Steam Divide and Conquer: The Story of Roger Ailes

Divide and Conquer: The Story of Roger Ailes

Divide and Conquer: The Story of Roger Ailes is a movie starring Tony Waag, Babette Bombshell, and Catherine Corcoran. A documentary that explores the rise and fall of the late Roger Ailes, from his early media influence on the...

Other Titles
Diviser pour mieux régner: l'histoire de Roger Ailes, Divide y triunfarás. La historia de Roger Ailes, Sex, Trump & Fox News, Manden bag Fox News, Untitled Roger Ailes Documentary
Running Time
1 hours 47 minutes
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Alexis Bloom
Babette Bombshell, Catherine Corcoran, Tony Waag, John Reardon
Audio Languages
日本語, اللغة_العربية, English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
Japanese, اللغة_العربية, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

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.

Comments about documentary «Divide and Conquer: The Story of Roger Ailes» (23)

Nathan B. photo
Nathan B.

Like most of us, I can relate to this documentary quite strongly. I was a young kid in the late eighties, and have always been fascinated with cable news, and the attempt by the TV news executives to promote their product. Some of the stories they covered that were positive, were deemed political. Sometimes, it was to the detriment of our national interest. But, in the midst of it all, and with so much influence at stake, how can we be sure we aren't becoming more and more like those that cover these stories? The movie is quite informative, and it brings up some good points. It provides us with a glimpse into the beginnings of the Fox News Channel. The anger of the network came from its fear that it was becoming more and more of a "Democrat-leaning" organization. It became a top player in the presidential election, and then for a while, even President. The product it had made, was out of touch with reality. So, it decided to take a stand and introduce its news divisions. It became more political in its content. The backlash of those that are exposed to these "liberal" TV news programs is quite telling. Some of these programs take the viewer to places that make them think about their own society. What makes those programs so difficult for the viewers to watch? That's where this documentary shines. Some of the stories are informative, and some are disturbing. The way that the programs are introduced, are mostly on-camera, and in the background, there is always a great deal of background music. The whole film is "natural" as far as the filmmaking technique. I found it quite pleasant. The writer/director had the necessary stuff to have a very good movie. I did not think it was sensationalistic. The music is not distracting, and the film is not sped up in any way. In my opinion, this is a very good film, and I recommend it.

Jack Lynch photo
Jack Lynch

I'm an MSNBC producer and I think that this doc should have been a longer feature, with a lot more facts to back up what it's showing us. But hey, we can't please everyone. This is the kind of thing you could watch with your family and say, "Yeah, it's true." My father-in-law was not a fan of the political world. He was the big Ben Affleck fan, and when his son did a documentary about Ailes, my father-in-law said that he was a bit biased. But all in all, this is a great movie, because it's not a documentary that has to be true, it's a "reality show" and it's about how important and true it is to show people the truth about Ailes. My wife and I were surprised at how accurate the movie was, and how it showed a lot of things that were never shown in the documentary. It shows how Ailes actually put money in his pocket while he was a big anchor and a host at Fox News. It shows that Ailes himself felt that there were a lot of people that were sickened by the idea of Fox News being a "little mouthy girl" that was very sick and needed to be scared. And then we learn how Ailes was able to put his loyalist allies in the press to make a political issue out of the story. It shows how Ailes decided to get Michael Powell to sue The Washington Post. We also learn that Ailes was in some kind of psych ward for a few weeks when he was in his twenties, but he was able to come out and win the lawsuit against The Washington Post. He used his news talk show and the money to make money to hire consultants, and he bought up a lot of political influence. The movie shows how Ailes had a political persona and had to prove it. He had to prove his political talent to get into the White House, and he knew that he had to be somebody that was famous, powerful, and powerful with his friends. The movie also shows how the high-power group that Ailes had to go up against became their own personal enemies and sought to destroy him. It shows how, when they came up with the idea of attacking Fox News, they didn't have any kind of proof that they were losing viewers to Fox. But it didn't matter because they were putting up the money for it. They knew that it was more important to attack the mainstream media than Fox News. They also knew that they needed to try and attack Roger Ailes personally

Samuel G. photo
Samuel G.

Roger Ailes was a very powerful network that was able to control our country in many different ways. In my opinion, the networks were the third pillar of a great government. One can't really say anything bad about them. Their voice and influence was very strong and influential. This documentary is an explanation of Ailes in more details. I also liked that it was made in a way that gives you a picture of a good man and the things he did in the past. A young Hillary Clinton and the Bernie Sanders campaign show how young people can be used and exploited. I also liked the idea of the interview with Brian Williams, who was fired from CBS and went to Fox for many years. He shows us how some of the people he interviewed made the mistake of trusting that Ailes was good and telling the truth, instead of what he was doing. The problem is that the documentary is not very strong on Ailes, except for his opposition to the FCC and the election of Ronald Reagan. There was a much more strong documentary on Steve Ailes, who was a great network owner and political donor. That one was made by Bob Costas and Michael Winslow and it was very good and powerful. I think the FCC is not a very important topic in this documentary. Maybe some of the other executives are the big problem. But this documentary is a very strong explanation and I recommend it for all Roger Ailes fans.

Keith photo

Like so many films of this genre, Ailes' masterpiece is one of those where a straight to video distributor decided to put it out on DVD. That might have been the logical reason, but as with so many other things the Director, screenwriter, and producer is credited for, it also has some very interesting qualities. Like his own documentary of his career, this film is also one of those documentaries that is really worth seeing. The documentary starts off with a very low budget, then you see the events of a C-Class president (who is really caught in the middle between Ailes, his mistress and a sub-contracted TV studio), then the presidents wife, then the C-Class president's son, then the whole house of C-Class and Ailes, then the White House and its occupants, then the whole family of C-Class, and finally the whole family and the White House. It's an interesting documentary, and it helps to explain why so many people thought it was necessary to not only pay Roger Ailes a lot of money, but to also hold his wife accountable for things that were not done by her. Another thing is that, like other documentaries of this nature, the Director actually made some of his own footage to go along with the footage. A friend of mine who is a documentary filmmaker said he enjoyed that this is kind of like a one long narrated film, and it doesn't help that it's really a pretty low budget film. A lot of times when you're making a film like this, you know that there's a chance it'll be over budget and the timing will be a little off. This film shows how Ailes saw his career in a different light. It really makes you feel like you know what he was like, and then you wonder what his career was like. I really liked that the Director actually really got into the personality of Roger Ailes, and how he started off with a good reputation. It also helps to understand why he changed so quickly and become a divisive figure, because that's part of what you have to understand. I also liked the interviews the Director did with those who worked with Ailes, and how Ailes' wife actually gave up a lot of her control to Roger Ailes, and how he really just wanted his own things. All in all, I really liked this documentary, and I really recommend it to anybody who likes documentaries.

John D. photo
John D.

Focusing on the life and legacy of Fox News, the film is a large slice of the television news industry. It deals with the recent scandal surrounding the departure of Roger Ailes and how the media played into the decision, as well as its effects on the career of Ailes, and the news business in general. Along the way, the film covers the politics of the media, and the television industry in general. The report talks about the current state of the media, how the media influenced the 2000 election and what is going on in the political world today. The film also includes interviews with notable news media figures. Its a great look at the industry that was a big part of the 1980s and 90s.

Sean P. photo
Sean P.

I saw the 90 minute film, which is not bad if you have watched some of the content in the past. In fact I like the first part where Ailes interviewed Roger Ailes. I think it does a good job of giving a good introduction to the good old days of the Fox News Network. I think this was a good start, but then the interview goes down hill. The interview doesn't have that much substance and you are just left wondering when this is going to finish. So, if you want to know what the Fox News Network was like when it was the first time, do not watch this, but if you want to know how Roger Ailes became one of the most successful conservative talk radio personalities in America, this is a good start. I am not sure if it is an actual documentary, because I saw the behind the scenes shots of the Fox News Network. It was not the best and I think they tried to give a more like a documentary feel to the interview. Overall it was a good start to know more about Roger Ailes, but then the interview goes down hill.

Johnny S. photo
Johnny S.

Like a lot of the things said in the documentary, I wasn't entirely sure what to expect, because Fox News had been a part of the CNN empire for a few years, but now there was a lot more to see. But, when it came, I really was shocked. What made the documentary so strong was that I could see people like Al Sharpton, Chris Matthews, and Joe Scarborough, all of whom had been on CNN for a long time, and they all had been treated poorly by the network. But, what they did was use their time to make themselves heard, and make sure their voice got heard. And, this was not done by just speaking out and giving their opinion, but by speaking up, and giving their opinion on their side. In this particular case, it was Sean Hannity and a friend of his, and they were very effective in getting their voices heard, and making sure they had a voice. And, they did it in a very unapologetic way. It's interesting to see how effective and effective they were, because I think that many would consider them to be wrong, and to be being too strident and too much of a bully. I do believe that they are right on one thing though, and that is that a lot of the things they were saying were true. But, they really showed it, and they had to be heard. The reason I say that is that what they said was true, because they had not just a few, but they had a lot of people saying it. But, that is not the way it happened in the media, and that is something that Fox News was able to show in the documentary. I really think that the film was really good, and I think that it was a very good documentary, but I think that it was not the best film I have seen.

Matthew Barnes photo
Matthew Barnes

Although I have only watched this film a few days ago, I think that the film does a great job at portraying the dysfunction within Ailes. But it also shows that, in fact, Ailes was a man who was full of power and ego and he made decisions that were not only illegal but also destructive to the companies that he was in charge of. It also shows that the media, news media in particular, were at times very easy to manipulate. For example, I remember that Ailes was always asking to see the names of his guests. This was for his own benefit. He was always looking for a way to get something from the media to bolster his ego. He did this with the constant covering up of the women who had affairs with his employees. But as we see, Ailes also had a personality disorder, as well. He had many of these personality disorders and they were all major contributing factors to his downfall. The film also does a great job at presenting the dysfunction within Ailes, and how they were all linked. We also see Ailes suffer from the many personality disorders that were passed on to him, such as narcissism, sex addiction, paranoia and paranoia about sex. I think the film does a great job in making this argument, even though I think that there is too much focus on the "leaks" and the person-to-person communications. The other thing that I like about the film is how it shows how Ailes could be so quick to dismiss things when they weren't working for him and it was completely against his nature. I think the film could have done a better job with that. This film is not the definitive documentary about Ailes, but it is definitely an interesting documentary that I think will leave an impact on you.

Carolyn photo

Roger Ailes, was a talented and successful media executive who was in over his head. "Ailes' "FOX News Network" has become one of the biggest and most influential news networks in the world. Despite all of the negative coverage he has faced, he seems to have maintained a high-quality of life. As a result, he has continued to support conservative causes and get the most out of his news operation. He even made good money. But after a disastrous election campaign for president, Ailes decided he had had enough. "I think that all of this, these negative stories, that Fox has been experiencing, is actually not that accurate." Roger Ailes is interviewed by Ted Alcorn who had worked for Ailes for over 20 years, until he left the company for personal reasons. They discuss how Roger had a meltdown, his response to the events, the decisions he made after he resigned, the separation he was forced to go through, his later work as a commentator, and his final exit. "It's pretty clear to me that, you know, the Fox News Channel has been almost a hobby of mine, you know, I thought it was just a necessity for me to have, I mean it was kind of like I needed to maintain my life. But then it became, that, it became, it became that, I was sort of, I was sort of delusional because I thought that I would be, like, you know, I thought that my life would just blow up or that I would be fired and the career would be over. But, I just, I just think that it's, you know, I'm gonna try and live a decent life. Like, I am gonna keep my mouth shut and work as hard as I can. And it's like I just didn't have to do it."

Jonathan G. photo
Jonathan G.

I really liked this documentary. It is very, very good and interesting. It is interesting that this film was made by the same people who brought us the infamous "toxic wife" movie. Now, I am no fan of Lisa's work, but she did do a good job at keeping her identity secret. I found it interesting that Roger Ailes was involved with this documentary as well. I think that he was very, very supportive of it. I would recommend this documentary to anyone who is interested in watching a very good documentary about a very interesting topic.

Nathan S. photo
Nathan S.

Wow, what a film! I had a strong feeling I was going to hate it, but I was pleasantly surprised. So many outrageous scenes. Also some truly touching moments. This documentary is about the future of the Fox News Channel, and I hope it'll help inspire others to pursue it too. I was surprised by the ratings on this film, because it wasn't really a hit with most Americans. But the ratings were very high on the weekends that Fox was airing it, and I think people have been put off by the viewer ratings. But I'm glad they gave the film a decent viewing, and hope this shows people what the future of the Fox News Channel can be. I had to watch it twice, because I still have mixed feelings about it. But I'll go ahead and rate it a 7/10 because of all the good points.

Dylan L. photo
Dylan L.

Saw this on the weekend. While the subject matter is somewhat different, it is an interesting look at the rise and fall of Fox News in the 2000s. The story is centered around Roger Ailes, the founder of Fox News. It is a fascinating look at how a man who seems to be a master of manipulating the media and politics into an influential force on both sides of the political spectrum has taken his influence to an almost cult-like mentality. It's a fascinating story, and though it is a little too much for the simple minded, I can understand why people would want to hear it. Some people might be just fascinated by how far Ailes has taken the Fox News brand. It's not a shocking story. It's not a particularly compelling one either. It's a story about a man who was able to turn what was already a powerful media organization into a highly successful media company. But it is not that interesting. I am a bit tired of hearing about how much more Fox News has since. It seems to me that all of the Fox News that exists today was founded and created in the 1990s. And it's time to move on. There are plenty of great films out there that can capture the spirit and spirit of the 90s. However, none of them will ever be able to touch the most powerful media organization in the world. It is quite interesting that the film was made as the presidential election is in full swing. It is a fascinating look at the current political climate, and how Fox News and other conservative media outlets have been able to influence the politics and public opinion in a way that was previously unimaginable. It is a fascinating story, and while it is not a particularly compelling one, it is still a very well done film. 7/10

Christopher B. photo
Christopher B.

Rude and crass, but with some incredibly enlightening moments. You can't help but be impressed by the complexity of the internet, and that this 'network' is a network. The old boss had some amazingly slick tricks up his sleeve, the younger guys took to it and adapted to the different needs and desires of their audience. It is interesting to see some of the old staff depart, including Roger Ailes himself. More talk than action, but that is the point. It's not a doc about Roger Ailes, it's a doc about the internet, and how one man can change the world. I think everyone can identify with one or more of these characters, even if it's just an excuse to play with computers. Good stuff.

Rebecca photo

It's one of the most entertaining films I've seen. There are many good things about it. I like that it's a documentary and the interviews are very much like those of Ailes. The documentary goes through his life and it's a great way to get an understanding of the man. What the film fails to do is cover what really happened to Ailes. The only thing that I got from this film is the idea that Roger Ailes did do some wrong things. However, the majority of this film is spent on interviews and nothing else. The documentary starts with a list of Ailes' mistakes. It goes on to say that he was just trying to make money. After that, the film takes a left turn and talks about his friendship with the New York Post. It's a pretty interesting section of the film, but it does not cover anything that happened in the past. Instead, the documentary focuses on his relationship with his bosses, his relationships with his family, and his work. The thing is, this section of the documentary is really good, but I was very disappointed with the rest. I was never really interested in the relationship between Ailes and his family. I wanted to know more about how his family was affected by the scandal, but I was never really interested in that. The relationships between Ailes and his family was great, but the rest of the film is wasted. A lot of the interviews are boring and it's hard to get into the film. However, the documentaries does a great job of getting Ailes' thoughts on the scandals and how they affected his life. It's a very interesting film. I would recommend this film to anyone, but it's not one I would buy on DVD.

Charles P. photo
Charles P.

Barry Blitt of "The New York Times" explains why Bill O'Reilly "went off the deep end" in "Roger Ailes." As the interviewee stated, "Barry thinks that Ailes had been drinking heavily when he went off the deep end." I also thought that the interviewee was absolutely correct when he stated that "Roger was a man with a clear mind who was tortured by an industry that wanted him to be a partisan tool." So it was the only thing that could explain what happened to Ailes. That is, until he was "possessed" by a "Nietzschean" psycho-babble that he "stumbled" upon in his youth. That Freudian psycho-babble was then "forgiven" by the public by Bill O'Reilly himself. Now, to say that Ailes did not deserve what happened to him is simply an admission of guilt by the interviewer, as is the fact that he "gave" that "Nietzschean" psycho-babble. In other words, the interviewee, Mr. Blitt, admitted that he knew nothing of the "Nietzschean" psycho-babble before O'Reilly's interview. But if you were a journalist, and you had been drinking heavily, it would be considered as a crime. So, for the rest of us, it is simply an admission that he knew nothing of the "Nietzschean" psycho-babble, which is an admission of guilt. When he "gave" it, he was giving it for the public, and that was the worst crime. So, if that psycho-babble was a crime, then what happened to the "Nietzschean" psycho-babble?

Kenneth Wade photo
Kenneth Wade

This is a documentary about the life of Roger Ailes. The interviews are very interesting and well done. They do a good job explaining why he became the CEO of Fox News. This film is interesting and well done, even though it is a bit slow in parts. However, the movie does show a lot of very interesting information about Roger Ailes, including the personal problems he had with his wife, the relationship with his children, and the decisions he made at the beginning of his career. All of these things make the movie very interesting and worth watching.

Margaret photo

Michael O'Reilly of the National Review asked me to take part in a special "Dissent and Blame" feature. As I always enjoy talking with these types of people, I went along and did my best to give them the benefit of my experience and knowledge. I will say that I am a HUGE Roger Ailes fan and will say that the film is VERY well made, well produced and written. The interviews are informative and helpful to understand how the other side sees this event. My favorite part of the documentary is when O'Reilly asked me how I felt about the big corporate forces that were supporting Ailes and that Roger Ailes was a "one man show" and that this shows the "bargain basement" nature of Fox News and how it is all about keeping money and not the quality of content. A lot of this has been discussed, but I think the best way to understand this is to see the film. It will help you to understand that, in the end, this is really about "How much do we owe Roger Ailes? How much do we owe the world?" and how that line is being worked in the media. If you have been following this story, you know the media is trying to make money off of Roger Ailes. I think you will agree with me on that. We know this from what has been covered, but I will say it is still a really good documentary to watch. I also think that the "Fox News" segment is really good and very informative. I was very surprised that one of the Fox News hosts has been trying to get in touch with Roger Ailes and asking him to take part in his "Believe the Hype" series, but in the end, I guess it was too late and we saw this documentary.

Shirley M. photo
Shirley M.

David Shulman is the most important person in the Roger Ailes drama, and he is more than just a writer and producer for the Fox News Channel. In his life, he has been a strong proponent for women's rights and equality, and a vocal supporter of the 'wussification' of America. And yet, in this documentary, he shares his personal experiences of the scandal that was Ailes' tenure as Fox News. It was such a shocking experience to witness how a network of this caliber could have such a toxic atmosphere that created a toxic climate of fear and misogyny. Despite the accusations and the paranoia that took hold of the entire network, there were women that worked in the channel who were not only loyal to Ailes, but also that were passionate about helping women. What I really liked about the documentary is that it is not a documentary about the Fox News Channel, but rather a document of the culture of the network. This documentary shows the process by which Ailes had to endure to finally get out of Fox News. It is really fascinating to see how he had to put his professional life on hold in order to try and help change a company that was fundamentally sexist and misogynistic. It's really important to watch because it is a powerful document of a man who gave so much of himself to this company, and to his friend, Roger Ailes.

Justin Williams photo
Justin Williams

A fascinating look at a man who seemed to have an absolute grip on all the right people and who thought he had all the answers to all the problems of the media and society. The film really delves into the mind of Roger Ailes and shows the depth of his paranoia and the trouble he had with his own daughter. It is fascinating to see how Ailes would have behaved if he was in the same situation as the rest of us, it shows how he would have reacted differently if he was faced with his own son. It is also interesting to see how the man who was such a champion of the truth and one who seemed to have an amazing grip on the media world became the guy who was just doing whatever he wanted and not really having any problem with it. I was surprised to see how he became this man who is now described as a sexist and homophobic (?) because he seemed to have developed a kind of malevolence that I have never seen before in a male. One thing I really liked about the film is that it shows how he actually thinks and feels in the real world and how he is a very confident and attractive man. A film that is well worth watching.

Mary C. photo
Mary C.

I don't know what to say about this film, it was excellent, very well done. I am a big fan of the show, I remember watching the first season and being very impressed. I'm glad that this documentary was made and I am looking forward to seeing it again.

Jack Pearson photo
Jack Pearson

I was fortunate enough to have the opportunity to see this documentary at the Sundance Film Festival. I was deeply impressed with the strength of the film, as well as the message it was attempting to convey. This is a film that can be enjoyed by everyone and deserves to be seen by everyone. This film is a must-see for anyone who is a fan of any of the main characters involved in this story. The film is highly recommended for anyone who is interested in the subject matter, or anyone who is interested in the future of the media.

Ethan photo

Most people seem to have a lot of problems with this documentary. I can understand why - it's a very well-crafted and thought-provoking film, but as a political documentary it's very, very weak. For instance, the interviewees in this documentary are all male, so of course they're all political conservatives. If you want to make a political film about a male political figure, you'd do well to make it about a woman, as it's far easier to get a woman's perspective on a political figure. And there are a lot of female politicians in this documentary. And yet they're interviewed on the basis of what they say about male politicians - you have to look beyond what they say to get to the true issues. As a documentary, it's solid, but as a political document, it's weak. And that's probably the most important point in the film: how could you possibly take an issue like sexual harassment as a political issue? How can you go through a political campaign and say to the people who voted for you that you believe that sexual harassment is a big deal? It's the single most serious political issue that we have, and yet, the media only uses the word sexual harassment about once a month in political coverage. I don't think there's a single politician who is anywhere near being held accountable for sexual harassment. We don't have a President who has said, "I think I'm going to take a look at the problem of sexual harassment." I think that's because there's not a single person who is able to say, "I think I've got a problem with this." And so that's why I think this is a really important political documentary. It's the single most important political issue that we have, and yet it's not being treated as a political issue. And that's a real problem, because if this were a documentary about a female political figure, it would be a lot stronger. It would have some real-life stories, some real-life consequences, and it would have real-life politics. But because it's a documentary about a male politician, it's only a political issue. I think that's the biggest problem with this film. It's the same as the opposite of "War of the Worlds," where it's a political documentary about a foreign leader, but the filmmaker chooses to focus on his family and their relationship with the leader. He chooses to show them as "perfect" people, and when the film ends, they're still perfect. I think the real problem with this documentary is that it doesn't tell us about the political issue, it's only about the human issues, and that's what it should be about.

Rebecca photo

A solid, if unoriginal, documentary about the disgraced former Fox News chief Roger Ailes. It's worth seeing, as it features the perspectives of many people and the story is told in a way that is easy to follow and the events themselves are so unusual that it seems almost non-fictional. There are several subjects that are covered, including the attack on an American soldier and a black woman's meeting with her rapist. Ailes was the most powerful and respected figure in the media world, so his fall from grace was even more shocking than it should have been. However, there is not a lot of insight into the people who worked for him, and even less about what happened to him afterwards. The documentary does not give us any kind of closure on the story and Ailes's legacy is not explored at all. The idea of the people around him, from the people who loved him to the people who hated him, is very much a subject that is not explored. There is also a lot of focus on Ailes's private life and the details that are often not mentioned or discussed, such as the cocaine habit. There is also a lot of discussion of the Fox News culture that Ailes was part of, which is interesting as that is also very important in understanding how the story unfolded. In some ways, this film feels like a documentary on the top 20% of the world's news media, which is certainly not a bad thing, but the idea of "Fox News" is not explored at all and the lack of that is what the film is mainly about. The documentary is worth seeing, but there are some flaws. The main problem is that it is too detailed and the story that it tells is a lot more interesting than the things that it discusses. For example, there is no mention of the many people that lost their jobs as a result of Ailes' infidelities, so the focus is on the negative aspects of Ailes' work, which is more interesting than the person himself. In addition, there is a lot of speculation about the relationship between Ailes and his accuser, which is only interesting because of how little is revealed about that. While the subject matter is fascinating, the documentary does not give us enough insight into the people who worked for Ailes, and what happened to them afterwards. Still, the documentary is a very good way to get an insight into the situation that Ailes faced.