MOVIE TRAILERS

Trailer for 'Divide & Conquer: The Story of Roger Ailes' Documentary

by
November 8, 2018
Source: YouTube

Divide & Conquer: The Story of Roger Ailes Trailer

"Roger knew what fear could do." Magnolia Pictures has debuted an official trailer for a new documentary titled Divide & Conquer: The Story of Roger Ailes, which premiered at the New York & Toronto Film Festivals this fall. The doc film is a career-spanning look at the person behind the rise of propaganda station Fox News, a vile man named Roger Ailes. Bloom charts the rise and fall of Ailes interviewing both allies and enemies, creating a compelling film that "is vital to understanding the power broker who will be studied for generations to come." The film traces how Ailes repeatedly used his power to sexually coerce women. If he was denied, he didn't hesitate to block their professional advancement, send a private investigator, or smear her in the press. As much as I don't want to hear about him, this seems like the correct way to tell his story.

Official trailer for Alexis Bloom's doc Divide & Conquer: The Story of Roger Ailes, from YouTube:

Divide & Conquer: The Story of Roger Ailes Poster

A documentary that explores the rise and fall of the late Roger Ailes from his early media influence on the Nixon presidency to his controversial leadership at Fox News. One of the most powerful & divisive figures in media, Ailes would eventually go down in flames amid scandal, paranoia, & multiple sexual harassment allegations. Divide & Conquer: The Story of Roger Ailes is directed by experienced documentary filmmaker Alexis Bloom, an Emmy-nominated director who made the doc Bright Lights previously, and worked as a producer on the PBS series "Frontline/World", as well as other TV docs. This premiered at the Toronto, New York, Hamptons, and Philadelphia Film Festivals this year. Magnolia Pictures will release Bloom's Divide & Conquer: The Story of Roger Ailes in select theaters + on VOD starting December 7th this fall. Who's in?

Find more posts: Documentaries, To Watch, Trailer

18 Comments

1

Sick, SICK man that I have no interest in seeing a doc about.

Charles Knowlton on Nov 8, 2018

2

Well, outrages people like him don't fall from the skies. He's the story of society ...

shiboleth on Nov 9, 2018

3

"behind the rise of propaganda station Fox News" - Fox News isn't propaganda, just a news channel with a different opinion. Enablers who say this are standing at the top of the demonisation slide that leads to people trying to kick down the front doors of Fox news anchors.

Payne by name on Nov 10, 2018

4

No. Maybe that is how it started, but it is unquestionably a brainwashing, propaganda station now.

Alex Billington on Nov 10, 2018

5

I'd question that your unquestionable fact is just an opinion motivated by your political bias. What empirical evidence do you have to label it as 'brainwashing propaganda' over any other media outlet? Maybe you can acknowledge that the film 'An inconvenient truth', the sequel to which you so proudly promoted, was propaganda given that at least 6 of the points in the film were proved in a UK court of law to be fake.

Payne by name on Nov 10, 2018

6

If FOX News isn't propaganda, what do you call propaganda? FOX News is the very definition of propaganda. If this is where you get your "news", then that's fine, we won't expect any rational point of view coming from you. You are free to watch what you want, but to say it isn't propaganda is 100% wrong. There's no argument there. The people who watch FOX News don't seem to have the faculties to know when they are being duped by the very place they spend their money on.

Charles Knowlton on Nov 11, 2018

7

Ah, I see the post truth world. You call something 'Propaganda' and it just has to be because you said it is with 100% certainty. All news contains an element of bias or are you so naive to assume that only Fox does that? As per my example to Alex, will you agree then that an Inconvenient Truth was propaganda given the lies that it passed as truths? While we're at what about CNN and their 'Jim didn't touch her campaign'. Is that propaganda because it's clear to everyone that he touched her by pushing down her arm with his? As I said, dismissing and demonising a station you dislike as some kind of evil brainwashing propaganda is the first step on a path to it being deemed okay to attack the homes of people that work there.

Payne by name on Nov 12, 2018

8

I don’t know where to begin with you, I really don’t. Part of me believes that you are so young that you have no idea of what news used to be like. The other part of me thinks you’re old enough to know better but because of the constant indoctrination by media sites (and I refuse to call them news) you have fully swallowed their brand of propaganda. First let me start with an Inconvenient Truth. I can’t argue with you because I haven’t seen the film. If there are blatant errors, which there could be, you can hardly equate them to the system of “news” broadcast daily by Fox News. That movie was hardly seen by anyone to form someone else’s opinion. Certainly not anyone who may have been on the fence as I’m going to guess the majority of it’s viewers were environmentally aware. Now, for the issue of Fox being propaganda, let me put it to you this way. Like I said earlier, you’re either too young or to gullible for me to convince you otherwise, so let me put it in the words of the VERY MANY Fox News contributors who have plainly stated that FOX NEWS IS PROPAGANDA. Check out this editorial from none other then 10 year FOX News analyst Ralph Peters. This is a quote from the retired lieutenant colonel in the United States Army a year after the election of Donald Trump: “With the rise of Donald Trump, Fox did become a destructive propaganda machine,” Mr. Peters said. “And I don’t do propaganda for anyone.” He used to work there. For TEN years. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/07/business/media/ralph-peters-fox-cnn.html Former Reporter and contributor Ralph peters: “As I wrote in an internal Fox memo, leaked and widely disseminated, I declined to renew my contract as Fox News’s strategic analyst because of the network’s propagandizing for the Trump administration.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/why-i-left-fox-news/2018/03/30/d1224648-32bb-11e8-8bdd-cdb33a5eef83_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.92e1d81cf0dd These were two very recent examples. Do you want me to go on because I’ll be happy to. There are many more people who have left over the years because of the shoddy nature of the network. We’re not just talking about an “element of bias” here. This is flat out state-run propaganda. Requested by the President and delivered by FOX News. As for the Jim Acosta incident it is so ridiculous that I won't even comment. If you can't see what actually happened, then nothing I say will convince you. Get a clue because your country can't handle any more ignorance.

Charles Knowlton on Nov 12, 2018

9

The arrogance of your response tells me all I need to know. As does quoting from the Post and the NY Times whose agenda is as clear as day. But I'm sure you blindly consider them bastions of fair and unbiased reporting. My point about an Inconvenient Truth was to question whether First showing is openly pumping out propaganda when it waxes lyrical about a sequel to a film that was proven in a court of law to be untrue - you know like spreading lies. But best of all is Acosta. Your inability or rather refusal to actually see what happened ie Jim pushing her arm down with his own and then claiming like the rest of the arse covering MSM that he didn't touch her is proof that your delusions extend to filling your eyes with mud.

Payne by name on Nov 12, 2018

10

I'm going to address these two points and then drop this. I don't care to discuss this any longer. If that Acosta video is seen to be assault by you, there is nothing I can do to argue the point. What I saw and pretty much everyone else I've heard from on the matter clearly says that was no assault. He clearly reacted by holding onto the mic. That was all. He was lurching his arm in defense, not aggression. If I have a shot to ask the president a question and someone tries to stop me by taking the mic away, I'd do the same thing and so would you. You see this differently. If it was a form of assault and on camera for everyone to see, then why didn't she lay a charge of assault against the guy. It's total nonsense and I can't believe it is even a thing to discuss. Now, the Inconvenient Truth. I just read the judges ruling on this. I wasn't aware of the findings. Here's why this judge's findings really don't matter in the grand scheme of things. All of the "facts" of AIT are based on scientists advice and predictions. Some are clearly coming true. The fires in California for example. The judge took issue with 9 statements that have not and could not be proven at the time. Let me give you an example: "Mr Gore says the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was directly attributable to global warming, but the judge ruled that it scientists have not established that the recession of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro is primarily attributable to human-induced climate change." If 99 scientists say the disappearance of snow was because of global warming and 1 scientist says it may not be, that's enough to question it in the eyes of the law. That's how the judge made his determination on every point. Read the finding here: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/earthnews/3310137/Al-Gores-nine-Inconvenient-Untruths.html You're using THIS example for "propaganda". Very bad example indeed. I made a mistake in my first post, one that you didn't catch because you didn't even look at the links. I put 2 quotes from the same reporter. But there a quite few former FOX reporters who have called FOX News Trump Propaganda: Conor Powell, Adam Housley, Suzanne Sena, Bruce Turkel ,Alisyn Camerota. These reporters worked there and called FOX News propaganda. So we have every right to call it so.

Charles Knowlton on Nov 13, 2018

11

Can't be arsed reading it all because your opening paragraph once again reveals your hand. Where did I say the words 'assault'. I didn't. You inserted them in an untruthful manner to navigate the argument away from Jim and co saying "I didn't touch her'. Which is clearly not true. Defensive or not, he did touch her. Anything else is a lie. Any news channel deliberately spreading a lie like this (like I don't know Trump deliberately over feeding those Japanese fish with a conveniently edited video) is carrying out propaganda. But seemingly lies from the left don't seem to trouble your virtuous pretension.

Payne by name on Nov 13, 2018

12

Wow! Do you excel at twisting your own words or what? Never mind mine. If it's not assault, what are you calling it then? I'm at a complete loss as to what you are even talking about now. Everyone on Trump's side was calling it assault after the incident. If it wasn't an assault, then what is it? Do you see how nuts this is? God god, you are twisting the narrative around 180 degrees. This is unreal! How can you say something SO asinine and expect to get away with it? I won't. Then you say "You inserted them in an untruthful manner to navigate the argument away from Jim" oh please, cry me a river. I can't reason with a child. Goodbye.

Charles Knowlton on Nov 14, 2018

13

The only twisting going on is from you. I've always called it touching, never assault. My point was on the bare faced lies of saying that he didn't touch her - he did.

Payne by name on Nov 15, 2018

14

No one ever said he didn't touch her. How could he not touch her if she's touching him and he's keeping her from grabbing the mic? How? I'm actually starting to enjoy this conversation with you. It might be a sick sense of humor deep inside, but I'm actually looking forward to your replies. But I have to ask you in all honesty and I mean no insult by this, but how old are you? I just would really like to know if I'm arguing online with someone who I probably shouldn't. Just the decade is fine, don't give me your actual age. I'm in my 50's by the way. It would really help to know. Thanks.

Charles Knowlton on Nov 15, 2018

15

Jim Acosta said to Anderson Cooper on CNN "I didn't touch her". Jimmy Fallon said on his show "He clearly didn't touch her, to say so is just a lie". You can't even do any basic research or fact checking, yet you are trying to 'educate' me. Jog on.

Payne by name on Nov 15, 2018

16

And you are just trolling and I'm too blind to see you have been all along. Goodbye.

Charles Knowlton on Nov 16, 2018

17

Yeah whatever. You said you were going to stop talking about three posts ago but in typical drama queen fashion then carried on.

Payne by name on Nov 16, 2018

18

"propaganda station Fox News" That cracks me up. You're not wrong but you know what CNN and MSNBC are? Propoganda stations!!!! Obviously different ideals but just as heavily agenda driven. I don't care for Ailes or Fox News but I'm just as nauseated with the other guys too if not more. Stop pretending one is holier than the others. Or is anybody actually delusional enough to think any of them are truly objective. No one is............right?

LightningB on Nov 12, 2018

Sorry, new comments are no longer allowed.

FEATURED POSTS

POPULAR COMMENTS

LAST YEAR'S TOP 10

Alex's Top 10 - 2020
1. Nine Days
2. Berlin Alexanderplatz
3. Pixar's Soul
4. Pieces of a Woman
5. Feels Good Man
6. Another Round
7. The Truffle Hunters
8. Sound of Metal
9. Lovers Rock
10. Nomadland
Click Here for Thoughts

Adam's Top 10 - 2020
1. Spontaneous
2. Promising Y. Woman
3. Nomadland
4. The Vast of Night
5. Blow the Man Down
6. The Invisible Man
7. Minari
8. Possessor
9. Feels Good Man
10. Color Out of Space
Click Here for Thoughts

FOLLOW US HERE

Subscribe to our feed or daily newsletter:
Follow Alex's main profile on twitter:
For the latest posts only, follow this acct:

Add our updates to your Feedly: click here