Less than an hour after Donald Trump wrapped up his first press conference as president-elect—a combative, and at times bizarre affair, during which he berated a CNN reporter, dodged questions about his campaign’s alleged ties to Russia, and announced plans to retain control of his business empire in office—Dan Rather had already written close to 500 words about it on his Facebook page, sent it out on Twitter, and filed another story for his news company, News and Guts.

This has become de rigueur for the former CBS anchor, who turned 85 on Halloween and has recently become something of a social-media sensation for opining on the daily news grind in his signature, measured tone. The man who once took a gut punch on the floor of the Democratic National Convention—and suffered another blow in 2005, when he left CBS Evening News amid a disputed report about then President __George W. Bush’s military service—has been covering press conferences and presidents for half a century. But Trump, the current center of the news universe, and the issues facing journalists in the wake of his election, are something different for him: more challenging, and worth talking about. After he posted his thoughts on Facebook, Rather talked to The Hive about how he ended up on Trump's “not-so-great” list, who he thinks really controls the media, and what he thinks of the nightly news these days.

V.F. Hive: What did you make of Trump’s press conference on Wednesday?

Dan Rather: This was a very effective news conference for Donald Trump himself. His tone was more measured than it sometimes is, though near the end he got a little heated. His goal was to reassure people that he’s going to be steady and is capable of being presidential. There will be many, many people who react to this at least saying that this is a better Trump than we’re used to getting. On the other hand, he played by the Trump book. He’s very selective on his facts, tried to delegitimize these new allegations that the Russians may have something embarrassing on him. We’re reaching a point, very quickly, where he’s got to deliver. These broad generalities—he will build a wall, repealing Obamacare and replacing it with something else—he’s got to deliver on these things.

He wasn’t measured in his criticism of CNN, and especially of BuzzFeed. What did you think of their decisions to publish what they published, respectively?

I acknowledge that I’m a little old fashioned on this by some people’s measure. I’m a publish-and-be-damned guy. I don’t believe in being irresponsible. Others will have to judge how well or how poorly I’ve done it. I’ve tried to be a responsible journalist, but any way you cut it, this was news—news that he had been briefed on what intelligence believed the Russians had. If I had that story, would I have run it? Yes. I think CNN went to considerable lengths to say these were unverified allegations. But it’s news that an intelligence agency would tell an incoming president that this is what we think is worth considering that the Russians knew about you. I think CNN made the right decision having that story.

There’s an old saying that news is what people need to know that other people, particularly very powerful people, don’t want them to know. That’s news. So much else is just advertising and propaganda. If you distill the Trump response, a summation, it’s yes, I should be told about this but nobody else should know about it. He’s a powerful person who thinks certain things shouldn’t be shared with the public, and I disagree with that. Having said that, I’m very, very skeptical about the claims that they have on him.