS IN A MULTIPLE STRANGULATION COURT CASE THE OTHER DAY.

I'VE SAT THROUGH CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE, CHILD EXPLOITATION, RAPE CASES.

I GO ALONG AND JUST SIT IN THE GALLERY, ESPECIALLY WHEN USUAL I WILL ONLY WHEN THEY ARE GIVING EVIDENCE.

AND IT'S TO SUPPORT THEM.

BUT ALSO, I FEEL LIKE PEOPLE MIGHT BEHAVE BETTER IF I'M IN THE COURTROOM BECAUSE.

>> RIGHT.

>> I'VE SEEN LOTS OF BAD BEHAVIOR.

>> YEP, YEP, YEP.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT IN THE COURT AFTERWARDS, AFTER THE CONVICTION, THE RUSSELL BRAND BARRISTER BASICALLY CAME AT THE JOURNALIST AND BASICALLY SAID I HOPE YOU'RE PLEASED WITH YOURSELF, AND JUST BEHAVED INCREDIBLY BADLY AFTERWARDS.

I MEAN, HOW --IN FRONT OF PEOPLE, YOU KNOW.

NO SHAME.

>> YEAH, NO, NO, NO.

THERE IS NO SHAME ABOUT THIS.

THERE IS, YOU KNOW, VERY, VERY PATRIARCHAL NORMS EXIST WITHIN OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND OUR PARLIAMENT.

I'M NOT SURPRISED A MAN WHO MADE THE ARGUMENTS HE MADE IN COURT THOUGHT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO WALK UP TO A WOMAN WHO HAD SPENT YEARS INVESTIGATING AND SUPPORTING WOMEN AND BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, HIT HER WITH A RUDE TIRADE AND TO SORT OF BLAME THE PRESS.

A FREE PRESS I HAVE TO SAY, I'VE NEVER FELT --AS A POLITICIAN, I DON'T ALWAYS LIKE PRESS SCRUTINY, BUT I HAVE NEVER, EVER --I'VE NEVER EVER FELT MORE PASSIONATELY AS A DEFENDER OF A FREE PRESS THAN I DO AT THE MOMENT BECAUSE NONE OF THESE WOMEN WOULD HAVE JUSTICE WITHOUT A FREE PRESS.

ZELDA PERKINS WOULD NOT HAVE GOT JUSTICE FOR HARVEY WEINSTEIN WITHOUT A FREE PRESS.

AND THESE CASES WOULD NEVER HAVE COME TO LIGHT.

AND THESE MEN WOULD BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO ABUSE WOMEN AT THEIR WILL.

AND IT WAS ONLY BECAUSE OF THE BACKBONE OF PRESS INSTITUTIONS GIVING THOSE WOMEN THE CONFIDENCE AND THE COURAGE, AND FRANKLY, THE LEGAL RESOURCE TO TAKE ON THE LEGAL CASES.

THAT THIS WAS ABLE TO HAPPEN.

>> YEP.

WELL, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, I'M VERY PROUD AS WELL OF MY COLLEAGUES WHO DID THAT INCREDIBLE WORK.

AND JESS PHILLIPS, THANK YOU, AND THANK YOU FOR THE WORK THAT YOU DO FOR YOUR CONSTITUENTS.

AND TO PUT THE WORD OUT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

>> YOU'RE WELCOME.

> >> NOW WE KNOW THAT TACKLING THE AFFORDABILITY CRISIS TOOK CENTER STAGE IN THE U. S. MIDTERMS.

NOW A DIVIDE CONGRESS MUST DELIVER THE GOODS.

OF COURSE THE COST OF LIVING IMPACTS EVERYONE DIFFERENTLY BASED ON SALARY, INHERITANCE, CIRCUMSTANCE.

YET THE FEELING OF ECONOMIC ANXIETY IS A COMMON THREAD ACROSS THE SPECTRUM.

THAT'S WHAT OUR NEXT GUEST MONA CHALABI IS TELLING HARI SREENIVASAN NOW.

>> CHRISTIANE, THANKS.

MONA CHALABI, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

YOU WROTE A BOOK RECENTLY CALLED TEN LIVES: HOW WHAT WE HAVE SHAPES WHO WE ARE".

AND YOU BROKE THESE SORT OF TEN CHARACTERS THAT YOU FOLLOW ACROSS THE ECONOMIC SPECTRUM INTO THESE DIFFERENT DECILES.

HOW DID YOU ORGANIZE THE PEOPLE IN THE FIRST PLACE?

>> I KNEW THAT I WANTED TO WRITE A BOOK THAT WASN'T JUST FOCUSED ON THE BILLIONAIRE CLASS.

SO MY PITCH TO MY EDITOR WAS TO FIND SOMETHING IN THE RICHEST 10% OF INCOMES IN THE U. S. , THEN THE NEXT 10%, AND THEN THE NEXT 10%.

AND I FOUND TEN INDIVIDUALS FROM EACH OF THOSE BRACKETS.

I KNEW THAT I WANTED TO SPEAK TO SOMEBODY WHO WAS WORKING AT AN AMAZON FACILITY.

I KNEW I WANTED TO SPEAK TO SOMEBODY WHO WAS NAVIGATING SURROGACY.

I KNEW I WANTED TO SPEAK TO A MILITARY VETERAN.

SO IT WAS VERY, VERY COMPLICATED TO FIND PEOPLE WHO WOULD NOT ONLY KIND OF FULFILL THOSE CRITERIA, BUT WHO WOULD ALSO BE INCREDIBLY FORTHCOMING ABOUT THEIR FINANCIAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

>> SO MUCH OF YOUR BOOK ALSO INCLUDES ILLUSTRATIONS.

AND I WANT TO POINT OUT, THESE MAKE --FOR ME, IT MADE SO MUCH OF THIS FUN TO READ, BUT ALSO EASY TO UNDERSTAND SOMETIMES.

AND YOU'VE GOT ILLUSTRATIONS OF STUDENTS AT A SCHOOL, PATIENTS AT A HOSPITAL, PRISONERS IN THE CAFETERIA.

WHY DO YOU INCLUDE THIS?

>> I THINK A LOT OF STATISTICS AND A LOT OF DATA IS COMMUNICATED IN THIS WAY THAT IS VERY, VERY INACCESSIBLE.

AND THAT'S TROUBLING TO ME BECAUSE IT MEANS THE PEOPLE REPRESENTED IN THESE CHARTS RARELY GET TO SEE THEM.

SO I DRAW THESE KIND OF WEIRD DRAWINGS THAT LOOK LIKE THEY COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BY A CHILD THAT HOPEFULLY MAKE THE INFORMATION A BIT MORE ACCESSIBLE.

>> ONE THING THAT YOU DID IS INTERESTING.

AND I THINK IT'S ALSO THE CASE WITH MOST PEOPLE IS YOU JUST ASK THEM WHERE THEY THINK THEY FALL ON THIS KIND OF LADDER OF INCOME.

WHAT DID YOU FIND?

>> I FOUND A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T REALLY KNOW WHERE THEY SIT ON THE INCOME LADDER.

YOU SEE THIS IN SURVEY DATA, RIGHT, THAT AMERICANS TEND TO PILE INTO THIS LABEL OF MIDDLE CLASS REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEIR ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES ARE.

WHAT I FOUND IS PEOPLE WHO TENDED TO BE AT THE UPPER END OF THE LADDER WOULD UNDERESTIMATE JUST HOW MUCH WEALTH THEY HAD, AND PEOPLE WHO WERE RIGHT AT THE BOTTOM WOULD OVERESTIMATE THEIR WEALTH.

>> LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT SOME OF THESE CHARACTERS THAT YOU FOUND.

ONE THAT I WANT TO DIVE IN TO IS CHRISTINA.

SHE IS A SINGLE MOTHER MAKING $30,000 A YEAR.

AND SHE BECOMES A SURROGATE TO HELP SUPPORT HER OWN CHILD.

TELL US WHAT YOU LEARNED NOT JUST ABOUT SURROGACY, ABOUT JUST LIFE AT THIS DECILE.

>> SO CHRISTINA WAS SOMEBODY WHO IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS INCOME LADDER.

AND I KNEW THAT I WANTED TO FIND SOMEBODY WHO WAS GOING THROUGH SURROGACY, BECAUSE I THOUGHT THERE WAS SOMETHING REALLY FASCINATING ABOUT THIS IDEA OF EARNING MONEY BY RISKING YOUR BODY.

AND OBVIOUSLY PEOPLE DO THIS IN ALL KINDS OF JOBS ACROSS THE U. S. , CONSTRUCTION WORKERS ARE THE ONES THAT IMMEDIATELY COME TO MIND.

BUT I THOUGHT THERE WOULD BE SOMETHING MORE EMOTIONALLY COMPLEX ABOUT SURROGACY, AND CHRISTINA DISABUSED ME OF THAT IDEA.

SHE MADE IT CLEAR TO ME THERE WAS NO EMOTIONAL AGONY IN HANDING OVER A BABY AFTER SHE HAD GIVEN BIRTH.

THIS WAS JUST A WAY OF EARNING MONEY FOR HER IN ORDER TO, AS YOU SAY, SUPPORT HER OWN CHILD.

I THINK I WAS QUITE SHOCKED ACTUALLY ABOUT HOW MUCH MONEY SHE MADE IN DOING THIS.

I THINK SHE MADE ABOUT $50,000 TOTAL.

AND AGAIN, IT WAS A VERY, VERY DIFFICULT PROCESS TO GO THROUGH PHYSICALLY AND MENTALLY.

>> YEAH.

>> AND SHE SPENT ALL OF THE MONEY SHE MADE ACTUALLY ON A PRIVATE DAY CARE FOR HER DAUGHTER SO HER DAUGHTER COULD HAVE THE BEST START IN LIFE.

>> YOU'RE RIGHT IN THERE THAT LIKE MOST CAREGIVERS, CHRISTINA FACED THREE OPTIONS.

PAY FOR CARE, FIND SOMEONE WHO WILL DO IT FOR FREE, OR DO IT YOURSELF.

EACH AVENUE LOOKED UNDESIRABLE OR UNVIABLE TO SOME EXTENT.

JUST THE COST OF CHILD CARE AND CERTAINLY BEING A SINGLE MOM, THE STRAIN IS TREMENDOUS.

THE FACT THAT IT REALLY I GUESS SHOULDN'T SURPRISE US THAT SOMEBODY WOULD CHOOSE THIS ROUTE BECAUSE OF THE ECONOMIC WINDFALL.

>> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

I THINK THE OTHER THING THAT THE BOOK DOES IS KIND OF COMPLICATE THIS NOTION OF WHAT IS ENOUGH MONEY TO FEEL SECURE IN THE U. S. , AND WHO EXACTLY IS WORKING CLASS.

WHEN I STARTED OUT WRITING, THIS I PITCHED TO THE PUBLISHER THAT I WANTED TO COME UP WITH ONE FIGURE, ONE DOLLARS AND CENTS FIGURE OF HOW MUCH MONEY YOU NEED TO BE OKAY, TO BE FINANCIALLY SAFE IN THIS COUNTRY.

AND PEOPLE LIKE CHRISTINA CONSTANTLY COMPLICATED THAT FOR ME.

I WASN'T ABLE TO COME UP WITH THE NUMBER BECAUSE BEING A CAREGIVER WITH A CHILD WHO REQUIRES CARE MEANS THAT NUMBER BECOMES VERY COMPLICATED VERY QUICKLY.

YOU CAN HAVE A RELATIVELY HIGH BANK BALANCE AND STILL BE GENUINELY FINANCIALLY PRECARIOUS IN THIS COUNTRY.

>> THERE USED TO BE A STATISTIC A WHILE BACK SAYING EVERYTHING ABOVE $75,000 INCREMENTAL HAPPINESS THAT YOU GAIN IS LESS AND LESS PAST THIS NUMBER.

IT SEEMS VARIABLE WHETHER YOU HAVE ELDERLY PEOPLE IN YOUR HOME THAT YOU NEED TO CARE FOR OR WHETHER YOU HAVE YOUNG CHILDREN YOU NEED TO CARE FOR OR HOW SATISFIED YOU ARE IN THE REST OF YOUR LIFE.

>> I HEARD SOME VERSION OF FROM THE PEOPLE I SPOKE TO.

BUT IT WAS BIT MORE COMPLICATED.

I FOUND IT WASN'T NECESSARILY HAPPINESS VERSUS SADNESS.

IT WAS ANXIETY.

AND EVERYONE THAT I SPOKE TO WAS ANXIOUS ABOUT THEIR FINANCIAL SITUATION, INCLUDING THE GUY WHO I SPOKE TO WHO WAS IN THE TOP INCOME BRACKET.

HE FELT THAT HE JUST DIDN'T NECESSARILY HAVE ENOUGH TO MAINTAIN THE KIND OF LIFESTYLE THAT HE WANTED.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS PARTLY BECAUSE EVERYONE I SPOKE TO EXPERIENCED SOME KIND OF ECONOMIC SHOCK.

SO FOR HIM, HE WENT THROUGH A DIVORCE THAT HE DIDN'T NECESSARILY SEE COMING.

AND THAT MEANT THAT HIS FINANCIAL SITUATION RADICALLY CHANGED.

HOWEVER, IT'S A REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT MESSAGE OF THE BOOK THAT JUST BECAUSE EVERYBODY FEELS ANXIOUS, IT'S NOT THIS IDEA THAT WE'RE ALL IN IT TOGETHER.

I WANT TO BE REALLY, REALLY CLEAR THAT THAT INDIVIDUAL WHO IS MAKING $550,000 A YEAR FACES COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SET OF STRUGGLES THAN THE PERSON I SPOKE WHO IS MAKING $25,000 A YEAR.

BUT THE FACT THAT EVERYONE FEELS ANXIOUS SHOWS US THAT SOMETHING IS BROKEN.

>> ANOTHER CHARACTER THAT YOU SPOKE, TO TIFFANY, SHE EARNS ABOUT A THOUSAND DOLLARS A MONTH.

OWNS HER HOME AND LAND.

AND I GUESS HOW CAN SOMEONE WHO IS IN THE POOREST DECILE OF YOUR LADDER BE A LAND OWNER?

WHAT DOES THAT TELL US KIND OF ABOUT INCOME VERSUS SFWHELT -- WEALTH?

>> SO TIFFANY IS A REAL OUTLIER.

I WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.

SHE CAME TO OWN HER HOME BECAUSE A NONPROFIT GAVE TO IT HER FOR THE PRICE OF 1 CENT, I THINK.

THERE HAD TO BE SOME KIND OF FINANCIAL EXCHANGE IN ORDER TO PUT THE HOUSE IN HER NAME.

AND AS YOU SAY, PART OF THE TAKEAWAY FROM TIFFANY'S STORY IS INCOME ONLY TELLS YOU A FRAXZ OF THE --FRACTION OF THE STORY.

WEALTH IS CRITICAL FOR TELLING SOMEONE'S FINANCIAL WEALTH.

IT'S REALLY NOT THE INDIVIDUAL WEALTH, IT'S ABOUT HOUSEHOLD WEALTH.

SO IT MATTERS WHO YOU GET TO TURN TO WHEN TIMES GET HARD.

I WOULD ARGUE THAT VERY, VERY, VERY FEW PEOPLE WHO CALL THEMSELVES BROKE HAVE A RIGHT TO DO SO IF THEY HAVE WEALTHY PARENTS.

AGAIN, HAVING PEOPLE THAT YOU CAN LEAN ON IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE.

>> SO I MEAN, REALLY, THAT KIND OF GETS INTO THE QUESTION WHO IS EARNING AND WHAT IS THE IDEA OF EARNING VERSUS INHERITING?

>> YES.

INHERITANCE IS PROBABLY THE BIGGEST FACTOR THAT DETERMINES ECONOMIC INEQUALITY IN THIS COUNTRY.

IN TERMS OF INTERGENERATION CONTINUITY.

THE MOST RADICAL THING WE CAN DO TO ADDRESS INEQUALITY IN TERMS OF AN OVERNIGHT POLICY WOULD BE TO POTENTIALLY INSTIGATE A 100% INHERITANCE TAX.

AND THAT WOULD BE THE MOST UNPOPULAR POLICY THAT COULD EVER, EVER BE INSTIGATED.

WE SEE THAT YES, A HUGE PROBLEM IS OF COURSE THAT PEOPLE'S INCOMES AREN'T BEING TAXED.

BUT ANOTHER MASSIVE PROBLEM IS THAT THESE FAMILIES INHERIT HUGE, HUGE, HUGE AMOUNTS OF WEALTH FROM THEIR PARENTS, FROM THEIR GRANDPARENTS, FROM THEIR GREAT GRANDPARENTS.

SO, YEAH, I REALLY WANTED TO INVESTIGATE THAT IN THE BOOK.

AND WHAT YOU SEE, AGAIN, IS THE PEOPLE WHO TEND TO INHERIT WEALTH OVERWHELMINGLY ARE WHITE PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY AND OVERWHELMINGLY THEY ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY WEALTHY.

SO IT JUST KEEPS WEALTH IN THE HANDS OF THOSE WHO ALREADY HAVE IT.

>> YOU ALSO REALLY POINT OUT SOMETHING THAT I HADN'T THOUGHT OF WHICH IS ONLY IN 16% OF CASES IS THE WIFE THE SOLE PRIMARY OWNER OF A HOUSEHOLD.

SO IN HETEROSEXUAL MARRIAGES, IF THE HUSBAND IS EITHER THE SOLE OR PRIMARY BREADWINNER, WHAT DOES THAT DO TO THE STRUCTURE OF HOW A HOUSEHOLD FUNCTIONS?

AND WHY DOES IT MATTER?

>> IT REALLY MATTERS BECAUSE IT AFFECTS WOMEN'S FINANCIAL INDEPENDENCE.

SOMEBODY THAT I SPOKE TO IN THE BOOK, ACTUALLY, SHE WAS EARNING A PRETTY ROBUST INCOME OF ABOUT $150,000, BUT IT WAS HER HUSBAND WHO WAS VERY, VERY WEALTHY.

AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS WHEN SHE IS CONTEMPLATING DIVORCE, SHE IS FACING A VERY DIFFERENT SET OF ECONOMIC QUESTIONS.

IT MAKES IT MUCH HARDER ACTUALLY FOR WOMEN TO LEAVE MARRIAGES EVEN WHEN THEY'RE UNHAPPY, EVEN WHEN THOSE MARRIAGES ARE ABUSIVE.

SO WHAT YOU SEE IN THE RESEARCH ACTUALLY IS THAT THERE WAS ONE STUDY THAT I CITED THAT FOLLOWED THOUSANDS OF COUPLES.

AND IT FOUND THAT AFTER DIVORCE, WOMEN ARE MUCH MORE LIKELY THAN THEIR MALE PARTNERS TO EXPERIENCE POVERTY.

HOWEVER, I ALSO FOUND THAT MEN ARE MUCH MORE LIKELY THAN THEIR FEMALE PARTNERS TO EXPERIENCE LONELINESS AFTER A DIVORCE, AND THAT MANY OF THE WOMEN EMOTIONALLY ARE HAPPIER AFTER LEAVING THEIR PARTNERS, EVEN THOUGH THE ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE DETERIORATED.

>> YOU'VE GOT A CHART IN HERE THAT IS ALMOST LIKE A MIRROR OF WHERE IS THE AMERICAN DREAM TODAY.

AND IT SHOWS THAT ABOUT 90% OF AMERICANS BORN IN 1940 EARNED MORE THAN THEIR PARENTS, BUT ONLY ABOUT HALF THOSE BORN AROUND 1980 DID.

SO WHAT DOES THAT TELL US?

AND ESPECIALLY NOW, WHERE WE HAVE YOUNG PEOPLE COMING OUT OF COLLEGE FACING VERY DIM PROSPECTS OF WHERE THEIR OWN CAREERS AND HOW LUCRATIVE THEY CAN BE.

>> I MEAN, THIS COUNTRY WAS NEVER A MERITOCRACY, AS YOU KNOW.

BUT I THINK THE FANTASY OF UPWARD MOBILITY IS BECOMING LESS AND LESS LIKELY.

AND YOU'RE SEEING THIS IN POLLING DATA AMONG YOUNGER PEOPLE.

THEY ARE LESS INVESTED IN THIS FANTASY OF HOME OWNERSHIP.

IT SEEPS INTO EVERY SINGLE ASPECTS OF THEIR LIVES.

THEY'RE VERY CLEAR SIGHTED ABOUT THE IMPACT OF UPWARD MOBILITY.

AND EVEN AGAIN TO GO BACK TO RELATIONSHIPS TRANSLATES TO THEIR IDEA OF ROMANCE.

BOOMERS ARE LESS LIKELY TO SAY YOU SHOULD PICK A PARTNER BASED ON THEIR FINANCIAL STATUS THAN GEN Z. GEN Z ARE BEING VERY, VERY PRAGMATIC ABOUT HOW THEY ARE GOING TO SURVIVE, HOW THEY ARE GOING TO LIVE THEIR LIVES GIVEN HOW TOUGH THINGS ARE FOR THEM ECONOMICALLY.

>> YOU ALSO POINT OUT WHEN, FOR EXAMPLE, AS YOU CLIMB UP THIS LADDER.

WE HAVE RIGHT NOW A TENDENCY TO FOCUS MOST OF OUR INEQUALITY CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE UBER RICH.

BUT YOU'RE ALSO SHOWING THAT BY THE DATA THAT THE MORE MONEY YOU MAKE, THE MORE MONEY YOU HIDE.

EXPLAIN THAT.

>> YEAH.

WHAT WE SEE IS THAT THE RATES OF TAX EVASION INCREASE AS YOU GO UP THE INCOME LADDER.

IN A WAY, THAT'S KIND OF UNSURPRISING I GUESS.

WE KIND OF CULTURALLY WE KNOW THAT RICH PEOPLE TEND TO BE A BIT DUPLICITOUS WHEN IT COMES TO THEIR MONEY.

BUT IT ALSO REQUIRES RESOURCES TO EFFECTIVELY HIDE YOUR MONEY.

YOU NEED LIKE A GREAT ACCOUNTANT.

YOU NEED INFORMATION THAT WORKS TO KNOW WHERE IN THE CAYMEN ISLANDS YOU SHOULD BE INVESTING.

AND THAT INFORMATION THAT YOU LOWER DOWN THE INCOME LADDER SIMPLY DON'T KNOW.

>> WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS CONVERSATION THAT YOU'RE HAVING, IT'S REALLY NOT JUST ABOUT IDENTITY IN TERMS OF RACE, WHICH OFTEN IS WHAT AMERICANS FOCUS ON, BUT REALLY ALSO ABOUT CLASS.

AND WHY IS IT IMPORTANT TO BE MORE EXPLICIT ABOUT THAT AND TO BE SPEAKING MORE OPENLY ABOUT MONEY?

>> YEAH.

I MEAN, I APPRECIATE THE WAY THAT THE U. S. HAS HAD --YOU COULD ARGUE HOW EFFECTIVE THAT CONVERSATION HAS BEEN.

BUT I WOULD SAY THE U. S. IS FAR MORE ARTICULATE THAN THE UK WHICH IS WHERE I GREW UP WHEN IT COMES TO RACISM.

IT'S PART OF WHY I MOVED HERE.

BRITISH PEOPLE ARE VERY, VERY UNCOMFORTABLE TALKING ABOUT RACE.

BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS QUITE SHOCKING COMING HERE IS PEOPLE WERE FAR LESS COMFORTABLE TALKING ABOUT CLASS.

I THINK THAT DISCOMFORT HAS HELPED TO UPHOLD THE INEQUALITY THAT WE SEE.

THE FACT THAT PEOPLE ARE BEING SO DISCREET THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT MONEY.

I THINK THAT EVEN IF PEOPLE ARE INTELLECTUALLY DIVESTED FROM THE AMERICAN DREAM, EVEN IF PEOPLE KNOW THIS FANTASY OF UPWARD MOBILITY ISN'T REALLY PLAYING ITSELF OUT, I THINK THERE IS STILL A EMOTIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL ATTACHMENTS TO THAT IDEA.

I THINK MANY PEOPLE STILL WANT TO BELIEVE IF THEY JUST WORK HARD ENOUGH, THEY CAN RADICALLY IMPROVE THEIR LIVES.

I WOULD ARGUE THAT THE AMERICAN DREAM IS A MUCH MORE ALIVE FANTASY IN THE MINDS OF MEN THAN WOMEN.

AND I WOULD ARGUE PROBABLY IN THE MINDS OF WHITE PEOPLE MORE THAN PEOPLE OF COLOR, FOR WHOM THIS IDEA OF UPWARD MOBILITY HAS BEEN REVEALED TO BE A MYTH LONG, LONG AGO.

>> A DIFFERENT FORM OF THE INEQUALITY CONVERSATION HAS REALLY PLAYED ITSELF OUT IN TERMS OF THIS MIDTERM ELECTION.

AND THE WORD HAS BEEN "AFFORDABILITY," RIGHT.

SO MANY PEOPLE, EXIT POLLS I THINK SAID 80% OF VOTERS SAID THEY WERE WORRIED ABOUT THE PRICE OF GAS AND GROCERIES AND HEALTH CARE.

AND 70% SAID THAT THE ECONOMIC SYSTEM FAVORS THE WEALTHY.

AND I WONDER.

YOU WERE WRITING AND RESEARCHING THIS BOOK WELL BEFORE THE MIDTERMS, WELL BEFORE THIS.

DID YOU FIND THAT KIND OF ANXIETY AS YOU WENT UP AND DOWN IN THESE CATEGORIES OF WEALTH?

>> WHAT WAS REALLY STRIKING WAS THAT IT WAS NOT JUST THE POOREST OF THE POOR THAT WERE WORRIED ABOUT THE COST OF LIVING.

IT WAS ALSO PEOPLE WHO WERE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE.

I REMEMBER SPEAKING TO SOMEBODY WHO I BELIEVE WAS IN LIKE THE FOURTH DECILE WHO WAS TELLING ME THAT SHE KEEP S HUNTING TO SAVE MONEY THAT WAS STRIKING TO ME.

REALLY HAVING TO CHANGE THE WAY YOU'RE EATING JUST TO SAVE A FEW DOLLARS EACH WEEK.

AND I'M GLAD THAT YOU MENTIONED THE RECENT MIDTERM RESULTS.

I'VE BEEN SLIGHTLY FRUSTRATED BY SOME OF THE COVERAGE AND THE WAY IT'S BEING DESCRIBED OVER AND OVER AGAIN AS A BLUE WAVE.

AND I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH OF THIS IS REALLY A WIN FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

I WOULD ARGUE THAT MANY OF THE PEOPLE WHO WERE VOTING IN THIS NOVEMBER'S ELECTIONS WERE REALLY, REALLY VOTING FOR JUST THE LEFT.

THEY WERE VOTING FOR A DIFFERENT SET OF POLITICS TO ADDRESS AFFORDABILITY.

THEY'VE BECOME DISILLUSIONED THAT THE RIGHT CAN ADDRESS THAT I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARILY FAITH IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY PER SE.

THEY WERE VOTING FOR INDIVIDUAL CANDIDATES WHO WERE TELLING THEM THAT SOCIALIST POLICIES CAN BETTER ADDRESS THEIR NEEDS RIGHT NOW.

AND I THINK THAT IS ACTUALLY A FAR MORE AND SURPRISING SHIFT IN AMERICAN POLITICS THAN ANOTHER SWING OF THE PENDULUM TOWARDS THE DEMOCRATS.

>> SO WHAT DO YOU THINK THAT VOTERS SHOULD BE LOOKING FOR?

WHAT WOULD ACTUALLY MAKE PEOPLE MORE SECURE IN THEIR --WITH THEIR ECONOMIC ANXIETY?

>> I GENUINELY THINK --IT'S SO SIMPLE, BUT IT IS JUST MORE TAXATION OF THE WEALTHY AND BETTER FUNDING OF GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS.

I REALLY BELIEVE THAT.

YOU KNOW, I THOUGHT ABOUT OTHER MODELS OF ECONOMIC SECURITY IN THE BOOK.

I LOOKED BRIEFLY AT PHILANTHROPY, COMMUNITY SUPPORT.

NONE OF THOSE REALLY STACK UP IN THE SAME WAY.

I DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN A WORLD WHERE RICH PEOPLE GET TO DECIDE EXACTLY WHICH PROJECTS GET FUNDED.

LISTEN, I LOVE THE BALLET, BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE THE SAME INTEREST AS THE SUPER RICH IN THIS COUNTRY AND THE THINGS THAT THEY CARE ABOUT.

AND SIMILARLY, AS I MENTIONED, THIS IDEA OF COMMUNITY-BASED SUPPORT ONLY WORKS IF COMMUNITIES ARE FUNDAMENTALLY EQUAL IN THIS COUNTRY.

WHAT WE'VE SEEN IS HISTORIC OPPRESSION MEANS DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES HAVE DIFFERENT RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO THEM.

AND THE ONLY INSTITUTION THAT IS POSITIONED TO HAVE THIS TRULY BIRD'S- EYE VIEW ON THE NEEDS OF THE ENTIRE NATION IS THE GOVERNMENT.

>> HOW DO YOU WANT THIS BOOK TO CHANGE PEOPLE'S VIEWS ON HOW THEY LOOK AT THEIR OWN MONEY, THEIR BANK ACCOUNT, THEIR INCOME, THEIR INHERITANCE?

>> YEAH, I WANT PEOPLE TO HAVE A MUCH CLEARER IDEA OF WHERE THEY STAND.

I HOPE THAT THE BOOK FOSTERS SOME CLASS CONSCIOUSNESS AND CLASS SOLIDARITY BY PEOPLE UNDERSTANDING WHERE THEY FIT IN THIS ECONOMIC SYSTEM.

I HOPE THAT, AGAIN, WE HAVE A MORE NUANCED UNDERSTANDING THAN SIMPLY TALKING ABOUT THE 1% AND THE REST OF US, BECAUSE THAT'S A FANTASY.

THAT'S NOT REALLY HOW THIS COUNTRY OPERATES.

>> MONA CHALABI, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU.

> >> AND FINALLY, A HISTORIC NIGHT IN MISSISSIPPI WHERE THE LAST VOTE HAS BEEN TALLIED MORE THAN A WEEK AFTER THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS, MAKING SCOTT COLOGNE STATE'S FIRST BLACK SENATOR SINCE 1881.

IT WAS A VICTORY BY THE DEMOCRATS WINNING BY LESS THAN 6,000 VOTES WITH NEARLY A MILLION BALLOTS COUNTED.

IN DOING SO, THEY FLIP A DEEP SOUTH DEEP RED STATE.

HE WAS UP AGAINST A WOMAN WHO HAD SINGLE- HANDEDLY BLOCKED HIM SITTING ON THE U. S. DISTRICT COURT BACK IN 2023.

NOW HE TAKES HER SEAT IN THE SENATE.

MISSISSIPPI'S LAST BLACK SENATOR WAS BLANCHE BRUCE DURING THE RECONSTRUCTION ERA AFTER THE CIVIL WAR.

> >> AND THAT'S IT FOR OUR PROGRAM TONIGHT.

IF YOU WANT TO FIND OUT WHAT'S COMING UP ON THE SHOW EACH NIGHT, SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER AT PBS.

ORG/AMANPOUR.

THANK YOU FOR WATCHING AND GOODBYE FROM LONDON.