The conservative commentator’s ideas did not hold up well outside her usual echo chamber.

Exclusive – Tomi Lahren Extended Interview Video – November 30, 2016 | Comedy Central

“Tomi” host Tomi Lahren explains why she supports Donald Trump, weighs in on Black Lives Matter and clarifies her stance on Colin Kaepernick’s national anthem protest.

On Wednesday night’s The Daily Show, Trevor Noah interviewed Tomi Lahren, a conservative commentator for The Blaze whose videos receive millions of views on Facebook. In a 26-minute extended interview, available online, Noah debates her on her concerns and attempts to understand what she stands for.

The decision to host Lahren on the show was incredible, since the two hosts are on the opposite of the ideological spectrum. Lahren is known for her controversial “Final Thoughts” rants, which receive wide circulation among conservatives on Facebook. She has taken numerous incendiary positions, such as criticizing Beyonce’s Super Bowl performance for supporting the Black Panthers or telling Colin Kaepernick to leave the United States if it disgusts him so much. Back in September, Noah highlighted these rants, comparing Lahren to “a super-famous actor in a foreign country, except the foreign country is your country,” because Facebook generally only shows her videos to people who agree with her views.

In today’s political environment, the conversation was critical. Noah’s openly stated goal by hosting Lahren was to break down the media “bubbles” that the 2016 election has revealed. To do so, he largely avoids any attempt to get her to oblige his disagreements, even as the audience reacts in horror to some of what she says. In doing so, he nimbly elicits remarks from her that are unsupportable, hypocritical, or outright offensive, but allows those remarks to speak for themselves.

What’s compelling about Noah’s interview is the way he finds opportunities to respond with his own points but does not get mired in a back-and-forth.

For example, Lahren defends her criticism of the entire Black Lives Matter movement by pointing out the extreme behavior of a few individuals, which prompts Noah to push back that she defends Donald Trump even though he’s supported by the KKK. She doubles down, so he then asks whether her logic applies to police: Are they all racist because of the many documented accounts of police targeting people of color? “It’s really not” the same logic, she insists. The audience groans, but Noah just moves on. The point has been made.

In an attempt to break down the bubbles, Noah asks her at one point what she thinks people outside her bubble don’t know about her, what she wishes they could understand about her. “I wish that we could disagree with each other without thinking we are bad people or ill-intentioned folks,” she responds. “Because I criticize a black person or because I criticize the Black Lives Matter movement, that doesn’t mean that I am anti-black. That doesn’t mean that I don’t like black people or that I’m a racist.”

She goes on to say, “True diversity is diversity of thought, not diversity of color. I don’t see color.” The audience’s reaction is severe. But Noah disperses the energy with a joke. “You don’t see color? So what do you do at a traffic light?” He briefly explains why disagrees, but again, advances the conversation instead of dwelling on the point.

A moment later, she suggests that the Black Lives Matter movement is encouraging supporters to “loot, burn, and riot” just like the KKK. Noah is incredulous: “Did you say, ‘What did the KKK do?’?” He respectfully suggests there’s a distinction between a movement and individual people, but again quickly pivots to a new conversation.

It’s only in the last third of the interview that Noah really tries to press Lahren to explain her views. His question is simply: If she objects to the tactics of Black Lives Matter and also Colin Kapernick’s form of protest — kneeling for the national anthem — what kind of protest could anybody do that she would support? Lahren mostly tries to defend her criticisms, prompting him to ask the question three different times. When he finally asks how she protests, she replies, “I don’t protest. I’m not a victim. I choose not to victimize myself. I choose not to make myself a victim.”

A few isolated boos emanate from the audience, but again, Noah just moves on.

The interview ends on an awkward sexist joke. Lahren is talking about how impressed she was when she learned more about the Trump campaign and the way that he was “touching people.” Yes, Noah jokingly agrees, he was “touching people.” Lahren replies, “Hillary could use some of that every now and then. Bill’s a little busy! Bill’s a little busy!”

It’s all an impressive experiment, but it remains unclear whether airing her views outside her conservative Facebook audience will change anything for either her fans or her detractors.

The ideal, perhaps, is that her fans will watch the interview, hear Noah’s responses, hear the audience’s reactions, and recognize that they might, in fact, be in a bubble and that their views are not irrefutable. Bringing her ideas into what she calls the “mainstream media” will open them to critique and response that they are generally immune to in their echo chamber. Maybe, for example, some of her fans will learn for the first time that colorblindness is a form of racism.

If nothing else, the interview is revealing in how these bubbles work. The idea that anybody could compare the KKK — which has historically worked to keep black people subjugated through fear, intimidation, and outright violence — to Black Lives Matter — which tries to undo that very inequality and oppression — might be incomprehensible to much of The Daily Show’s audience. But millions of people see no problem with Lahren’s juxtaposition. That doesn’t make her or them right, but as the election proved, those views don’t just go away if they’re ignored.

Bubbles block out dissent, and the only way to free bad ideas from that kind of self-reinforcement is to test them out in “the lion’s den,” as Lahren called it. Not all ideas that are popular in bubbles are bad, but they have to be able to hold up outside the bubble, particularly when confronted by the group of people they impact the most. Lahren can claim she’s not racist, but if only white people agree with that claim — no matter how many — that doesn’t make it true.

Bubbles not only block out dissent, they depend upon its absence to survive. Noah’s interview, on its own, did not pop any bubbles, but it was an important first step of applying pressure.