This is a rush transcript from "MediaBuzz," May 9, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

HOWARD KURTZ, FOX NEWS HOST (on camera): The media have a new heroine and her name is Liz Cheney. If you cover the Bush administration as I did and remember the intense animosity that many journalists had toward Dick Cheney, especially over the Iraq war, it's kind of head-snapping to see the praise being hit on anyone with that last name.

The Wyoming congresswoman, like her dad, is very conservative and takes a hawkish line on foreign policy. But she is in rhetorical war with Donald Trump and thus is getting strange new respect from the press. House Republicans with strong backing from Trump plan to dump Cheney from her number three leadership post this weekend. She has essentially abandoned the fight.

Now, while critics say Cheney is stubborn, she is also taking a stance based on principles. She says the 2020 election was not stolen, putting her at odds with the former president, many GOP lawmakers, and millions of Trump voters.

While Trump's claims of widespread fraud remain unproven, this has become a litmus test in the party and the media are laser-focused on Cheney because all of this is a proxy war for the GOP's future, and it reminds me of Mitt Romney, of John Bolton, of Michael Cohen and others who got awful press in the past until the pundits could cast them as leading voices in the Trump resistance.

I'm Howard Kurtz. This is MEDIABUZZ.

If what Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy told Fox is any indication, House Republicans aren't exactly hiding their determination to push Congresswoman Cheney out of the leadership.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R-CA): I have heard from members concerned about her ability to carry out the job as conference chair, to carry out the message.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ (on camera): That message was even blunt to when McCarthy was caught on a hot mic saying -- quote -- "I think she's got real problems. I've had it with her. You know, I've lost confidence."

The media are casting this as far broader debate whether Republicans other than a few aligned with Liz are telling the truth about what happened in 2020.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: And they throw, of all people, Liz Cheney, a conservative's conservative. Throw her right under the bus to appease a disgraced, twice impeached, one-term insurrection inspiring former president.

LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS HOST: She detests former President Trump and all of his supporters. I will say it straight. She thinks many, if not all of them, are racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic or just plain dumb.

CHUCK TODD, MSNBC HOST: It is pretty clear that what's left of the conservative movement is -- that was once based on principles and democracy has been completely snuffed out. And Liz Cheney felt like -- it felt like she was the last flickering light.

DEROY MURDOCK, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Look, this is not a massive fight between, you know, conservatives and moderates. I think it's really a fight with Liz Cheney. She has continued to trash the GOP and talk about January 6th over and over and over.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ (on camera): Joining us now to analyze the coverage in New York, Kat Timpf, co-host of "Gutfeld," a new late-night show, and Mara Liasson, NPR's national political reporter and a Fox News contributor.

Kat, there is no question that most of the media are siding with Liz Cheney, but is it because of what she has to say on principle or is it because she is attacking Donald Trump?

KAT TIMPF, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: The second one.

(LAUGHTER)

TIMPF: Look, I saw -- it has been interesting when I saw New York Times piece by Maureen Dowd and the first sentence was I miss torturing Liz Cheney. But then it went on to call her a Valkyrie amid halflings. It wasn't completely complimentary. It said, hey, you want to talk about the big lie? How about your dad's lies, the Iraq war, and so on and so forth?

But still, if we could have seen in 2014 that Maureen Dowd would be, you know, using that Valkyrie, comparing it to the symbol of, you know, wisdom and north mythology who decides who lives and dies in battle, I would have not believed that.

KURTZ: Right. Some people are still settling scores. And Mara, as journalists contrast Liz Cheney's opinion with Donald Trump's opinion, it could not be more different on what happened in the 2020 election. Is this a gift to all the anti-Trump pundits who may be a little tired of talking about Joe Biden and policy?

MARA LIASSON, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR, NATIONAL POLITICAL REPORTER FOR NPR: Well, maybe there is just not as much interesting. Apostasy is always much more exciting to talk about, the strange new respect to angle is something that happens every time someone breaks with the orthodoxy of their party, especially with Donald Trump. But -- and all those liberal pundits might be having a field day with this.

This is a huge, important story because the Republican Party is being asked and Liz Cheney won't stop asking the question whether or not they believe that the 2020 election was legitimate and that Joe Biden won it legitimately. If you have a party whose vast majority doesn't believe that, it is pretty hard to see how we can proceed with the stable democracy.

KURTZ: Let me give in fairness some quotes from each side. In a Washington Post op-ed, Liz Cheney doubled, tripled down, writing that Trump is essentially saying I'm still the rightful president and President Biden is illegitimate. The question before us now, she says, is whether we will join Trump's crusade to delegitimize and undo the legal outcome of the 2020 election.

Kat, the Guardian is calling Liz Cheney a martyr. But even if you're a journalist who thinks that she is standing up and courageously, you know, doing this at substantial risk to her own career, aren't Republicans in the House entitled to have somebody in a leadership position who agrees with most of their conference?

TIMPF: Yes, absolutely, but the main thing here is -- I remember we were all asking ourselves this question, what happens when Trump is not in office? Have things really changed so much that they're not going to be same anymore? And stuff like this is pointing to yeah, because he is not even allowed on social media right now. He is not out there speaking all the time.

But at the same time, he is still the focal point of so many conversations and this rift particularly in the GOP where obviously any time, you know, you break from your party, it is going to be a huge news story. People are going to be talking about it.

But there is this unique sort of passion. It is just crazy. I think there is something so unique about anything when it comes to Donald Trump, even though it has been months since he has been in office.

KURTZ: Yeah. Trump has put out many statements about all this. Here is one of them. We can put up part of it. Writing, the fake news media -- that sounds familiar -- working in close conjunction with big tech and radical left Democrats, is doing everything they can to perpetuate the term the big lie. He goes on to say this reminds him of Mueller, Mueller, Mueller, Russia, Russia, Russia, impeachment hoax number one, impeachment hoax number two.

Mara, isn't the former president driving this debate as much as Liz Cheney is?

LIASSON: Absolutely. I mean, Donald Trump wants to be relevant. His metric of success has always been how much he can dominate the media narrative, how many clicks he is getting and eyeballs, and that is what he wants to do.

And as far as him being on social media, there is nothing stopping Donald Trump from summoning a group of cameras to Mar-a-Lago or Bedminster any time he wants. He can be on television all day every day if that is what he wants. So he is driving this. He wants to perpetuate what I believe is a lie, it is false, that he actually won the 2020 election, sometimes he says in a landslide. He is asking every Republican to choose whether they're with him on that or not.

KURTZ: Right. That part is, I think, beyond dispute. Now, just moments ago on "Sunday Morning Futures," Kevin McCarthy actually came out and formally endorsed Elise Stefanik, congresswoman from New York, to take Cheney's number three House leadership post. She has a more moderate voting record than Cheney and has voted with Trump much less often but, of course, she is sort of embracing the Trump position on this.

Kat, some in the conservative media are not siding with Donald Trump on this. For example, Wall Street Journal editorial page, the election wasn't stolen yet Mr. Trump wants an endorsement of his stolen claim to be litmus test for every Republican candidate.

National Review, the Republican Party is so under the thumb of Trump consistently acknowledging reality about the election disqualifies somebody from leadership. This reminds me of 2020 when some of these same outlets on the right broke with the president.

TIMPF: Yes, absolutely. We can see some of the consequences for the Republican Party. If you look, for example, what happened in Georgia, if you're saying, hey, elections, not legitimate, it is rigged, people are going to be less inclined to go out and vote. If this is a narrative that keeps continuing, that could be a problem that the GOP continues to have.

KURTZ (on camera): Right. Even President Biden got asked about this. Reporter said, what do you think of House Republicans moving to kick Liz Cheney out of the leadership? Here is what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We need a two-party system. It is not healthy to have a one-party system. And I think the Republicans are further away from trying to figure out who they are and what they stand for than I thought they would be at this point.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ (on camera): So, Mara, like Joe Biden, the media are trying to make this into a much larger debate about the Republican Party, not just about Liz Cheney obviously, not just about Kevin McCarthy.

LIASSON: Right.

KURTZ: It is about all the House members who after the riot at the Capitol on January 6th were not -- voted not to accept at least in certain states the Electoral College results.

LIASSON: Right.

KURTZ: And so news outlets want to put all of them under you're all perpetuating the big lie. I wonder if you think there is any, oh, shall we say liberal bias in that because it makes the GOP look bad if you accept that premise.

LIASSON: Sure. I think that two things can be true at the same time. The Republican Party is going through an identity crisis but also it is not in shambles. In other words, it has tremendous advantages, structural advantages and otherwise going into the 2022 election cycle.

So I don't think it's a party that is falling apart, but it is a party that is trying to figure out what it stands for. And on that, I think that is just a huge story and we are all going to be covering it for the next couple of years.

Of course, it is legitimate that they can have whoever they want as conference chair in the House, but it is also really important whether they believe the democracy means sometimes your side loses an election.

KURTZ: You know, Kat, it seems to be that Liz Cheney is not only getting positive press, for example, now that she is kind of on her way out from leadership, Washington Post political (INAUDIBLE) unnamed source is saying, oh, she is too stubborn, she is too honorary, she has the right to do is, why does she keep bringing it up? That is one example.

And another, you mentioned the Maureen Dowd column in The New York Times, you know, sort of fighting the last war over her service in the Bush administration when she worked for the State Department all about Iraq. So, it is a classic Washington knife fight, it seems to me.

TIMPF: Yeah. There is another piece in The New York Times that said, hey, if she was really was upset about this, she wouldn't even mention that, could negatively impact her career.

It is interesting to have to write about things that happened that are unexpected or that we've never seen before because obviously that she is going to get flak from the Republican Party because Donald Trump months later is still this -- he wants it to be a litmus test and a lot of people are on board with it being a litmus test.

It is really, really insane to see. So, she doesn't really have super fans on either side, right? Because again, look, I'm still no fan of her foreign policy myself and I know a lot of people remember the Cheney family and all those sorts of things, but it is great to be able to talk about things outside of party lines, I think, sometimes and have those conversations. I think we can have productive, reasoned conversations when we take party politics out of it.

KURTZ: Yeah. Just briefly, Mara, if Donald Trump wants to keep talking about 2020 as opposed to 2022 when Republicans have a very good shot of taking over the House and Liz Cheney does, isn't it also true, do you think, the media will keep this storyline going for months and months and it won't just flame out once that change is made in the House GOP leadership?

LIASSON: Yeah. I think that Donald Trump is always going to be click bait for the media. Whatever he says, the more outrageous it is, the more it will be covered disproportionately. So yes, I think that is going to keep going.

KURTZ: Right. Well, he is the most important and influential voice in the Republican Party even as a former president. That part --

LIASSON: Absolutely.

KURTZ: -- is beyond debate. Let me get a break. Ahead, a Frank Luntz focused group tells us why people are fed up with the media's pandemic coverage. When we come back, speaking of Trump, why Facebook is keeping its ban on Donald Trump even though he is now a private citizen?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KURTZ (on camera): It was hardly a shock when Facebook's oversight board of global luminaries upheld this decision to ban Donald Trump, also criticizing Mark Zuckerberg's company for violating its own rules by making the ban indefinite. And the media treated the ruling as though the fate of western civilization was at stake.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ARI FLEISCHER, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: I don't understand how you ban President Biden, a former president, if you let the president of Iran, the president of China, all kinds of people on there, and you ban an American president who half of the country wants to hear from.

UNKNOWN: He is the former president of the United States. He is not being silenced. It is just that these are private companies and they want to be able to moderate what kind of content they put on their platforms.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ (on camera): Now, Trump said in his statement, what Facebook, Twitter, and Google have done is a total disgrace and an embarrassment to our country. Free speech has been taken away from the president of the United States because the radical left lunatics are afraid of the truth, but the truth will come out anyway.

Kat Timpf, can anybody really be surprised if Facebook is still banning Trump after this oversight board essentially punted the whole thing back to Mark Zuckerberg?

TIMPF: They sure did. This was Mark Zuckerberg's whole idea, right? It is kind of like, you know, when you're a kid and you ask your mom, can I do it, I don't know, ask your father. What the board did is basically the father said, OK, go ask your mom, right?

There was a great piece in the Washington Times that said, you know, Mark Zuckerberg tried to, you know, punt this and yeah, they punted it right back. He wants to avoid being responsible for this because he doesn't want conservatives to be mad, Trump supporters to be mad. He also doesn't want liberals or Democrats to be mad. He wooed (ph) about the opportunity, say, yeah, this is what the board did, the board decided. Now, he doesn't get that chance.

KURTZ: Right. But Mara Liasson, the board did scold Facebook saying it essentially created this whole new category of a permanent ban, especially for private citizen. It didn't exist before. And in six months, Facebook is supposed to reconsider. Obviously, Facebook can easily finesse that at the time.

LIASSON: Yeah. Look, this is a private company that has tremendous power. Many people say it has too much power. And once again, we are aware of this. I mean, Mark Zuckerberg has to decide what he wants to do. He is not the government. There is no law that says he has to let anyone speak on his platform, but he can't pretend that there is a total unfettered free speech on his platform.

I mean, this is a fundamental debate about whether the social media companies are public utilities, they're like a highway that needs to be regulated by the government, or they're a private chat room that happens to be gigantic.

KURTZ: Well, the days when they were a private chat room or a place just to look for dates, I think, is long gone, the most powerful media companies around --

LIASSON: Yeah.

KURTZ: -- and --

LIASSON: But Zuckerberg still acts like he is.

KURTZ: Yeah. And Michael McConnell, the chairman of this oversight board, said on Fox News on Sunday, well, private companies have no first amendment issue but, of course, it is very much of a free speech issue.

Kat, based on the media coverage, is this one more piece of evidence, glaring evidence in the view of many conservatives that Facebook is biased to the left, that Silicon Valley is biased to left? Because in this Congress, at least, Republicans can't do anything about this decision.

TIMPF: Yes. In the eyes of conservatives, it absolutely is. You see it as another example of bias. Of course, you know, it is one of many examples, right? I think it is so important to distinguish between free speech in the constitutional sense, which is that you're free to say anything you want without government punishment.

And then the cultural view of free speech, which is, you know, cancelling people basically or blocking them from these platforms. I think that both are important, obviously, the constitutional when it is critical. But really, I think that this just really further gives a lot of these people ammunition.

I always believe that including culturally the answer to speech you don't like is more speech and not less of it because then Trump does get to come out and say in other ways and other statements, see, look, I'm the victim here, they're not letting me speak, they've never done this before, I'm suspended indefinitely.

KURTZ: Mm-hmm.

TIMPF: And it actually energizes his base even further.

KURTZ: Right. But it does deprive the former president of a fundraising platform.

TIMPF: Right, yes.

KURTZ: Mara, this Facebook board, it is funded by Facebook. It doesn't really have any power. The Atlantic writer described it as (INAUDIBLE).

LIASSON: Right.

KURTZ: It can't even force Zuckerberg to answer questions and Facebook didn't answer some of its questions. And so is it sort of an appearance of accountability here with this court?

LIASSON: I don't even think there is an appearance of accountability.

(LAUGHTER)

LIASSON: This isn't the Supreme Court. This is Facebook.

(LAUGHTER)

LIASSON: It is especially for people hired by Facebook talking to Facebook. I don't think there is any accountability at all. Mark Zuckerberg has to decide what he wants to do. I know he didn't want to decide that because, but he is going to have to.

KURTZ: Right. Now, Twitter, of course, is not even reconsidering its ban, but Twitter did -- Trump started this new blog. I guess I will call it the DJT desk and it was a way for people to like or not like what he says on Twitter kind of getting around the ban. Twitter deleted that blog, saying, you can't have this on Twitter because it is the way of getting around the decision.

So I think there is a lot of animosity here toward these companies which used to be so popular. Their CEOs used to be so popular. But they do have to come to grips with the fact that they have all this power and, as you said, Mara, maybe too much power.

Kat Timpf, Mara Liasson, great discussion. Thanks very much for giving us part of your Sunday.

TIMPF: Thank you. Anytime.

KURTZ: All right. Up next, the latest on the Trump DOJ having obtained the phone records of three Washington Post reporters. And later, why was there such an uproar over Elon Musk doing "Saturday Night Live?"

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KURTZ: The Trump Justice Department secretly obtained the phone records of three Washington Post reporters from 2017 as part of a leak investigation, a move approved by former Attorney General Bill Barr. This was about Russia.

The three reporters, Ellen Nakashima, Greg Miller, and Adam Entous, had written a story based on classified U.S. intelligence intercepts involving then Senator Jeff Session having a post-election conversation with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. It can, of course, be illegal to leak such information.

The Justice Department now says it followed the established procedures and the targets of these investigations are not the news media recipients but rather those with access to the national defense information who provided it to the media and thus failed to protect it as lawfully required. Acting Post editor Cameron Barr says the paper is deeply troubled by this use of government power.

Joining us now is Mike Emanuel, Fox's chief Washington correspondent. Mike, the Trump administration is not the first administration to go after reporters' records in a leaked investigation, but since this was approved by Bill Barr and involved the reporting of the Russia probe that was aimed at President Trump and his inner circle, it could, of course, be viewed as political.

MIKE EMANUEL, FOX NEWS CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: We all remember the Russia probe was a very sensitive topic with President Trump and a lot of his senior team. Adding to the drama, it was about a meeting with then campaign advisor Jeff Sessions, who went on to become the attorney general when the articles were published.

He was attorney general of the United States, and a couple weeks later, he announced he was going to crack down on a culture of leaking. And so he was not lying about that. Clearly, he was serious about going after the leakers.

I'm not going to defend whether folks should leak classified information or not, but as a journalist, you tell your sources, hey, I am going to protect you, I'm not giving up your name for anything, but when big brother reaches over you, goes through your call records and has phone numbers and the length of time of the calls, it probably doesn't take long for the Justice Department to figure out with whom you're speaking, who might have had access to this classified information.

And so as a reporter, you feel like you're pretty much naked. Your call records are out there and the government is going through them.

KURTZ: Yeah. From a journalist point of view, it is pretty chilling. No opportunity for appeal. You don't even find out it happens until much, much later as in this case.

I was highly critical at the time when the Obama Justice Department secretly obtained phone records from reporters from Fox News and the AP classified or sensitive information having to do with Korea, North Korea. So, any news organization or journalistic critic that now slams Trump and Barr over this particular leaked investigation, shouldn't they have to include Barack Obama and Eric Holder in that criticism?

EMANUEL: One hundred percent. I was here at the time when as were you when our former colleague James Rosen had his call records obtained by the government. They also obtained several days' worth of his personal e-mails, not hi Fox News e-mails, his personal e-mails. So, folks here at Fox obviously didn't like it one bit.

That is why it is not surprising at all that the folks down the street at The Washington Post are equally unhappy about the treatment that their reporters received for 2017 stories that they did about contact, alleged contact between the Russian ambassador and then campaign advisor for the Trump campaign, Jeff Sessions. Bottom line is if you like the First Amendment, you don't like hearing stories about this kind of stuff.

KURTZ: Right. It is supposed to be done only in rare instances. Biden Justice Department is defending this as following procedures. The records that were seized involved those few months in early 2017, but the decision was made by Bill Barr during the 2020 campaign. At the same time, we're talking here about sensitive, classified U.S. Intelligence intercepts.

So since such leaking can be illegal, not for reporters receiving it but for those who work for the government, could that justify from that point of view obtaining the phone records?

EMANUEL: That is the point that the Justice Department is making, that this is highly sensitive, U.S. classified information and it is not punishing the reporters, but going after the government officials who are to protect sensitive classified information in their roles that they have access to the sensitive America secrets.

And so they defend their actions by saying that they're going after the leakers because next time, it could be even more sensitive leak. And so it makes presidents crazy from both parties the sensitive leaks. Certainly I remember from past presidents and clearly that continues today when they're trying to get to the bottom line of who is leaking America secrets and how big of a secret it may be.

KURTZ: Right. I think we have to find out more about this particular case whether it was justified, but understandably, journalists are very upset, as you pointed out. Mike Emanuel, thanks very much for your reporting this Sunday.

EMANUEL: Thanks, Howie.

KURTZ: Next on MEDIABUZZ, why media conservatives are furious at big tech coverage of the Bill Gates divorce and the Space X guy does SNL? Jedediah Bila is in New York and on deck.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KURTZ (on camera): Does big tech have way too much power? That's the focus of an increasingly fierce media debate now that Facebook is keeping its ban on Donald Trump.

Joining us from New York is Jedediah Bila, co-host of Fox & Friends weekend. So, most of the media are welcoming Facebook's decision to keep the ban. But really, the journalistic debate is whether Facebook along with Twitter and Google has become all so powerful that it gets to unilaterally decide what is acceptable speech.

JEDEDIAH BILA, FOX NEWS CO-HOST: Yes. And when they make these decisions there is an arbitrary nature to them. So people sit back and they say, all right, if Donald Trump is banned because he is being accuse of inciting violence, and he's being accused of praising rioters at the time of the insurrection, OK. Well what about all of these other people that are still allowed to exist on there? Whether they be people in prominent political positions, celebrity or otherwise? They are just regular people.

So, I think, you know, and that's essentially what the oversight board came back and said. They said, listen, you need to not be so arbitrary in your decision making because people need to know for sure that these decisions aren't made for political purposes, and that they're not agenda driven. These companies are big. That's how people see their news, Howie. Oftentimes people go on Twitter.

KURTZ: I know.

BILA: They scroll through. So, they're going to themselves if you're deciding what I can and cannot see, if you're deciding who can and cannot have a voice there then you're essentially brainwashing the public at large and you're indoctrinating them. You're saying --

KURTZ: Right. Right. Right.

BILA: -- this is what -- this is the information you're allowed to have. And this over here you're not allowed to see. It can't look like that.

KURTZ: But you know, the anger at social media isn't only at the right. And Elizabeth Warren is one of the Democrats who wants to break up Facebook.

BILA: Right.

KURTZ: But you know, there is this counterargument, these are private companies, they can do whatever they want, they can kick off whoever they want, and it kind of, ignores the fact that these are the most powerful media companies in the world. And they pretty much control digital dialogue these days.

BILA: They control a lot. They have a lot of power. You know, not only are they getting us addicted to apps, and I, you know, as you know I was here talking about it. I wrote a whole book about that.

KURTZ: Yes, I know.

BILA: But they also, you know, yes, they are really involved in censoring some thought as opposed to others. I know Elizabeth Warren, some on the left will come in and say let's break up these companies, let's have the government get involved, let's have the government play a role.

I understand the argument that these are private companies, and essentially, they can make these decisions but these private companies have to realize, if they are arbitrarily doing these things. If they can't justify what they are doing and say, this is a blanket reason, these are all policies, if you violate them, I don't care who you are, you are going to throw it off. And instead, you have some people that are subject to those, those rules and other people that are not.

KURTZ: Right.

BILA: Then you are going to have people leaving the apps. You are going to have people condemning the apps. I mean, you had a lot of people leave Twitter when this happened to President Trump because they felt it was arbitrary.

KURTZ: There's a lot at stake here.

BILA: So, there's going to be a consequence one way or the other.

KURTZ: Let me move on to the Bill and Melinda Gates announcing their divorce. Now this is not just a gossip story because of the fine work of the $50 billion-dollar Gates Foundation. New York Times had a zillion word, piece on this yesterday.

But there's been a lot of online snark about it, even though this is not a tabloid mess the way it was with Jeff Bezos's divorce. Why do you think there is such public interest and curiosity about the breakup of this marriage?

BILA: Well, first of all, it's a lot of money. Right? So, people look and say, it's a lot of cash, billions upon billions of dollars where's this money going to go. They have three children together. And there's been a lot of questions, they said at one point that each child was going to get $10 million regardless. There is lot of curiosity about what inheritance will look like.

And also, they were viewed as a philanthropic power couple. There were no indications that there was anything wrong in their marriage. No public hiccups.

KURTZ: Yes. You know, --

BILA: No public infidelity that people can see. So, it's shocking to viewers.

KURTZ: I had -- I had a chance to meet both of them at a Gates Foundation event in Seattle years ago, and they seemed like a perfect couple which leads to a Washington Post headline, if Bill and Melinda Gates can't make a marriage work, what hope is there for rest of us?

BILA: Right.

KURTZ: That seems to be the theme?

BILA: Well, that's exactly right. People look at that and say they have all of this money. They're working together as part of a foundation. They're doing charitable work. They obviously share a world view how am I going to make it work? I don't have all of those things necessary. I don't have access to all of that privilege, and all of that money. So yes, it causes people to self-reflect on their own life.

Everyone knows that divorce rates are super high, I think they're around 50 percent right now. So, it makes people think about their own lives. And also, remember, you feel like you get to know these people, right? They're out in the public eye. They're public figures. You feel like, you're kind of living your life, much like you do with, you know, celebrities and reality TV stars.

That's just a way that the American culture is right now. So, people feel very plugged into their lives whether they want us to be or not.

KURTZ: Yes. Of course, it's an illusion in many instances. All right. Elon Musk doing Saturday Night Live last night. Now he of course is the Tesla guy, the SpaceX guy. He is a genius. He is also very eccentric. He gets himself a lot of trouble on Twitter. Let's take a look at clip from his monologue.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ELON MUSK, CEO, TESLA MOTORS: I reinvented electric cars and I'm sending people to Mars on a rocket ship.

(APPLAUSE)

MUSK: Did you think I was also going to be a chill normal dude?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ (on camera): Not a normal dude. Why was there such a media storm over Musk doing SNL, to the point where NBC cast members had to be assured, they didn't have to appear if they didn't want to?

BILA: Well, he is a billionaire for one. And there was a lot of talk about, you know, there was a tweet by another cast member at one point, I think it was a screen shot of a Bernie Sanders tweet that had criticized the wealth gap in the country. He had said some things that very controversial about the coronavirus causing, I think pandemic lockdowns he said, at one point were fascist.

He's made some statements, some inaccurate statements about the virus last year. I think he is just a controversial figure. A guy who has a lot of money. And the thing about it though, is that he is a funny guy. I mean, we learned that. And sometimes these figures that are not actors that are not typical celebrities that come from the business community, that you don't really know that other side to them to, well, they want to being surprisingly really good. I think he was very refreshing, he was absolutely the highlight of the show, agree with him or not on what he said --

KURTZ: Yes.

BILA: -- about COVID or what not.

KURTZ: Right.

BILA: I think it was interesting. A lot of people will be pleasantly surprised by his appearance.

KURTZ: Here's what I think is the key. SNL ratings are down more than 50 percent since the election. So, trying to get --

BILA: Yes.

KURTZ: -- some controversy going. Jedediah Bila, always --

(CROSSTALK)

BILA: And they got it.

KURTZ: Yes, absolutely.

BILA: They got it.

KURTZ: He delivered.

BILA: They got us talking, Bila. They got us talking.

KURTZ: Always great to see you. Thanks for joining us this Sunday.

BILA: Bye.

KURTZ: After the break, are the media hyping bad COVID news for ratings? Frank Luntz has some troubling focus group findings in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KURTZ (on camera): The slowing pace of COVID vaccinations has naturally been a big story for the media. And as we see in this Frank Luntz's focus group there are sharp criticism of this issue and the overall pandemic.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FRANK LUNTZ, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST AND POLLSTER: How do you evaluate the media's handling of COVID-19?

UNKNOWN: Mistrust.

LUNTZ: Why?

UNKNOWN: Because all they kept reporting about is all the deaths, not how this vaccine can work. To heal.

UNKNOWN: They don't ever tell you the story or the stories of all the people that recover from it. They just want to tell you about all the people that have died from it. And I just find they just want to -- there is a lot of fear-mongering in the media.

UNKNOWN: Ratings seeking. Doing stories that are going to get ratings. Doing just trying to get that Nielsen share in.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KURTZ (on camera): Joining us now on a rather shaky feed from London, is Frank Luntz, the veteran Republican pollster. One woman told you the coverage was good because it provided information about such things as CDC guidance. But why the conviction on the many your -- many of your focus group people that the media are hyping tragedy and death?

LUNTZ: A lot of it is the feeling that COVID has been politicized. And this goes back before the election. If you're a Trump voter you think that it was used to defeat the former president. If you are a Biden voter you think that Trump was not honest with the American people. And both sides think that the partisan nature is really causing a divide in this country that should not be happening when this is a public health crisis.

Second, is that all they see from places like the New York Times, and the L.A. Times, is the negativity. That's what they think they see, that just another death, it's about the suffering and it's not about people who recover.

Howie, the key element right now is whether or not the press is talking about a light at the end of the tunnel. Whether or not they're talking about the mask, masks coming off. Whether social distancing is ending and whether we are moving in any further close, any closer, I should say to a return to normal.

KURTZ: Let me just jump in here because when 580,000 Americans have died from COVID-19, that's an undeniable part of the story. So I don't fully get the criticism that people in my business are doing this for ratings. Maybe at the beginning of the pandemic when it was a new, scary and chilling story but the topic is inevitably a bit of a downer. It doesn't exactly make people rush to tune in to news.

LUNTZ: I agree with that. I agree with that analysis. And it's something that I've tried to say to President Trump voters in these focus groups. That in the end it is based on medical science, it is based on research that went into it, thousands, tens of thousands of tests.

And the fact is, this is something that you learned from The de Beaumont Foundation the work that we're doing, the consequences of the virus today, in May of 2021 are so much worse than even the worst-case consequence of the vaccine. And that the public needs to understand that but it's up to the press.

The way the press should box it and talk about the COVID-19 facts. The media, the television should give the, a positive element not just the death count because that is what will get more people vaccinated.

KURTZ: Well, here is a classic example. The New York Times this past week had a huge story, an influential story. When vaccinations dropping, experts say America can't reach herd immunity not in the foreseeable future, perhaps not ever. Three days later the Times had another story, turning the corner, U.S. COVID outlook reaches most hopeful point. Yet saying, some states are reporting no deaths on certain days. What are readers supposed to think?

LUNTZ: They are supposed to print both of those stories at same time because both of them are accurate. We found this from de Beaumont as well. But you have to show both sides at the same time.

And actually, this is not one case where the media should not be trying to beat up on Trump for what he did or did not do, and should not be trying to beat up on Trump voters because they're skeptical or they're hesitant, they've got concerns. Actually, embrace it.

The people have the right to ask questions. They have the right to their doubts but in the end the decision to get the vaccine is just not for themselves, it's also for the people they love.

KURTZ: Right.

LUNTZ: In the end we hope they make the right decision.

KURTZ: You know, the Biden White House is announcing new tactics now that the vaccination rate has dropped about 27 percent by some estimates, getting it to doctors' offices, mobile medical units. No criticism of that. Perhaps this should have been anticipated. But obviously everybody is scrambling.

You're working to convince more conservatives and particularly to get vaccinated. President is out there giving speeches. Anthony Fauci is out there on a lot of television shows. It doesn't seem to be having an impact.

LUNTZ: It has to come from your doctor. I'm going to tell you my dream. And you are going to say this is insane. I want Donald Trump and Joe Biden to film a commercial together. Trump complimenting Biden for getting vaccines out, Biden complimenting Trump on Operation Warp Speed. And the two of them turning to their own doctors and let them deliver the message.

Howie, it's not going to come from Washington. It's not going to come from government, it's not going to come from celebrities. It's got to come from your own doctor. It's one of the key findings that we've learned.

KURTZ: So just in half a minute, is there reason for that a distrust of politicians and political leaders, the polarization that you mentioned earlier, and there is more trust in local doctors? But of course, there are problems in getting the vaccine to local doctors because of storage issues and how much of this has to be shipped. Just briefly.

LUNTZ: Yes, and it's medical science. In the end stop the demonization and focus on education. If we do that, we'll get over the 75 percent mark. If we don't, we won't reach herd immunity.

KURTZ: Which would be just unbelievable shame that we have these life- saving vaccines that were developed almost in miraculous amount of time. And yet there is a hardcore people who don't want to take them. Look, they are entitled to their individual decisions. But as you pointed out, as many others pointed out, if they don't do it, it kind of hurts the whole country.

Frank Luntz traveling the world apparently. Thanks very much for joining us.

LUNTZ: Thank you, Howie.

KURTZ: Still to come, the New York Times top editor on botching the Rudy Giuliani story. The Washington magazine where staffers are protesting about having to come back to the office and much more. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KURTZ (on camera): In the fallout over that colossal mistake involving Rudy Giuliani, first the Washington post, then the New York Times, and NBC all having to correct a false allegation that the FBI warned the ex-mayor that Russian intelligence was targeting him, one editor has to his credit gone on the record.

Times executive editor Dean Baquet told the Post, quote, "we weren't rigorous enough. I think we all tend to drop our guard when we get beat and are trying to catch up. We need to grill sources more to make sure we understand exactly what they're confirming. We've all discussed it, corrected it, and we need to do better."

Good for Baquet. The Washington Post acting editor wouldn't talk to his own reporter. And by the way, Giuliani may have been slow to issue a denial, reporters tried to contact him because federal investigators seized his phones.

A reporter from New York's Daily News one of the most grittiest and most story tabloids is openly trashing its likely new owner. With Tribune company negotiating a sale of the paper along with the Chicago Tribune, Baltimore Sun, and others, olden -- excuse me --olden Global Capital, Larry McShane calls it notorious hedge fund known for decimating newspapers like the Denver Post before picking the bones for profit.

As he points out, Tribune fired half the newsroom three years ago. The staff is down to 100. These are really tough times for newspapers. Which is why other than rich guys, only hedge funds are buying them, and too often bleeding them dry.

So, the news which ran the classic headline, ford to city, drop dead is trying to avoid death by strangulation. Washington Post editors created a whole lot of confusion with a memo what staffers can and can't do at public gathering. Attending a pride celebration or one for Juneteenth that's OK, but not protests or partisan activities.

It's fine to join a celebration at Black Lives Matter plaza but not a protest. Aren't those similar? A news who employ can't hold a sign in a parade, or wear a hat backing or opposing a politician or policy, but can wear a rainbow cap and wave American flag or t-shirt celebrating their identity. But what if you wear a rainbow hat at a gay right's protest. Look, I'm all for reporters not joining in partisan activities but this sounds like you need a lawyer to decipher.

The CEO of Washingtonian magazine has a revolt on her hands after saying she expects staffers to return to the office full time. Cathy Merrill said in a Washington Post op-ed that they need to be there to help their colleagues. Here's what she wrote. While some employees might like to continue to work from home and pop in only when necessary, that presents executives with a tempting economic option the employees might not like.

What would that option be? Well, it would be turning them into contractors which Merrill said would cost them, she just came out and said it, their health and retirement benefits. Now the entire staff essentially went on strike, posting the same message on Twitter. We are dismayed by Cathy Merrill's public threat to our livelihoods. We will not be publishing today.

Look, this is a difficult transition for companies across America, not just the media. Making not so subtle threats against your employees is really heavy-handed. Merrill later backed off saying she won't change her employee's status. And quote "I'm sorry if the op-ed made it appear like anything else." Online protests sometimes work.

That's it for this edition of MEDIABUZZ. I'm Howard Kurtz. Happy Mother's Day to all the moms out there and all the people celebrating their mothers on this special day. We hope you like our Facebook page. We post my daily columns there among other things.

Let's continue the conversation on Twitter at Howard Kurtz. I don't have to encourage some of you. Check out my podcast. You see it there. Media Buzz Meter. You can subscribe at apple iTunes, Google podcast or on your Amazon device. We're back here next Sunday 11 Eastern. See you then with the latest buzz.

Content and Programming Copyright 2021 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2021 VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.