Fox News' Benjamin Hall On Ukraine's Desire For Peace, His Resilience In Recovery And How His Trauma Made Him A Better Reporter — Deadline Q&A
Hall lost one leg and both feet, his sight in one eye and the use of one of his hands along with severe burns in the explosive attack. Two of his colleagues, cameraman Pierre Zakrzewski and Oleksandra 'Sasha' Kuvshynova, who was working as a freelance consultant for the network, were killed.
More from Deadline
Newsmax Agreed To Pay $40 Million To Settle Smartmatic's Defamation Lawsuit
Shutdown Averted? Chuck Schumer Says He'll Vote To Advance GOP Funding Bill Out Of Fear Of Far Worse Consequences
Justin Trudeau Signs Off With Message To Canadians Amid Trump Threat: "No Matter What The World Throws At Us, You Will Always Be The Same"
Hall published a memoir about what happened in 2023, Saved: A War Reporter's Mission to Make It Home, and he has recently followed that up with a new book, Resolute: How We Humans Keep Finding Ways To Beat The Toughest Odds, as well as a Fox Nation series tied to the theme of facing adversity.
As part of his recovery, Hall continues to need surgeries and suspects that he 'will be having little operations forever.' But also said that 'they don't play a big part in my life.'
'The main thing is about switching your mind to say, 'It's not a lifetime recovery. It's about adapting.' It's about realizing that this is who I am, and these are things I can no longer do, but there are other things I can do,' he said. 'It's about accepting the differences, accepting what you can and can't do, and making your new schedule feel like your new normal life.'
Deadline spoke this week to Hall about how his experience has changed his reporting and career. He also addressed the situation in Ukraine, including serious concerns that Donald Trump, in his insults of Volodymyr Zelensky, is coddling Russia and Vladimir Putin.
'Everyone's looking for peace. Everyone's looking for a ceasefire. The real negotiations have yet to happen,' Hall said. 'So I think we've entered the period where they will be discussing the long term security guarantees, etc. But I think to start off with a ceasefire is a good first step.'
DEADLINE: What was your reaction to the Oval Office meeting with President Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky?
BENJAMIN HALL: I think that it's fair to say that the way that President Trump negotiates and works is different to previous presidents. … I think that we have to wait to see how this all plays out. If there ends up being long term peace in Ukraine with some security guarantees, then I suppose President Trump would argue that the end is what you're working for. But certainly we haven't seen anything like that in the Oval Office before, but this is a presidency that does things in a different way.
DEADLINE: There was some criticism that it looked like the U.S. was switching sides in the war. Is that valid?
HALL: I guess it would depend on how the negotiations moving forward play out. There will be pressure on Russia now to come and agree to the ceasefire, and I think we hope that we have to see equal pressure on Russia that was put on Ukraine. I think that is President Trump's position. He says is that he'll put pressure on both sides if it means getting them to the table. And I guess we will only really know when they when they reach an agreement.
DEADLINE: You mentioned talking to Ukrainians. How did they view President Trump and the Oval Office meeting? Are they alarmed by it?
HALL: I haven't spoken to any Ukrainians specifically about the Oval Office address itself, but the Ukrainians I speak to —- I speak to soldiers and I speak to diplomats in general —- and everyone knows that they're looking for peace. That's what they want, but it is making sure that the peace they get is long term, and not just something that, for example, allows Putin to rearm and try again in a few years. So look, they think that when you have negotiations like this, both sides have to make concessions. And the question is, what concessions will be asked of Russia? What concessions will be asked of Ukraine? And again, we don't quite know what those will be.
DEADLINE: Did it surprise you when there has been this talk coming from the administration that Ukraine kind of brought it on by itself?
HALL: I think President Trump and his administration, obviously, they have that their own form of diplomacy, that they work in a way that other administrations have not. I think that it will depend on the finished product, on the what happens at the end.
DEADLINE: Your new book, . What made you decide there is more to tell?
HALL: This is far more reflective book. It's far more a personal book. And what's interesting is that so many people think of the injuries, and they think of what happened when I was in hospital, but I actually found those moments to be in some sense easier than what came afterwards, because you are surrounded by people to help you. … But when I went home, and tried to do normal day chores, and discovering how my life had changed, that that was the moment that actually became a bit more difficult. The different way in which people interacted with me was something that surprised me. And so the tough part of the journey, I thought going home was the end of it, and I had achieved it and I was back. But actually is what came after that that I found to be quite difficult. … I am now in a position where I'm well aware that I will forever be dealing with my injuries. And it wasn't this, 'This happened and I got better.' My life will forever be different. And it's coming to terms with that.
DEADLINE: Did you have depression?
HALL: No. I wouldn't call it depression. I write about one trip where I came over to the U.S., and I was actually going to the White House Correspondents' Dinner, and I found myself in a hotel room, and I was unable to get in the shower, and I found myself just in a pretty dark place. I couldn't move, and I was on the floor. It was wet, and there was just suddenly that moment, and that happened a few times, where the weight of how your life was different, and how there was no one there to help you was bit overwhelming. But I'm also very good at catching that and saying, 'Alright, pick yourself up, drag yourself back, pull yourself up, sit down. Think about it. Get through whatever you've got to get through, and then keep moving.'
People talk about resilience as this thing [where] if someone is resilient, it means that maybe everything is easy for them, and they are strong. What I found resilience to mean is that it's an understanding that you can get through any difficult moments. There will constantly be difficult moments, but as long as you know in the difficult moments, you can get to the other side of them, that if you work hard, you reach out to people, and you talk about it, that will pass. And I think that's probably the biggest lesson I've learned. It's not about trying to hide or get away from the most difficult moment. It's about understanding that they will come in everyone's life, but that you can get through absolutely any of them.
DEADLINE: Do you have any trouble talking to people about your injuries?
HALL: I like talking about it, and I often raise the topic because it sometimes puts other people at ease. The physical injuries don't bother or worry or upset me at all, and I think talking about them is a positive thing. Again, I think that hiding from bad things, trying to run away from things that have happened, trying to ignore them or pretend they didn't happen is the worst thing you can do. It's one of the reasons I went back to Ukraine. I didn't want to hide from what happened. I wanted to just send a message that we will face up to anything that happens to us.
DEADLINE: Were you surprised that you had that resilience?
HALL: I always wondered in conflict, and I've seen people injured, what it would be like if it was me, how would I react? And I don't think you truly know that till it's happened. I think I would have always assumed that I would have behaved, that I would have been resolute about it, that I would have been strong, and in the end, I was. I honestly think, though, that when people are right up against a wall the way I was, that there is that resilience in everybody. Many people never have to discover that. They never go through something this bad, where they have to find that resilience inside them. But I think that it is inside everyone. It's about learning how to switch it on. It's about learning how to utilize it, and that's more difficult.
DEADLINE: We're coming up on the anniversary.
HALL: Of course I think about the day a lot, and there are two sides to it. On one side, as we've been saying, 'This is my life. This is what happened to me. I don't want to forget it.' I think it's important I remember it. It makes me feel so much more grateful about life, and in that sense, I want to talk about it, because I think it is important to face up to everything that happened and not be afraid of it. At the same time, it makes me think of Pierre and Sasha, and that's the first thing I think of on those days, because that's the day that they passed away. … So on the day itself, the first thing I will always do is talk about Pierre and Sasha.
DEADLINE: How do you cope with those memories of the trauma of that day?
HALL: I've spoken to people who have very severe PTSD and I have nothing near that, but I still have flashbacks. I still think that certain things scare me for brief moments. Whenever my doorbell rings at home, which happens all the time, there's always Amazon deliveries or something like that, the first thing I think is it someone coming in to raid the house. Every single time. And it's a brief millisecond, but I see that as who I am. Those are the experiences I've had in my life, and I accept them. I don't I don't let them frighten me. They happen. I go that's happened again, and I'm able to move on and say, I have been through something that is pretty traumatic. It will forever be part of me. It would be strange if I was running away from that and expected that never to happen. And so I guess again, it's about embracing what has happened to me. It's about realizing that it is part of my life.
DEADLINE: Do you think that this experience has changed the way you actually report and talk to people and interview people?
HALL: As a journalist, it's what we strive to do, is to have people open up and talk to us, to share their real emotions. And I used to think that I did it quite well. But there was one moment that I really realized that it was different. I was interviewing a girl named Maya. She had been taken by Hamas and held hostage in Gaza. She had similar injuries to me, and I was in Israel, and I spoke to her when she was released, and it was the first time in my entire career where I understood the suffering. I understood what she'd gone through. And I think that that, in some cases, will make me a better journalist. We would always go to war zones, and you would try to write about the pain someone was feeling or what they'd gone through, but it's almost impossible to really understand what that feels like unless you've gone through it yourself. And I think that has made me that sense a better journalist. I understand not just the pain of what someone goes through, but also the effect it has on the people around you, the fact how community can come together to help you or not. And so I just think that I have learned an awful lot about people's experience going to difficult moments, and I think that that allows me to not only to convey and write it better, but allows me to ask better questions. … So as far as being a journalist has gone, I would say it has made me a far more understanding journalist, certainly someone that understands the complexities of going through something traumatic.
Best of Deadline
'The White Lotus' Season 3 Release Schedule: When Do New Episodes Arrive On Max?
How Jon Gries' Return To 'The White Lotus' Could Shape Season 3
Everything We Know About 'Nobody Wants This' Season 2 So Far
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
13 minutes ago
- CNN
Trump's ‘chilling effect' is coming for museums, historians warn
Historians and researchers are expressing 'grave concern' about President Trump's push to purge museums of information he dislikes. 'Such political interference stands to impose a single and flawed view of American history onto the Smithsonian, placing at risk the integrity and accuracy of historical interpretation,' Sarah Weicksel, executive director of the American Historical Association, told CNN Wednesday. 'Such actions diminish our shared past and threaten to erode the public's trust in our shared institutions.' Weicksel said she has been fielding messages of concern not just from fellow historians, but also from people with no professional affiliations. 'Many of them are parents who are concerned about the Smithsonian's future,' she said. 'Others are frequent museum visitors.' On Tuesday, Trump called museums 'the last remaining segment of 'WOKE'' and said, 'We are not going to allow this to happen.' He was seemingly following up on last week's letter from the White House informing the Smithsonian Institution of a content 'review' that would aim to 'ensure alignment with the president's directive to celebrate American exceptionalism, remove divisive or partisan narratives, and restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions.' That announcement prompted the American Alliance of Museums, which represents 35,000 professionals in the sector, to speak out against 'growing threats of censorship against US museums.' 'This is not just a concern for select institutions,' like the Smithsonian, the group said. 'These pressures can create a chilling effect across the entire museum sector.' The American Association for State and Local History argued in a statement that the Trump administration's broader goal is to 'delegitimize the work of the history field and to rob the public of its ability to learn from the past.' 'Censoring and manipulating content to fit a predetermined, triumphalist narrative is the antithesis of historical practice and a disservice to us all,' the association said. The ultimate danger 'is that you get an incomplete picture of what happened in the country,' Annette Gordon-Reed, the Pulitzer-winning Harvard historian, said on CNN's 'Anderson Cooper 360.' 'If you can't learn from history, if you don't know what actually happened,' Gordon-Reed said. 'So, it's a way of keeping people ignorant of the past.' Trump's follow-up message on Truth Social said, 'We have the 'HOTTEST' Country in the World, and we want people to talk about it, including in our Museums.' The president said he had directed attorneys to 'go through the Museums' and 'start the exact same process that has been done with colleges and universities where tremendous progress has been made.' In some ways, his rhetoric is a continuation of a fight that liberals and conservatives have been having for decades about how much to emphasize America's sins versus its strengths. 'America's national museums have been captured by a niche ideological faction that believes that Western civilization, and, indeed, our nation, is irredeemable,' the editors of the conservative publication National Review wrote last week. 'If the White House gets this review right, it can help make the Smithsonian a cultural gem that all Americans can once again take pride in.' Weicksel and other leaders in the field argue that Americans already have a great deal of trust in museums and historical sites, and MAGA-style ideological meddling will diminish that trust. 'Across numerous surveys, a majority of Americans consistently say they want a full, honest, and unvarnished presentation of our nation's history,' the Organization of American Historians said in a statement last week. The organization predicted that the administration's review would 'undoubtedly be in service of authoritarian control over the national narrative, collective memory, and national collections.' The Smithsonian is not part of the executive branch, but it is federally funded, and it has a Board of Regents that includes the vice president. The institution began a review of its own in June, and last week it said that it would 'continue to collaborate constructively' with the White House. Dozens of groups representing historians came to the Smithsonian's defense back in March when a Trump executive order disparaged the institution, presaging this month's actions. 'Our goal is neither criticism nor celebration; it is to understand — to increase our knowledge of — the past in ways that can help Americans to shape the future,' the groups said in an open letter. 'The stories that have shaped our past include not only elements that make us proud but also aspects that make us acutely aware of tragedies in our nation's history,' the letter continued. 'No person, no nation, is perfect, and we should all — as individuals and as nations — learn from our imperfections.'
The Hill
15 minutes ago
- The Hill
Korea's democracy prospers and the Korea-US alliance is intact
We express our deep concern over the recent commentary by Gordon Chang published in The Hill, which presented inaccurate and misleading portrayal of the Republic of Korea's democracy, its president, and its alliance with the U.S. Korea's democracy has evolved through the resilience of its people, and it continues to thrive. At the same time, the Korea-U.S. alliance has developed into a future-oriented comprehensive strategic alliance. President Lee Jae Myung's upcoming visit to Washington D.C. and his summit with President Trump will mark yet another milestone in this enduring and indispensable alliance. The claim that Korea's June 3 presidential election was marred by irregularities, or that our democracy is in crisis, is entirely without foundation. Korea's democracy is internationally recognized as transparent and vibrant. The election was held freely and fairly, and no evidence of irregularities was found. The absence of any objection from Korea's independent judiciary or major political parties proves this fact.. Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and leaders across the world publicly congratulated Lee on his victory, reaffirming confidence in the integrity of Korea's democratic institutions. More than 100 countries likewise recognized the strength and resilience of Korea's democracy. Lee earned 49.4 percent of the vote, the second-highest share since the introduction of direct presidential election in 1987. Baseless attacks against a duly elected leader who secured the support of a majority of citizens are more than political criticism. They represent a disregard for the Korean people themselves, dismissing their democratic choice, the resilience they have shown in overcoming grave constitutional challenges, and the trust that sustains Korea's partnerships with the international community. Equally false is the assertion that former President Yoon Suk Yeol faced fabricated charges of insurrection. He was unanimously impeached by Korea's Constitutional Court after unlawfully declaring martial law. The allegations of insurrection against Yoon will be decided in accordance with fair judicial procedures, which constitutes another cornerstone of democracy. He has been treated in accordance with relevant laws and regulations, in the same manner as any other criminal suspect in Korea, and allegations that he was denied medical care are entirely unfounded. Claims that the current Korean government restricts freedom of expression on social media, investigates citizens, and raids religious facilities are patently false. Rather, the majority of Koreans have been deeply shocked by allegations in the media that certain religious figures provided bribes to Yoon and his wife. Our government will continue to respond firmly to such falsehoods and to the grave affronts and attacks they represent against the people of the Republic of Korea. The allegation that Lee is weakening our alliance with the U.S. is simply incorrect. Since his candidacy, Lee has consistently stated that the alliance is the cornerstone of Korea's diplomacy and security. Since taking office, he has repeatedly reaffirmed this commitment. The Ulchi Freedom Shield joint exercise is being conducted as planned. Adjustments to the schedule were made only after thorough consultation between the two governments to ensure the safety of troops under extreme heat and to maintain a balanced combined defense posture throughout the year. The investigation at Osan Air Base was limited to the area controlled by Korea and did not involve U.S. personnel or materials. The alliance is not only the bedrock of Korea's security but also a pillar of stability in the region. Also, the two countries are working closely together to respond to both threats and opportunities under a firm shared commitment. Under Lee's leadership, the Republic of Korea will continue to develop the alliance into a future-oriented comprehensive strategic alliance. Lee's visit to Washington D.C. and his summit with Trump will be a defining milestone in charting the course of future cooperation. To claim otherwise is to misrepresent reality and to disregard the bipartisan, multi-dimensional cooperation that has long underpinned the alliance. If the contributor of the above-mentioned commentary truly wishes to see the Korea-U.S. alliance flourish, then, ahead of this important first summit since Lee's inauguration, the responsible course is not to spread baseless accusations but to support this opportunity for the alliance to advance and prosper.
The Hill
15 minutes ago
- The Hill
Even Hillary Clinton admits Trump's foreign policy is working
Well, here's something you don't see every day. President Trump's foreign policy is getting high marks from an unusual grader — Hillary Clinton. Indeed, the former first lady, secretary of State and Democratic presidential candidate is typically no fan of The Donald; she's called him an illegitimate president, a threat to our democracy, a Russian stooge, and every other smear in the book. But even Clinton admits Trump is doing a pretty good job strengthening the U.S. relationship with European allies while getting more out of them in terms of NATO defense and their financial contributions. Watch Clinton speaking with liberal Fox News commentator Jessica Tarlov: 'I actually was encouraged by the events of the last several months,' said the former secretary of State. 'The NATO commitment by individual member states to increase their defense spending, it's something that prior administrations have certainly sought, and I think it's great that we're seeing these commitment they now have to follow through on.' Clinton continues: 'There is beginning to be a better understanding, both by the president and the people around him, as well as by the leaders of our European allies, that there can be common ground amongst us. The kind of dismissiveness of that we saw in the first Trump administration has been replaced by a much more obvious working relationship, to the good of European security, transatlantic security, and hopefully Ukrainian security.' That's high praise from a Democratic political figure who previously accused Trump of being totally beholden to Vladmir Putin and Russia, and of working to subvert the NATO alliance, and of being an isolationist — all notions that are explicitly disproven by Trump's diplomatic efforts to engage the West in the project of mediating peace between Russia and Ukraine. And, actually, it's not just Russia and Ukraine. Trump is working to achieve peace all over the globe — something that has attracted the notice of moderate liberal commentator Bill Maher. Let's watch: 'If you're the kind of person who can find some good in anybody, this would be the good in Donald Trump. He really does not like war. Thailand and Cambodia were firing at each other, Rwanda and the Congo — most people don't even know about these — India and Pakistan, Armenia and Azerbaijan, he got involved in all of them.' All we are saying is give peace a chance! That's what I believe in, it's what Donald Trump seems to believe in, and it's what America First really means. War should be a last resort. Diplomacy can accomplish more than sanctions or airstrikes or, god forbid, boots on the grounds. Letting countries trade with each other and benefit from each other's resources is a surer way to get our allies and our enemies to serve our interests than twisting their arms with force. We don't need to ask the American people to send their hard-earned tax dollars overseas in some naive hope that it will make foreign peoples friendlier to us, nor should we bomb them into somehow loving America. Neither of those strategies — liberal interventionism and neoconservatism — work for us. What does work is libertarianism, or you can call it military noninterventionism, or foreign policy populism, or just call it America First. It's what the people want, and it's what they're currently getting, and even Hillary Clinton has to admit, it's sort of working.
