Did Kamala Harris eke out a victory on Fox News?

What did we learn from this latest foray? Did Harris get what she was looking for? And what was in it for Fox News, anyway? I’m joined by my Post colleague Chris Suellentrop and Slate’s Josh Levin, host of the podcast “Slow Burn: The Rise of Fox News,” to discuss this much-anticipated media appearance.

💬 💬 💬

Erik Wemple: So, that was certainly adversarial. Did Kamala Harris’s famous appearance on “Call Her Daddy” help her prepare for Bret Baier? Or did she appear a bit flustered by the onslaught?

Chris Suellentrop: I thought that interview was a microcosm of the Harris campaign — strong start, a little shaky in the middle, and the end result is, well, unknown. But she should do these more often. She more than held her own. Baier was the one who seemed flustered.

Josh Levin: I felt like Baier came out really hot, not wanting to get steamrolled. They eventually settled into a bit more of a rhythm, but I think he would’ve been better served to give her the chance to dodge a little bit before accusing her of dodging.

Erik: If you saw Tim Walz with Fox News host Shannon Bream, you saw Bream cut off Walz when he dug into Donald Trump’s patent lunacy. I got a similar feel here — that Baier had all day to talk about immigrant crime but not about Trump’s nature. Right or wrong?

Josh: It felt like the immigration segment went on for a very long time. For Harris, I’m sure it felt even longer. And yes, there was an incuriosity from Baier about what Trump is actually saying. I thought Harris’s strongest moment came when she called out the fact that they showed a clip of Trump (on Fox!) denying that he’d talked about an “enemy within” and didn’t show footage of his rallies where he talks about exactly that.

Chris: The goal of his first question about illegal immigration was to elicit an apology, which he got. Or, I suppose, to show that this was going to be a tough interview. It was fun to watch: We learned, I guess, that she is tough under fire and that she got genuinely angry about Trump. That was good television.

Erik: It struck me that Harris had trouble parrying Baier’s focus on the Biden administration’s early-term immigration policies. My takeaway is that she wasn’t ready to answer the question that drew a straight line between immigration policies and real-world events. If you watch Fox, you gotta know that’s coming.

Josh: I’m struggling to think of anything Harris could’ve said in response to the questions about young women who were killed by immigrants that would’ve been seen as a big win for her. The victory, to the extent there was one, was showing up and getting asked the questions.

Chris: I thought her worst answer came halfway through, when she couldn’t explain what she wants to “turn the page” from. On immigration, she apologized to the victims’ families and emphasized that Trump sought to make the border less safe because of partisan politics — I am not sure she could have played a bad hand better. Agree with Josh there.

Erik: This is an important point. Does it really matter who the heck is in the Fox News audience? Or does it only matter that Harris sat down with Fox News, a signal of her defiance and confidence?

Josh: One thing that’s incredibly consistent about Fox News is that it cares first and foremost about getting people to watch. This interview will certainly do good numbers for the network, and it also affirms (in a period of uncertainty for Fox and for cable TV as a whole) that Fox can still create a TV moment.

Erik: How do you folks think that this interview will shake out among Democrats: Will it be seen as a reason to go on Fox News or as a reason to avoid it?

Josh: Appearances by Pete Buttigieg and Harris surrogate Ian Sams have shown that going on Fox can generate a lot of positive attention. In this case, Harris wasn’t going to win on Fox’s issues, so winning meant showing resolve and getting in as many Trump digs as she could.

Chris: Josh and Erik, as Fox experts, where do you think Baier sits in the constellation of stars in the Fox universe? He is the anchor that Washington journalists take seriously. Do the network’s viewers distinguish him from, say, Sean Hannity?

Josh: Baier’s “Special Report” is the old Brit Hume program, the place that took hard news seriously even as it mixed in a healthy dose of opinion. To put it another way, it’s the place where Fox has always looked for and often found external legitimacy. It’s also a show that has always had a fraction of the audience of the prime-time stars. So, Fox couldn’t have given this job to Jesse Watters. But if it had, a lot more people would’ve watched!

Erik: I adore this question. I can say that the Fox News superfans have an ambivalent and sometimes even thumbs-down view of Baier. That said, I think that even those hardcore Fox News fans will enjoy this Baier product. But does the initial viewing audience even matter at a time when everything gets aggregated on social media and other news sites?

Josh: The clips are clearly going to circulate more than the full interview. When you think about it that way, the whole thing definitely feels more like a branding exercise — a performance of seriousness by Fox News, a display of toughness by Harris.

Chris: Baier closed his show by complaining that he didn’t get to ask all his questions. This feels like the reverse of when a politician complains about the debate moderators. I don’t think a journalist can lose an interview. If his goal was to butter up a few of those Fox News superfans by a ritual display of toughness, I can see why he was disappointed.

Erik: Disagree on that one, if only because he spent all that time on immigration.

Josh: It is funny that he immediately went into the spin room and Harris left.

Erik: Well, this is all fascinating, sans doute. As far as Fox News’ stake in all this, let’s just stipulate: This is a network that has craved the respect and acknowledgment of storied American institutions, even those that are perceived as being on the left. So scoring an interview with the Democratic presidential candidate is huge. Would Harris have agreed to do this if Tucker Carlson had still been at the network?

Chris: I can’t possibly know what Harris would or wouldn’t have done in the mirror universe. (Does Carlson have a goatee in this scenario?)

Erik: Absolutely.

Josh: I think Carlson needed to leave for Fox to be able to turn the page on the era that he defined as a host and personality. He overwhelmed everything.

Erik: Yes, precisely. I do think that the network’s hostility to Democrats dropped a bit upon his departure. He made a career of saying they hated America.

Chris: Yes. Baier went out of his way to be respectful, but he also wanted to control the interview, with good reason. I am glad it wasn’t my job.