Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Torture Scenes From Fictional TV May Help People Support Use of Torture; Senator Feinstein Accuses CNN Of "Hyping Up Possible Violence"; 19-Year-Old Girl Viciously Burned With Her Car; Uber Facing Several Controversies

Aired December 10, 2014 - 15:30   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When was the last time you saw bin Laden? When you lie to me, I hurt you. This is what defeat looks like, bro. Your jihad is over.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: Seen that movie? That was "Zero Dark 30" that film that chronicled the manhunt for Osama bin Laden. But the details released in the U.S. Senate report on chase, Methods of Torture, were not from this glamorized Hollywood blockbuster. It's worth. You know, you read the details -- ice water baths, rectal feedings, slappings, sleepless nights. All practices the Senate report suggests were ineffective and more brutal than originally thought, although, so the CIA will argue otherwise.

But for Hollywood, torture scenes seem to be working. The number of torture scenes in television have reportedly skyrocketed and there was a recent study that shows that when people see torture as being effective in fictional TV scenes, they are more likely to support it.

Erin Kearns is American University scholar who co-author the study joins me now to explain.

So welcome to you, Erin. And first is, really simply, with this study, what were you looking for?

ERIN KEARNS, SCHOLAR, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: Well, Brooke, in this study we were looking to see if as some people such as brigadier general Patrick Finnegan, he traveled to Hollywood in 2007 and just hunted to convince producers of "24" to show scenes where torture didn't work sometimes. He had a fear that this was having a detrimental impact on troops than theater.

So the question that we started with is, are people really impacted by scenes that show torture in the media? Does this impact perception, you know, in favor of or in opposition to these practices?

BALDWIN: OK. So a scene such as we're about to show you for you "24" fans out there. Here is a clip from "24." Jack Bauer is counterterrorism agent, of course, fighting the bad guys and this is part of what you showed these students. Watch. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Tell me where the bomb is! Tell me where the bomb is!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Fine.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I will tell these men to kill your last son. Where is the bomb? Tell me now!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I will tell you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Tell me now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Jack Bauer. So, you know, obviously, not all groups in your study saw the same clips. Tell me your methodology and what did you find?

KEARNS: Absolutely. So, what we are interested in the scene how torture is depicted impacts how people perceive the practice. So participants in the study where retreated (ph) to participated in the study on the current events issue, so we asked them about torture and also about four other potentially contentious current event topics so to obscure the true purpose of our study. And then participants were asked initially about their stated level of support for each of these five topics, then, were shown a series of video clips where they were assigned to one of three conditions about torture.

Then they saw a clip where torture was shown to work such as the clip you are seeing now where in the end Jack Bauer's tactics do get the information that's necessary to subvert disaster. We showed a version of the same clip but without that little last piece where torture was shown to be effective. So torture in that condition appeared to be ineffective. And then we also had a condition where torture was not shown but just an interrogation by Jack Bauer.

And what we ended up finding when we compared what participants said their levels of support of torture before seeing the videos and after seeing the videos, we saw that participants who saw torture has being effective had a significantly higher level of state of support for torture than participants in other two conditions.

What's interesting though, is that participants that saw torture as being ineffective, which we expected if you see torture as being ineffective, you're going to be less likely to support the practice when in fact that is not what we thought. No, that should not have an impact people of state of level of support for torture.

And then, what is also interesting and important is that in addition to asking what people, you know, say they believe, were also looking at, you know, people's action because as we know from psychology of behavioral economics literature, what people say and what they do frequently can diverge from one another. So we also gave participants petition, but in support and in the

opposition to these practices. And say that they have the option if they want to choose assign one of these two petitions so that it would be sent to Congress.

So we are also looking at, not just what people say, but also whether they will behaviorally commit to their state of use on torture via-a- vis signing a petition.

BALDWIN: OK. So it was about petitions, it was about supporting or not supporting even when it wasn't as effective. It's interesting. I mean, Hollywood.

Erin Kearns, we are going to let you go. Thank you so much for that study. That's Hollywood's effect, right? But then you have real life, this torture report from the Senate. Is the media making it into too big of a deal?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D), CALIFORNIA: CNN is doing it these days. You are really hyping it to a point.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: That is the chairwoman of the Senate Intel committee, Senator Dianne Feinstein you see her on with Wolf Blitzer. They had a fiery exchange. We are going to talk to Wolf about that back and forth.

And Uber, Uber's huge, huge problems worldwide. The car service now banned in multiple countries and accused of making false statements to consumers in California.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BALDWIN: The senator, the chairwoman of this committee who made a decision to release the CIA's torture secrets accused CNN of, and I'm quoting her, "hyping up possible violence" in response to the report. The problem is the warnings aren't coming from CNN. They're coming from the United States government. And during a tense interview, my colleague, Wolf Blitzer, challenges Dianne Feinstein. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST, THE SITUATION ROOM: If Americans are killed as a result of this report, and they tell you that I assume you would feel guilty about that.

FEINSTEIN: I would feel very badly, of course. I mean, what do you think, Wolf Blitzer? But we lose control. At the end of this year, the Republicans take control and there's some evidence that this report would never see the light of day. We believe it should see the light of day. CNN is doing this these days. You are really hyping it to a point obviously they're going to take 96 hours before the report came out to secure all our facilities. BLITZER: Let me interrupt for a second. You and I are friends.

We've known each other for a long time. When the department of defense issues a warning saying thou thousands of marines are on a higher state of alert around the world in advance of the release of this report and when the department of homeland security and the FBI issue a joint statement going out to all law enforcement authorities across the United States, be on a higher state of alert.

CNN is not releasing those statements. We're just reporting what the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI are telling law enforcement and military personnel around the world. That's their words. Not ours.

FEINSTEIN: Do you have a question? Do you have a question?

BLITZER: I just wanted to point out --

FEINSTEIN: You have pointed it out, Wolf, three times.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Good for you, Wolf Blitzer. Because that's absolutely true. The government is sending out the warnings. Let me just begin with something she said off the top because I find it interesting is that the Democrats -- you look at the timing of this, they made sure to release this report before January when the Republicans take over.

BLITZER: Right. I suspect that she thought if she didn't release it this week, it wouldn't be released for the next two years when Republicans become the majority in the Senate and majority in the Senate intelligence committee and Republicans could hold up releasing any documents they want to hold up if they are the majority. So this was really the last shot.

In fairness to Senator Feinstein, she has been trying for at least six months, maybe longer, maybe even a year or two, to get this report out. It's been available. The White House, CIA, department of justice, the national security agency, department of defense, they all have been going through it. And as you know, the 500 or 600 pages were released. That's maybe 10 percent of the 6,000 pages that are classified right now.

So she's been working hard. She has wanted to get it out for a long time, but there have been delays after delays. And this was really, as she acknowledged in the interview, the last chance that the American public will get to see the declassified redacted version this week because in January the Republicans are going to be in the majority and certainly there is a good chance they would be able to hold it up.

BALDWIN: It was quite an interview, you know. And part of the narrative today is that, Feinstein, she is getting heat for not interviewing the interrogators making this a bigger, fuller picture, you know, report. Did she address that with you?

BLITZER: Yes. She basically said they wanted to interview the direct personnel officials at the CIA, the contractors, the others who were directly involved in these enhanced interrogation techniques, the tactics, whatever you want to call it. But the justice department she says early on told the Senate intelligence committee you can't directly interview these people, some who could potentially, be criminally prosecuted for breaking the law, whether withholding information from higher ops or going beyond what was the truth, so don't talk to them directly.

You can take a look at the transcripts of interviews that have done with these people by the inspector general and CIA and others in the U.S. government but you can't directly question them so she says she didn't.

Now, I did interview John Rizzo who was the chief CIA counsel during that time and he said he strongly disputed what she was saying. He said if they would have come to him and other CIA officials for Q&A, they would have been happy to do so. Maybe some of them un- instruction from lawyers, they didn't want to incriminate themselves, they may have resisted. But officials would have been able to talk about what happened during those critical years right after 9/11. But they were never called for these kinds of Q&A, the question and answer periods that the Senate intelligence committee report did not have the direct testimony from the CIA officials.

BALDWIN: Well, it was Dianne Feinstein yesterday and a former CIA chief, Michael Hayden, will be with you. Wolf Blitzer in "the SITUATION ROOM." That's a huge, huge get, huge interview.

BLITZER: Yes. One other thing, we have Alberto Gonzalez. He was the White House counsel when they originally signed off on these enhanced interrogation techniques. He later became the attorney general of the United States. And it was one of those early meetings that Rizzo from the CIA lawyer was with Alberto Gonzalez. Rizzo says at that meeting they said don't share this information with the then secretary of state Colin Powell. He could blow his stack if he hears about it. So we are going to speak to Alberto Gonzalez about those early meetings whether to avoid telling someone like Colin Powell what was going on.

BALDWIN: Two key players, must see TV, "the SITUATION ROOM" with Wolf Blitzer.

Wolf, thank you.

BLITZER: Thank you.

BALDWIN: A woman coming up here doused with lighter fluid 19 years young set on fire, left to slowly burn to death on the side of this rural Mississippi road. But it is her final words that may lead police to her killer. We'll have a live report on that next.

Plus, that Uber ride to the airport may be cheaper and more convenient but are you paying the price with your safety? State of California is now suing the car company. We'll tell you why coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BALDWIN: The only part of her body that wasn't burnt was the bottom of her feet. That is a direct quote from investigators who told the family of teenager Jessica Chambers who was set on fire, left to die on a rural Mississippi road over the weekend.

When responders arrived, Chambers was near her car, her body horribly burned. The 19-year-old was still barely alive, but it was too late. She died later in a Memphis hospital. Authorities told her father, Jessica that her head had been bashed and she had been doused with lighter fluid.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BEN CHAMBERS, FATHER OF JESSICA CHAMBER: They said that as far as they could tell they squirted fluid down her throat and up her nose because it burned her on the inside so bad. The doctor said there was nothing we could do, you know. She was burned on 98 percent of her body.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Martin Savidge is working this one for us today. And just hearing the details, it is horrendous. Do they think they know who did this?

MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: They believe they're closing in on who did this, Brooke. This was such a horrific crime that even to investigators they say they've not seen anything like this for at least a decade or more. And so there is an initial shock value even for them.

This is a very small area, a very small town, I should say, less than 500 people. It was 8:00 on Saturday night when a 911 call comes in and says hey, there is a car on fire on a county road. So the volunteer, that shows you how small the community, the volunteer fire department goes out there. And then suddenly, stumbling out of the darkness is this 19-year-old.

And the terrible thing is because it's a small town, they realized who it was. And they immediately tried to give her first aid. And then, this is the key moment here. She hoarsely whispers something to the fire chief and those are her final words. She dies the next day. It is believed that what she said was her efforts to try to identify.

Now, I've talked to law enforcement there. They won't tell me what she said, but they definitely say it's a clue and it's a lead they're following up on.

BALDWIN: It's incredible, she had the wherewithal and strength to be able to whisper that. Beyond this person's identity, do police in talking to them, do they have a clue as to why someone would have done this to her?

SAVIDGE: No. Many people, you know, that's the first thing who would carry out a murder? But then on top of that, who would carry out such a vicious, heinous kind of death? Again, it is small town. So you start looking at everybody here. They have brought in a number of people for questioning. Nobody is under arrest. There was some talk that she was going to go to a party that evening. They've spoken, authorities have, to some of those at the party and said they never saw her there.

I think one of the keys is going to be her cell phone. Authorities say they recovered the cell phone. And in fact, I was just on the phone with the DA and he said, you know, we finally got clearance legally to go inside. So the forensic kind of diagnostic now, the cell phone looking at texts, looking at who was the last person to call that was just getting under way. But it could be, they say, the key to the whole investigation.

BALDWIN: Horrible. Thoughts with our family. Martin Savidge, thank you.

SAVIDGE: You're welcome.

BALDWIN: Uber banned in New Delhi after a woman accusing her driver of raping her. But here in the United States, are you any safer? The state of California is suing the car service over background checks. We'll explain that.

Plus breaking news on Wall Street, the Dow plummeting more than 200 points. Find out why ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BALDWIN: More roadblocks for Uber, the ride sharing service has been running into plenty of them. Recently, the latest examples, Los Angeles, San Francisco, both California cities suing Uber over background checks. So a lot of people use Uber. So we have to talk about this with Laurie Segall.

What are the issues in California, specifically?

LAURIE SEGALL, CNN MONEY TECHNOLOGY REPORTER: You mentioned background checks.

BALDWIN: Yes.

SEGALL: Well, Uber is saying that, you know, or the San Francisco DA saying hey, you guys aren't complying with the same background checks that our taxis here are complying to. Specifically when it comes to background checks, these guys have to go in and get fingerprinted.

Uber drivers don't have to do that. I spoke with the San Francisco DA earlier. And he said that, you know, they're filling out online applications. It's not as safe of a process. He also said that they've been looking at Uber over the last year. They sent them multiple cease-and-desists. There are extra charges sometimes that they're saying that shouldn't be the case.

And one thing he said to me, Brooke, that I thought was interesting, was about your protection. If God forbid something were to happen to you when you were in an Uber, you might not have the same protection as if you were in a cab. Listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE GASCON, SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT ATTORNEY: You look at the fine print in most of their stuff that they put out to the consumer. And basically they're telling the consumer we assume no liability for you riding in one of the vehicles. You know, this is a transaction between you and the driver. And, you know, most of the public don't understand that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SEGALL: It's pretty scary to think, OK, if something were to happen to me, you know, this is a technology platform. They're not liable. This isn't their fault, you know. And it's these types of things that we're just learning about and the idea of the background check. And what he said to me is he said he believes in this business, he believes in this type of transportation system, but he said that social responsibility and innovation shouldn't be mutually exclusive. We should feel safe when we get into those cars and those cabs.

BALDWIN: So -- I mean, we talked to, there was an issue -- one of the issues, I mean, recently and we talked to the guy who started Uber, you know, and he obviously was very defensive about all of this and they do, do the background checks. But I guess your point is not as thorough and online versus in person. I mean, people are still so many people use the service.

SEGALL: And here's the thing. So they just raised $1 billion, a $40 billion valuation. This company is valued at $40 billion. A lot of that was to expand internationally. Now, if you look at what's been happening internationally, it's been a bad week for Uber. I mean, we are talking --

They were banned in New Delhi after a passenger was allegedly raped, banned in Thailand and Spain. Everyone is following suit. I mean, take a look at all of the places right now that they're facing these issues. And part of what the issue is if you look at what happened in New Delhi, Travis, the CEO said he needed to work with the government in India for better background checks because it's not a one size fits all, you know. They don't have complete control over these checks and we're seeing that safety is so important when it comes to your livelihood.

BALDWIN: Let's stay on it and especially the idea that something, as you say, God forbid, happens, you know, you should be able to be protected.

So, Laurie Segall, thank you so much. A lot of people have their ears perked when you talk about Uber.

Thank you very much for being with me. I'm Brooke Baldwin here in New York. I will see you back here same time tomorrow. Again, if you missed any of the interviews on the show, please go to what we call the Brooke Blog. Go to CNN.com/Brooke.

To Washington we go now, as always, "THE LEAD" with Jake Tapper starts right now.