NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
We’re less than two months away from election night, and if you watch Fox News Channel’s popular show “The Five,”where I share my views as a Democrat and co-host, you know I’m hoping the Democrats score big victories across the country.
(If you’ve seen the latest polling, we’re on track to flip the House and maybe the Senate, but I’ve been disappointed before. I won’t celebrate until the votes are in and the calls are made!)
But believe it or not, I’m not always a fan of my home team. Sometimes the Democrats go too far. Sometimes they preach so intensely at the rest of us that we feel left out of our own party. When it comes to far-left Twitch streamer Hasan Piker and his views on Marxism and China, as I said recently, I don’t agree with an ounce of what he’s selling.
And sometimes, with the benefit of hindsight, we get to see things differently.
FOX NEWS CHANNEL TOPS NBC, ABC AND CBS IN KEY RATINGS MEASURABLE FOR SECOND STRAIGHT SUMMER
To me, two big moments stand out in this crazy political era over the last more than six years, when I believed one thing, then changed my mind.
The first is COVID-19. Don’t get me wrong, I still think Dr. Anthony Fauci, who retired in 2022 after leading the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases for nearly 40 years, did a lot of good for the country. But mask mandates went too far, for too long. When I interviewed my conservative friend and fellow co-host on “The Five” Greg Gutfeld on my podcast, “Raging Moderates,” I saw why he was so frustrated about the government’s response: they kept telling him what to do, instead of just leaving him alone.
The second goes back to 2019 (a blissful time compared to the chaos that was about to come!) when actor Jussie Smollett lied about being the victim of a hate crime in Chicago. I’d defended him amid the initial skepticism about his attack. In the end, my bias clouded my judgment.
50 CENT MOCKS JUSSIE SMOLLETT’S HARLEM PRIDE PERFORMANCE AS FANS SLAM HIS COMEBACK ATTEMPT
We have to get better at accepting when we’re wrong. Without that, we can’t have a deeper conversation, let alone forge a stronger connection with the people we love. That’s why I wrote my new book,”I Disagree.”
As I found out, there is a surprising amount of data and science behind the art of conversation. Understanding that is one of the keys to unlocking better debates, and ultimately, meaningful relationships.
***
You know that glazed look that comes over someone’s face when you present them with facts that contradict their position? It’s not that they’re stupid or stubborn. (Unless they are.) It’s that their brain is protecting them from the psychological pain of having their worldview challenged.
First, we sort through what evidence we’re willing to consider. Then we make sure that anything that might threaten or contradict it gets screened out. Scientists refer to this as motivated reasoning, and eventually it leads us to what sociologists call cognitive armor — a defense system that pre-filters reality.
The most unsettling part? This process is largely unconscious. We don’t decide to ignore contradictory evidence. Our brains do it for us, automatically and efficiently. And if we do try to change our minds, did you know that it actually hurts?
AOC SAYS ‘WOKE 1 WAS CRAZY,’ BUT DEMOCRATS STILL OWE VOTERS AN EXPLANATION
Neuroscientists at the University of Southern California discovered that when they fed a series of statements to high-intensity voters that challenged their beliefs, the regions of the brain responsible for processing physical pain lit up like Times Square.
If you think about it, though, it makes sense. Trying to pick out real news from the mess of your social media feed, never mind deepfakes and misinformation, is exhausting. Just as our bodies filter out foreign invaders, our brains filter information in ways that protect us from constant anxiety.
“Eddington” – More than a Movie
More than anything else, I think our approach to COVID made the two Americas so anxious that we stopped listening to each other. Ari Aster does a great job capturing the divide in his 2025 film “Eddington.” Set in New Mexico, the movie ostensibly examines a small-town election for mayor. The sheriff, played by Joaquin Phoenix, refuses to wear a mask, while the incumbent, portrayed by Pedro Pascal, tries to enforce a legal mandate for mask-wearing during the height of COVID-19.
HERE’S HOW THE CDC TRIED TO USE BAD SCIENCE TO CONVINCE PEOPLE TO WEAR MASKS DURING COVID
While not everyone loved the movie — the last act in particular veered a bit too off course for me— what really worked in Eddington is how it explores the way communities fracture along ideological lines, and how cynicism infects our most basic civic functions.
The sheriff doesn’t merely disagree with mask mandates; he’s fundamentally skeptical about institutional authority itself. As a result, the citizens of this “regular American town” get hopelessly and irreparably divided, and devolve into violence.
The parallel to our lived experiences is exaggerated — it’s a movie, after all — but the message is clear: Our allegiances to one another are not rock solid. Once we experience a breakdown of our relationships, it’s hard to put things back together.
Greg convinced me to watch the film before he appeared on “Raging Moderates,” and he made the case for the skeptics: I think everybody has a feeling, after going through that period, I can’t believe I let people do this to me. I can’t believe I stood six feet apart from people. I can’t believe I washed my Amazon packages… I keep thinking this could never happen again. It could never happen again. But I don’t know. What else could come down the pike…?
The mask pressure is very similar to the pronoun pressure. You could just leave me alone… I don’t need to acknowledge these pronouns. That’s a speech thing. But there were people that were compelling you to do it, and that creates this thing inside you where you go, “F— that, you’re not telling me what to say.”
And I feel like that is kind of a parallel thing to the mask, where, you know, if I’m in a hospital, yeah, I’ll put on a mask. But if I’m outside in New Mexico on a desolate street, I’m not going to do it. When somebody wants to compel you to do something, you instinctively resist. And so you end up with everything becoming A versus B. Mask, no mask. Pronouns, no pronouns. When really it should be just, Leave me the f— alone.
Do I think masking and pronouns are comparable? No, not really. But as we went on to talk about the differences in our experiences, our realities stood side by side. Greg’s view, shared by millions, was that enforced masking was an intolerable infringement on his rights, not to mention quality of life.
My view, shaped by caring for a dying parent and the fear that COVID would take him before cancer, was that the mandate was worth potential overreach if it meant my father would live longer.
Although the danger of COVID has receded, that debate continues. Were mandates a necessary evil? Or were they just evil? Remarkably, I haven’t seen much of an in- between.
The Smollett Test
So how do we navigate this cognitive minefield? It has to start with confronting our biases. I try not to forget what happened when Jussie Smollett, the Black and gay actor who starred in the show “Empire,” reported being the victim of a hate crime in Chicago in 2019. The report of two masked men wearing MAGA hats dousing him with bleach, hurling racist and homophobic slurs, and slipping a noose around his neck went viral.
When I went on the air, I joined the outrage by pointing out— obviously, I thought— that a person of color was more likely to be the victim of a hate crime than anyone else. But then the narrative started to change. The men who supposedly attacked Smollett admitted that the whole thing had been a hoax.
Eventually, Smollett faced allegations that he had staged the attack and was charged with disorderly conduct, though the initial charges were dropped after he completed community service and forfeited bail. He was re- indicted in 2020, convicted in 2021, and sentenced to jail in 2022, though he served only six days. The Illinois Supreme Court ultimately reversed the conviction, ruling that prosecuting him again violated double jeopardy.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
Looking back, there were plenty of warning signs. The attack supposedly happened at two a.m. during a polar vortex in Chicago— not exactly prime time for anyone to be wandering around. The attackers who allegedly recognized Smollett from Empire also were said to be carrying bleach and a noose. Who does that?
Did my liberal bias cloud my coverage? No doubt. And as Fox News anchor Harris Faulkner, host of “The Faulkner Focus” and co-host of “Outnumbered,” pointed out when I appeared on Outnumbered, “If we’re ever going to go forward, we do have to look at the facts and have an open heart. They are not mutually exclusive.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Now I look for smart people to disagree with me, just as I hope they look for me to do the same. As Greg once put it when describing our dynamic: “It’s like going to the gym to lift weights. You need resistance. Imagine going to the gym and there’s no weights. That’s every show without somebody who has a different opinion. I want to see if my ideas can lift weights. And when you’re in there, you force me to work out. You’re kind of my muse. It’s like, if we were playing basketball, you throw elbows. And that’s just the way you play.”
The power is in knowing the truth and also that we like to resist it. Only then do we have a shot at a shared reality.
Excerpted from “I DISAGREE: Winning Arguments Without Losing Friends” by Jessica Tarlov. Copyright © 2026 by 19 Jay LLC. Excerpted by permission of Random House, an imprint of Random House, a division of Penguin Random House, LLC. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
JESSICA TARLOV
Editor’s note: The new book “I Disagree” is Jessica Tarlov’s guide to staying true to your values, finding common ground, and communicating with confidence when engaging across political and social divides. It is available for order now at Barnes & Noble and all major booksellers.
Read the full article here
