How the American Media Has Failed Democracy w/ Andrea Grimes

[00:00:00] Welcome to Democracy Nerd. A recent interview with New York Times executive editor Joe Kahn has caused a little bit of controversy. Kahn told Ben Smith, formerly of Politico and Buzzfeed, that threats to democracy are not a priority for the Times.

[00:00:23] I'm quoting here, it's New York Times job to cover the full range of issues that people have, Kahn told Smith. Democracy is one of them, but it's not the top one.

[00:00:32] We ask, well what could be more important? Should it be one of many or one of the really important of several?

[00:00:39] The 1969 book The Selling of the President in 1968 explained the marketing campaign to sell Richard Nixon to the American voters. Another book for aspiring nerds is The Nightly News Nightmare about cable news' impact on press coverage of presidential elections.

[00:00:54] The 24 hour news cycle pushes horse race coverage, trading substance for sound bites. Marketing of candidates plus horse race coverage has been sort of the template of the past 40 years of presidential election coverage.

[00:01:07] But should it? When one of the candidates, arguably or maybe not arguably, poses a threat to democracy. Andrea Grimes, our guest today, doesn't think so.

[00:01:16] She's been critical of what she calls the media's wash and rinse take towards presidential elections.

[00:01:23] So to discuss the success and failure of the American media in this election, we welcome Andrea Grimes, independent journalist whose work has appeared in The New York Times, The Texas Observer, Day Magazine, and elsewhere.

[00:01:34] Andrea, thank you so much. We're honored to have you and welcome to Democracy Nerd.

[00:01:38] Thanks so much for having me, Jeff. Appreciate it.

[00:01:41] So what was your initial response with The New York Times executive editor in that comment that I mentioned, Jokan with Ben Smith, when some would argue that it was not as critical of focus? Did it jump out at you? Did you have a response to it?

[00:01:58] I mean, my response was duh, basically. I mean, it's very clear, I think based on The Times' ongoing coverage of Trump really since 2015, since he became a serious candidate and then the president, that The Times and the Beltway Press and mainstream political press has treated Trump as though he is a normal candidate, right?

[00:02:24] And not the threat to democracy that he is. So when Kahn said, you know, we can't treat this guy any differently, you know, we're not focused on this particular threat to democracy, you know, naming it as a threat to democracy would be a bridge too far.

[00:02:40] You know, I was surprised that he admitted it, but I was not surprised in the substance of what he said.

[00:02:50] What would The New York Times, if you were editor of The New York Times, and that doesn't mean just if you were you, right? And if I were me. But if you were editor of The New York Times, meaning you could, or a New York Times editor you could imagine, how would you advise them to approach it?

[00:03:09] How would that manifest itself? What would it read like? What would it sound like? What the headlines look like? And how would it be different than another presidential election?

[00:03:15] Sure. Um, I mean, I think, you know, basic language is really one of the top issues and has been an issue for years with regard to Trump and the Republican Party and the insurrection and all of this stuff, right?

[00:03:30] Just naming things for what they are, using words like lies, lying, and instead of mislead, falsifying, right? That sort of stuff.

[00:03:40] Naming fascist policies and using the term fascism to describe fascist beliefs and behaviors, right?

[00:03:50] Focusing on demonstrable threats to democracy, to enfranchisement, to voting rights, to civil rights.

[00:04:00] You know, making those really the front page headlines rather than the horse race or sort of the intrigue or the sort of splashy, you know, sort of backroom White House stuff and really focusing on impact on real people and real voters and Americans and citizens and undocumented folks, right?

[00:04:22] Um, you know, I think you'd see, I, you know, I think that there's just a lot more space to grow into actual reporting on reality rather than reporting by a pundit class for a pundit class.

[00:04:39] Where do you think they particularly get it wrong? And it might just be the inverse of the things that you just said, but what are particular examples if they're at the ready or even just sort of thematic mistakes that you think they make?

[00:04:54] Sure. Um, you know, I mean the, the Hillary Clinton emails is the classic example, right? Of pretending as though there was some equivalent between Hillary Clinton's data privacy and anything Donald Trump could do or has ever done, right?

[00:05:10] Um, you know, I think that we're seeing a lot of, um, Trump shows his hand all the time. I mean, he's incapable of stringing coherent words together, but what he does manage to get out is pretty terrifying, right?

[00:05:25] Um, and that I feel is too often treated as like business as usual, as normal, as though, you know, he might be speaking as coherently as anyone else, right?

[00:05:39] Rather than treating his incoherence as itself a fundamental problem, as a story, as a disqualifying characteristic of a president or a presidential candidate, right?

[00:05:51] Um, I think at this point that's one of the things that I would really focus on if I were, um, covering the White House, the race for the White House, that sort of thing is focusing on how fundamentally under, unqualified, unready the guy is, right?

[00:06:11] As, as a, as itself a threat to democracy on top of everything else, the fact that he's a grifter and a sexual abuser and all of those sorts of things, right?

[00:06:20] Um, the, the increased normalization as though there is always a balance between something Trump is doing and something Biden is doing, right? Or something the Republicans are doing and something the Democrats are doing.

[00:06:34] It's just not the case. We're not dealing with two equally baddie both sides here. We're dealing with fascists and I don't know, something else.

[00:06:44] We've got it. We've got a fundamental media problem. And even I fall into the trap because we live our lives and we're prisoners of every moment.

[00:06:54] And the thing that used to drive me nuts is I would listen to, it's a different problem to be clear, overlapping problem, I would say.

[00:07:01] Uh, but it's truly a different institution.

[00:07:04] And so I stick to the New York Times or at least tag the New York Times again.

[00:07:09] WMIC just had a, uh, just had a feature raising the question is, is New York Times a tech company now?

[00:07:17] And if you, and if you view New York Times as a capitalist institution, that's its primary purpose is to, uh, is to give value to its owners.

[00:07:27] And if it's surviving and thriving in a new media age because it's burging strategies with tech companies kind of becoming one.

[00:07:36] I mean, wire cutter, which I use very often to pick what kind of household appliance I'm going to get, right?

[00:07:43] I, by the way, consumer reports usually gives better reviews.

[00:07:46] But when I use wire cutter and that's, I mean, that's a, that's an online company that they bought.

[00:07:53] And now it's part of New York Times. New York Times gave it its brand, but then they're using an algorithm to and some reviews to market to me.

[00:07:59] And then they're getting revenue from that. It's a different thing than reporting the news.

[00:08:04] And then it's not necessarily too dissimilar from the less Moon vest line, right?

[00:08:11] Donald Trump is bad for the country, but he's, you know, might be bad for the country, but he's good for CBS.

[00:08:16] Uh, my words again, he's good copy.

[00:08:20] We've got a fundamental media problem and I, and I, I want to just ask you questions, but I, I've got to make sure I don't fall in the same trap.

[00:08:27] Yeah, this is different.

[00:08:29] We've got a fundamental media problem. And when we, when we see the problem with, well, let me turn to a question because it's supposed to be an interview.

[00:08:35] What are examples? I wasn't saying my, what are examples you see of where the media problem we have is being reflected by viewpoints that we're then seeing in the polls.

[00:08:47] The one that was coming to my mind so I don't just hide the ball is where people are saying we're in a recession, saying that we've had record unemployment.

[00:08:54] We've had record low, at least a record low streak of low unemployment where people think that inflation is getting worse when it's just kind of not great.

[00:09:03] Uh, when people think that we have higher joblessness, when joblessness is improved and obviously that's significant part of that is because what media they're watching are not watching.

[00:09:13] And we know that a significant majority of YouTube watchers, the people who say they get their news from YouTube say they're going to vote for Donald Trump.

[00:09:20] Those who watch other media say they're not going to vote for Donald Trump.

[00:09:25] What sticks out at you as manifestations is proof positive the media is getting it wrong.

[00:09:30] Um, I mean, really, I don't know how much time you have for a rant about broadcast news, but I could go basically for six hours straight on it.

[00:09:39] But, um, you know, I, I, I almost never consume traditional broadcast news even cable broadcast news unless I'm in a waiting room right at the airport that sort of thing or when I'm spending this

[00:09:53] I would say.

[00:09:54] In a painful circumstance.

[00:09:55] Indeed, or in less painful but sometimes painful circumstances when I'm at home with my family who live in suburban North Texas, my parents who are Republicans and very avid television news watchers.

[00:10:10] And, and that includes just like their local, you know, 10pm news but also there's sort of the specter of Tucker looms in the background of my dad's, you know, study all the time right.

[00:10:22] And the TV, the world of the TV news I truly I feel like a tinfoil hat person saying this like the world of the TV news boggles me because I read, you know, a lot of news I read the Times in the post in the LA Times and I read my local, you know, Austin American statesman here and I read a lot of progressive news you know it's my job to consume and share news as a commentator as a pundit.

[00:10:51] And the world that is reflected in my parents television when I am there watching with them and the world, I see with my own eyes in front of me every day are two entirely different places they are different universes right.

[00:11:06] On, you know on the TV news it's prime it's inflation it's Biden is too old it's Biden has lost his mind it's you know it's just it's like the the the the.

[00:11:18] It's not just like a poor distillation of reality it's a reality I don't recognize right because in my reality a lot of other things are happening right there are abortion bans and a former president on trial, and you know a genocide going on in Gaza right and you know those the overlap between

[00:11:40] the world I feel I live in and the world I see on the television news is is so thin, and I don't it truly like I don't I don't know how to reconcile those two universes.

[00:11:59] It shocks and surprise surprises and dismay is me that more broadcast journalists and media makers don't see a disconnect and recognize the disconnect or if they do don't seek to correct for it.

[00:12:16] I truly like I don't. Why don't you think, why don't think you see why do you think that they don't see.

[00:12:24] I mean some some of it I would imagine depends on the form itself right I mean especially if you're talking about producing a nightly news broadcast at 10pm every night and you're a you know a reporter out on the whatever beat right you're just focused on getting your

[00:12:42] you know stand up in and getting your clips done and getting your B roll and turning that in I think you get caught in this turn where you don't necessarily see the whole picture right so I don't particularly put the blame on individual news reporters or

[00:12:57] creators but I think when you start moving up the chain to newsroom producers and editors.

[00:13:02] I think that's also where you see complacency, I think, where you see profit motivation over other motivations that to me feel truer for journalism right.

[00:13:17] And, you know, I don't.

[00:13:20] I don't genuinely think like the question that sort of underlies what you're asking here is, was it ever not thus has journalism ever been a pure honest pursuit of truth and righteousness, arguably not journalism has been motivated by profit for most of the

[00:13:42] institutions life as we know it right.

[00:13:45] You know when we think of sort of like golden ages of journalism or even new journalism in the 50s 60s 70s right.

[00:13:53] Um, you know, even then I, you know, we were journalism was even more dominated by white guys, right so the perspectives were highly limited there was still a lot of, you know, biased coverage and both sides right.

[00:14:07] Right. Um, it's just that as I think America applauds ever closer to collapse.

[00:14:16] It becomes harder and harder to excuse and reconcile, you know what we're seeing on the television with what we experienced in our real lives, which is I think to get back to your question on, you know how could we believe that inflation is so terrible and unemployment

[00:14:34] is so bad when demonstrably it's not right. Um, I think because there is actually like a vibes disconnect in the way people feel about their daily lives and the like low level terror threat of the country feeling fundamentally unstable, right, because

[00:14:55] there is this Republican presidential candidate who threatens democracy as we know it.

[00:15:01] Um, and, you know, I think it, I think people don't really know how to grapple with the fact that like inflation could be fine and jobs could be pretty good.

[00:15:13] While this monster is looming on the horizon to write, and I think all of that is very poorly explained and packaged in general by most newsmakers.

[00:15:23] You really have to cobble together your news these days right which I think is a lost skill if we ever had it.

[00:15:30] Um, so yeah, I sorry that was very long with it.

[00:15:36] But now I appreciate it also gave me a chance to consider a little bit.

[00:15:41] And a commercial model of journalism.

[00:15:45] Be successful.

[00:15:47] If it takes as its primary mission and approach to defend or even improve democracy and hold capital to account can in fact, a commercial model be successful.

[00:16:08] If it's mission or primary approach is to defend or even improve democracy and hold capital to account.

[00:16:15] I think it depends on your metric for success.

[00:16:20] Um, I can be financially viable.

[00:16:23] And I'll take the bait on that quickly financially viable and have lots of and become important like have the people who run it not get fired.

[00:16:33] Right like have the people who run it not get fired and then and not have everybody go over to somebody who does get advertisers.

[00:16:40] Right, right.

[00:16:41] Who, who, because they're not holding that them to account and who is able to navigate sort of the tricky politics and advertisers waters where they're saying well we don't want to be too much of this or too much of that.

[00:16:54] Right. And, and where they are saying oh if you're having a threat to democracy that's pretty well funded and pretty well viewed broadly viewed can a commercial model be successful mainstream.

[00:17:14] Can it be significant can it be a plurality of viewers can it be Edward R Murrow but not necessarily a white guy. If it is, if it's approach or mission is defender approved democracy and hold capital to account.

[00:17:28] I think yes.

[00:17:31] Because I think we have evidence that the opposite is not possible.

[00:17:37] I'm sure you've seen the news today that the Washington Post has lost something like $77 million in the last year or so.

[00:17:46] Right, and the playoffs are impending right and the post like other mainstream legacy publications has been listing ever more rightward in recent years at least in terms of pandering to right wing thinking and bigotry in terms of editorial perspectives

[00:18:05] and I think to some degree in their more traditional coverage. Overall, I think that there is a bent towards access journalism and both sides ism.

[00:18:17] And I, you know, I think that you don't lose $77 million doing your best work. Right, I think that there's something behind readers viewers consumers users whatever you want to call folks right.

[00:18:35] Not finding that sort of coverage to be what they would like to pick up and see in the newspaper, right.

[00:18:44] Okay, so watch the book keep the good go ahead and not try to get you know. No, go ahead.

[00:18:48] So, the Washington Post, not being successful might be a data point that you could be successful. Otherwise, it might be someone else might say well no there's other reasons for it otherwise, other might say well heck, they've got democracy in the damn title.

[00:19:06] They got in their subject maybe maybe the problem is, maybe the problem Washington Post is they've tried to defend democracy and and that and they've done that at the expense of commerce, and they haven't become a tech company.

[00:19:19] And so they're going to fail. And, and, and this is not a rhetorical question right I'm really interested in this and I have a hypothesis that I am not confident in, because one possibility is that you can write could work well let me not transfer question yet.

[00:19:35] Other examples, examples of who's really doing it right.

[00:19:39] And showing real growth any models, and as a commercial model that is that is defending, defending democracy and holding capital to account.

[00:19:52] Truly commercial.

[00:19:56] I mean so we can't so not NPR ProPublica or the 19th or like are you are you are you an absolute zero on on any non.

[00:20:06] So this question is, because the so that I don't bury you know sort of the, the contraposite, or is it that we need to more focus on alternative models on additional models are not just commercial models that can defend or improve democracy

[00:20:23] and hold capital account they can be real, that's my definition of real journalism. Right, it's not only it's not only that will use capital to attack democracy or use capital to attack elected officials do are the only kind of journalism they know how to do is foyer requests

[00:20:37] and the only power they hold to account is elected power or unelected bureaucratic power that's not all of what all I mean.

[00:20:45] But if they are.

[00:20:47] So that really is the thing, is it no no the end and like what we've got to have is more NPR we've got to have is more community radio we've got to have is more purpose driven media that has ownership models that are be corpse or or at the most commercial or that are, or their co ops, or that are

[00:21:07] or that are, or nonprofits right that are also funded by, you know dead rich people money, as well as donations not just subscriptions.

[00:21:16] That this is an, and I have to say, I

[00:21:21] my own thought is all only commercial me that I do think we have a model problem, I think, I think if we're relying on commercial organizations to save the marginal capital account.

[00:21:33] I'm wanting very much to find examples that are really working but I'm you got a better you got a broader perspective than I do. Oh well I mean I you really I mean I think truly the only way that that sort of thing might work is if you have a truly benevolent billionaire backer, you know,

[00:21:51] somebody who is not focused specifically on growth models year over year right somebody who's happy being an owner of something that is merely sustainable rather than growing wildly right somebody who's happy with something that does one thing news and not

[00:22:11] word games and product reviews, and everything else right.

[00:22:16] You know, if somebody was truly interested in just producing a commercial product that was sustainable at a given level year over year that seems possible to me on a commercial model.

[00:22:30] producing a commercial product that was sustainable at a given level year over year, that seems

[00:22:37] possible to me on a commercial model.

[00:22:41] But I think that we're in such an era where we're focused on blockbuster growth, venture

[00:22:48] capital, private equity, right?

[00:22:50] All of those things are never are so the mall is gaping and endless, right?

[00:22:56] There is no way for those sorts of financial models to underpin journalism in a long-term

[00:23:04] sustainable way that does truly hold power to account and speak truth to power.

[00:23:09] I mean, that's...

[00:23:10] So Jeff Bezos is a billionaire that owns Washington Post.

[00:23:13] Do you disqualify him as the benevolent billionaire that you seek?

[00:23:16] Absolutely.

[00:23:17] I disqualify anything related to connecting the word benevolent and Bezos in the same

[00:23:22] sentence.

[00:23:26] So I do think models are an issue.

[00:23:28] And what I just heard you say is people should be...

[00:23:31] You didn't say this, but that's what I heard you say anyway, is that people should be

[00:23:34] getting where they can their news from purpose-driven sources, sources that aren't dominated

[00:23:39] primarily by either because they're not private equity owned or they're not hoping

[00:23:44] to be private equity owned soon and that people should be attending to the ownership

[00:23:49] model as well as to what they're clicking upon.

[00:23:55] I want to get something else, sort of a hard pivot.

[00:23:57] Forgive the hard pivot.

[00:23:58] You critique the wash, rinse, repeat of election punditry because repeat is in the word.

[00:24:05] It gives me the excuse to repeat it.

[00:24:07] Wash, rinse, repeat.

[00:24:09] What do you mean?

[00:24:10] What's wash, rinse, repeat journalism?

[00:24:12] I mean, laundering the same language, questions, queries over and over again every

[00:24:20] two years through the sort of inevitable horse race cycle of punditry.

[00:24:28] Right?

[00:24:29] The who is going to win and what do they need to do to win?

[00:24:33] And those are interesting questions that can be valuable.

[00:24:38] However, you'd spend enough time watching this same conversation take place over in

[00:24:45] my case like 20 years.

[00:24:46] Right?

[00:24:48] You start to notice patterns that start feeling less like patterns and more like automatic

[00:24:56] programming.

[00:24:57] Right?

[00:24:58] You know, it's you know, the question of how to appeal to the centrist white moderate

[00:25:07] has been raised like clockwork every two years since I started covering politics in

[00:25:13] 2005.

[00:25:14] Right.

[00:25:16] And I feel sure that it wasn't a new idea then.

[00:25:19] Right.

[00:25:20] And you know, it's frustrating and boring and kind of rote.

[00:25:26] But it's dangerous when we're looking at an election like the one we're facing in

[00:25:33] November.

[00:25:34] Right.

[00:25:35] Potentially. I mean, like hyperbolically, but potentially the last election we might

[00:25:42] have in like a really meaningful, you know, sort of free and fair way.

[00:25:47] Right.

[00:25:49] So the wash, rinse, repeat of punditry, of political machinating, of horse racing,

[00:25:58] it's exhausting. I'm tired of it.

[00:26:00] I wish that there were something else to listen to every two years because it is

[00:26:06] exhausting.

[00:26:08] What would a better view?

[00:26:10] What a better sounding.

[00:26:11] What a better perspective.

[00:26:13] What a better practice look like?

[00:26:15] Yeah.

[00:26:16] I mean, I would just truly love to hear more from, for and about folks who are

[00:26:24] impacted by policy and politics.

[00:26:27] Right. I want to hear less about how does Joe Biden game out the next three

[00:26:34] months by appealing to X, Y, Z voters in light of X, Y, Z statements from

[00:26:40] Trump. Right.

[00:26:40] I'm like, I don't that doesn't tell me anything about what my world might look

[00:26:46] like if either one of them are elected.

[00:26:49] Right. But I would love to see more coverage that really looks at policy

[00:26:55] impact, that looks at the real lives of people that, you know, that I would

[00:27:01] love to see coverage that is by from and for people who are most affected

[00:27:06] by politics and policy and the sort of left and right swing.

[00:27:11] Right. You know, unfortunately, journalism remains a pretty white middle

[00:27:16] class or upper middle class institution in terms of who is able to break into

[00:27:22] the industry and maintain a career in the industry over time.

[00:27:26] Right. In a lot of ways, journalism is hostile deliberately so to people

[00:27:33] of color, to low income folks, to undocumented folks.

[00:27:36] Right. It's not an industry that welcomes people who have true, like

[00:27:41] real life lived experience in terms of being affected directly by some of

[00:27:47] these core key policies.

[00:27:50] And I would simply just love to see more of that and less of like Nate

[00:27:56] Silver writing his little numbers around on his little board.

[00:28:00] So I hear you saying more real problems, more real impacts.

[00:28:06] What are real possible solutions?

[00:28:07] I mean, those impacts of by and for people who are impacted and most

[00:28:14] impacted by them.

[00:28:15] What are let's dig into that.

[00:28:17] What are some examples?

[00:28:18] What are some what are some areas sort of policy areas and or impact

[00:28:23] areas and human areas to write?

[00:28:27] I mean, like also like the for whom and of whom and by whom as well.

[00:28:33] But what are some of the things that you think media is really missing or just

[00:28:37] getting way wrong or just not beating the drum well enough or loudly enough?

[00:28:44] I think an interesting example of this is the ongoing newsification of

[00:28:54] what's happening along the Texas Mexico border, particularly in Eagle Pass,

[00:29:00] Texas and environs.

[00:29:03] We we know that Greg Abbott and Texas politicians have implemented some

[00:29:10] horrible deadly policies along the border razor wire in the river.

[00:29:14] Right. Putting more and more cops around the border.

[00:29:17] Right. You know, there were those the caravans of Trump this that were

[00:29:23] traveling to the border last year.

[00:29:26] Right. Foaming at the mouth for a civil war to redox.

[00:29:31] Right. In all of that coverage, I think was truly genuinely lost.

[00:29:40] A fundamental question, which is what does it actually look like there?

[00:29:44] What is life like along the Texas Mexico border?

[00:29:47] What is life like for the folks who are crossing the border who cross the

[00:29:50] border every day going back and forth?

[00:29:52] Right. It's the the newsification of it all allowed, I think, a general

[00:30:00] understanding created a general understanding, a general delusion that

[00:30:07] the border is a dangerous place, that it's a site of conflict, that

[00:30:12] cities along the border are overrun with, you know, boogie persons

[00:30:19] right from from the south.

[00:30:21] Right. Look, I think Eagle Pass is a perfectly normal city.

[00:30:26] Laredo is a perfectly normal city.

[00:30:28] McAllen's a perfectly normal city.

[00:30:30] Brownsville is a totally normal place.

[00:30:32] Right. Gajillions of Texans and snowbirds go to Nuevo Progreso

[00:30:38] in Mexico every year to get dental care because it's so much cheaper

[00:30:41] there. Right. So it is mind blowing to me that the coverage of

[00:30:47] immigration in this country is takes as its launch point these

[00:30:54] terroristic fear tactics that are rooted in, again, like fascist

[00:31:01] policing. Right. And in overpolicing and in the creation of

[00:31:06] these specters of criminals at the border when it's just simply

[00:31:10] not the case.

[00:31:11] Like I'm not saying there's no problem with immigration policy

[00:31:14] in this country. Right. But the whole conversation has been so

[00:31:19] dominated by like, do we need more cops there?

[00:31:22] What about the razor wire in the river?

[00:31:24] Right. Whereas, you know, I think there's so much more room

[00:31:27] for stories about who lives there and why, who crosses the

[00:31:31] border and why, how are these policies affecting them?

[00:31:35] And you do see coverage of that sort of thing in, you

[00:31:37] know, in border newspapers, you see it in outlets like the

[00:31:41] Texas Observer. You know, you see it in progressive and left wing

[00:31:46] outlets. Prison Reports is a great place for stories like that.

[00:31:49] Right. But it feels like the mainstream and legacy papers,

[00:31:54] including, you know, my local paper here, The Statesman,

[00:31:56] The Morning News, The Chronicle take as their basis

[00:32:02] the political noise first and then might supplement with a

[00:32:10] human interest, a human impact. Right.

[00:32:13] I want to see that flipped. I want to see the human impact first.

[00:32:16] I want to see the human interest first and then maybe let's talk

[00:32:19] about what it means for politics.

[00:32:23] Who else are you liking out there?

[00:32:25] Who else do you think that you want to lift up that people

[00:32:27] should be following, should be listening to, should be reading,

[00:32:29] should be sharing?

[00:32:31] Oh, gosh.

[00:32:32] I mean, you I will forever be a cheerleader for public radio

[00:32:37] and cooperative radio.

[00:32:39] And we have, you know, I think our public radio network here in

[00:32:43] Texas is great. The Texas Standard is very good on a lot of issues.

[00:32:47] Again, the Texas Observer love, you know, and great in Texas.

[00:32:54] It's all figured out.

[00:32:56] There is a lot of stories to tell here.

[00:32:58] You know, but you've got other stuff like Bolts magazine

[00:33:02] and Press On South, which is a great press collective

[00:33:06] that tells stories from the south.

[00:33:07] Scalawag, right?

[00:33:09] You know, there are these places that tell these really interesting stories,

[00:33:13] but they are so underfunded and underappreciated.

[00:33:18] And I think there's a real dichotomy in the news world

[00:33:26] increasingly or maybe, I don't know, increasingly.

[00:33:29] I don't suppose I can back that up with data, but

[00:33:32] the delineation between an activist journalist

[00:33:35] and a movement journalist and a mainstream and legacy journalist.

[00:33:39] Right. I those two divergent paths.

[00:33:43] The fact that those paths are diversion is very troubling to me.

[00:33:46] Right. I don't I don't I think Maggie Haberman is a movement

[00:33:50] journalism for the movement journalist for the mainstream.

[00:33:55] Right. Just as, you know, Tina Vasquez is a movement

[00:33:59] journalism on immigration. Right.

[00:34:02] And I think we lie to ourselves when we pretend that,

[00:34:08] you know, the Habermans of the world's,

[00:34:11] the Glenn Threshers of the world, right, are somehow objective,

[00:34:15] biased, better informed, have better perspectives, right.

[00:34:20] Then, you know, then folks who do movement and activist journalism work.

[00:34:25] All journalism is activism.

[00:34:27] It just depends on who you're rooting for, really.

[00:34:32] Yeah. And there's still so many people.

[00:34:34] I think we forget.

[00:34:37] I think we think that post Watergate journalism

[00:34:42] is the or even immediately pre Watergate journalism

[00:34:46] is the norm or when things started.

[00:34:50] But I don't have to go far to say that

[00:34:52] a story of Democrat Harold and so many newspapers with Democrat in the name.

[00:34:58] They said, no, the purpose of us sharing information is to try to blank.

[00:35:04] It is not merely an act of commerce.

[00:35:06] It is to blank.

[00:35:08] And it turns out that readers respond to things that are about blank.

[00:35:13] Not only the back of our cereal box, because we needed something to read

[00:35:17] as a general, but also as a political leader.

[00:35:20] Because we needed something to read as a Gen X kid, because we didn't have phones.

[00:35:25] But something that has a purpose, something has a reason.

[00:35:29] And we can disguise that reason or we can say that reason.

[00:35:33] And it's journalism itself.

[00:35:35] OK, to what purpose?

[00:35:37] I would like to say to what purpose?

[00:35:39] OK, purpose to knowing stuff.

[00:35:41] OK, knowing stuff for what purpose?

[00:35:44] And if and if there is, if that's it, I still have questions.

[00:35:48] Yeah, and because if you pretend that there isn't just that,

[00:35:52] if there isn't rather another layer, then your answer is commerce.

[00:35:56] It really is just for commerce.

[00:35:57] Then then OK, I'm on team private equity.

[00:36:01] That's the answer. Right.

[00:36:02] Not not because that's what it is.

[00:36:05] If the purpose is commerce, the purpose is commerce. Right.

[00:36:08] If somebody says it's for democracy, then I understand it.

[00:36:11] And to be clear for me as a consumer,

[00:36:13] if something is news just for commerce, then it's like they need.

[00:36:17] I need to be somebody addicted to.

[00:36:19] Then it's got to be for sports and like TV shows that I really like.

[00:36:23] Right. Or like rating products that I might buy.

[00:36:25] Like, they'll get me for that kind of crap.

[00:36:27] But if I'm going to.

[00:36:29] Move beyond the go beyond that, then I'm going to care.

[00:36:32] I want it to be about democracy.

[00:36:33] I want that newspaper that has as its purpose, depending on actually,

[00:36:38] I think that's what journalism is for. That's what I think.

[00:36:41] And that's why I ask. Go ahead.

[00:36:42] Well, that's what journalism has truly always been for.

[00:36:45] Well, I maybe not entirely.

[00:36:48] I mean, I mean, if your listeners are interested,

[00:36:52] the best book on this is called The View from Somewhere by Lewis Raven Wallace.

[00:36:56] It's a brilliant history of journalism that gets into

[00:37:01] I think the subtitle is something like

[00:37:05] the myth of objectivity or something. Right.

[00:37:08] Anyway, their book is is fantastic.

[00:37:10] It's a comprehensive history that I think in particular,

[00:37:14] if I'm recalling correctly, really digs into the roots of journalism

[00:37:18] as a union project and a labor rights project.

[00:37:23] A lot of original newspapers and publications and magazines

[00:37:27] were rooted in labor organizing and that sort of thing. Right.

[00:37:30] So just fundamentally sort of a leftist project,

[00:37:34] but also like a leftist political goal oriented project. Right.

[00:37:39] Like these aren't publications that were sort of like generally for democracy.

[00:37:44] Right. They had a purpose, right, which was to organize and disseminate

[00:37:48] news to a particular population of people who had a shared goal. Right.

[00:37:53] So even more grandly, more specific, even would be like today,

[00:37:56] you'd also have a labor wonder as a group environmentalists got together.

[00:38:00] We're going to create a news organization that is going to cover lots of stories.

[00:38:04] But our goal is to save the planet and save climate. Right.

[00:38:07] Or feminist organizations as our goal is to is to facilitate

[00:38:12] the rise of the matriarchy or et cetera, et cetera.

[00:38:15] Precisely right.

[00:38:17] And so, you know, it really wasn't until this period you are talking about,

[00:38:21] you know, the 60s, late 50s, 60s, 70s, where, you know,

[00:38:25] we sort of have this imagined golden age of objective journalism,

[00:38:31] speaking truth to power.

[00:38:35] You know, that was that was a manufactured idea that had a pretty limited shelf life

[00:38:40] and changed significantly with the rise of cable news. Right.

[00:38:44] So, you know, once you get into the cable news era,

[00:38:48] a tremendous shift happens

[00:38:52] across all industries, not just broadcast. Right.

[00:38:55] So, you know, the the idea that,

[00:38:59] um, you know, that that, you know, there is some great,

[00:39:05] pure objective way of doing journalism is a historical.

[00:39:10] And to me, that's very freeing.

[00:39:14] I love the idea that objectivity is BS. Right.

[00:39:18] I like that to me.

[00:39:20] I'm just like, oh, good.

[00:39:21] Screw that. We don't even have to mess with it anymore. Right.

[00:39:25] And that's when I think you get into really interesting stories

[00:39:29] and reporting and meaty stuff that really tells stories about people's real lives.

[00:39:35] Right. And, you know, I think that that's rewire news is a great example of this.

[00:39:40] You know, covers reproductive health policy across the country

[00:39:44] and internationally and has for many years.

[00:39:48] You know, there's and you know, they are biased in favor of facts

[00:39:53] to the extent that like science and medicine is a true and measurable thing.

[00:39:57] Right. They don't have to both sides news about abortions.

[00:40:01] It doesn't make them any less accurate.

[00:40:03] It makes them more accurate. Right.

[00:40:06] I think that stuff is really exciting.

[00:40:08] And I think the constraint of the myth of objectivity

[00:40:13] does the whole industry a disservice.

[00:40:17] All right. So what should we do?

[00:40:20] I have at least three options.

[00:40:22] OK. And then additional options could be combo options.

[00:40:27] And there could be options that have not occurred to me.

[00:40:31] I'm sure their options have not occurred to me.

[00:40:33] But here are three. One, we can tell big media to be different.

[00:40:38] We can criticize the New York Times or urge that they do better trainings

[00:40:44] or try to train them from the side, which is a nice way of putting

[00:40:49] social media criticism of them. That's one.

[00:40:53] Option two, telling viewers and listeners to pay attention to different stuff,

[00:40:57] including stuff with different ownership models,

[00:41:01] including stuff that is goal oriented, it is mission driven,

[00:41:03] that is purpose pursuing.

[00:41:07] Option three, working to make alternative news better.

[00:41:13] Telling, hey, Fox News didn't win.

[00:41:16] I mean, make an argument here.

[00:41:18] Fox News didn't win merely because more Americans wanted it.

[00:41:21] Fox News won for a couple of reasons.

[00:41:24] One, because they were able to appeal to a more monotheistic,

[00:41:27] monochromatic, monopolitical market.

[00:41:32] It was harder for the coalition to do so.

[00:41:34] Hey, we're going to we're going to aim at not just urban

[00:41:38] white people over the age of blank, right?

[00:41:41] That are almost entirely Christian.

[00:41:43] Like that's a definable market.

[00:41:45] And if you're trying to say that shouldn't just rule the country,

[00:41:48] then you have a less definable market.

[00:41:51] But their other advantage was they paid a lot of attention

[00:41:55] to what their people look like, what they sounded like,

[00:41:57] what the what the visuals look like.

[00:41:59] They did put a whole lot of like they took production years

[00:42:02] ahead of where Walter Cronkite was.

[00:42:05] Everybody else was behind on sort of just visual just and they would do

[00:42:08] stuff not hung up by things like I don't know.

[00:42:12] Some people might call it basic morality.

[00:42:13] Other people call it political political correctness.

[00:42:16] But they worked to make it look like something

[00:42:18] that their audience would want to watch.

[00:42:20] So three things and you could you could pick one that you care most about.

[00:42:25] You could say any of them that you think are dumb and not really worth doing.

[00:42:28] Or you could put percent, you know, utils on any of them.

[00:42:31] I think it's 40 shares of that 20 shares of that and, you know,

[00:42:34] 40 shares the other one.

[00:42:35] Or you could say, Jeff, none of these are the most important.

[00:42:38] Instead, people just need to buy my book.

[00:42:41] Well, I don't have a book yet.

[00:42:43] So I'd worry about that one.

[00:42:44] I'd worry about that one.

[00:42:46] So I really criticism of mainstream and legacy.

[00:42:50] They don't care.

[00:42:52] That is a non viable model.

[00:42:54] I you know, we I think we saw this most notably or starkly.

[00:43:00] Was it last year or the year before when a number of journalists

[00:43:05] sign an open letter against the New York Times is transphobic bias

[00:43:09] in their coverage.

[00:43:10] And I was one of the journalists who signed that letter.

[00:43:13] I mean, there were hundreds and hundreds of us, including people

[00:43:16] active in the newsroom today.

[00:43:18] And the Times's response was to sanction current employees

[00:43:22] and act like the rest of us were insane.

[00:43:25] You know, and that is that's about as by sanction.

[00:43:29] You mean punish is distinct from sanction, meaning give permission to.

[00:43:32] Yes, I do. Yes.

[00:43:35] Um, so, you know, you know, that's about as legitimate

[00:43:39] a criticism as an organized group of journalism

[00:43:45] folks could do, and the Times simply did not care.

[00:43:48] In fact, I think it might have pushed the Times even further to,

[00:43:55] you know, sort of go those are our people.

[00:43:57] They're clearly critical. They're clearly our enemies.

[00:43:59] We're going to we're going to play to our friends. Right.

[00:44:03] So, you know, I and I think that's sort of a similar thing happening

[00:44:08] with NPR recently. Right.

[00:44:12] The white guy with the grievance, I can't even remember his name,

[00:44:16] you know, who claimed that he quit because NPR was too liberal.

[00:44:21] Right. You know, now what we're seeing is NPR enacting

[00:44:26] a massive, like editorial overhaul of of their entire process

[00:44:33] that is not meant to create, you know,

[00:44:39] that is meant that will probably have the impact of right.

[00:44:43] Farther right biased coverage.

[00:44:46] Wait, hold on, though. You just said something really important.

[00:44:48] You said they do care.

[00:44:50] They just don't seem to care about lefty stuff.

[00:44:52] Oh, well, yes. Sorry. Yeah. To be clear. Yes.

[00:44:55] If we're talking about criticizing in the service of moving

[00:45:01] even to the center, let alone left, it's a nonstarter.

[00:45:06] If we're talking about criticism, moving them to the right 100 percent,

[00:45:10] like if that's what you want, you got it. Right.

[00:45:15] So right. So I think criticism as a leftward push is a nonstarter

[00:45:20] with mainstream and legacy.

[00:45:22] Um, it is hard.

[00:45:24] But maybe but maybe it's people should not be discouraged from doing it

[00:45:29] because if there is only one, if they're if they're only hearing it from,

[00:45:34] I don't know, Jordan Peterson, then that'll make their

[00:45:39] the trench warfare will be only one direction.

[00:45:43] Precisely. And you know, and vocal criticism and has all manner

[00:45:49] of benefits beyond achieving one specific stated goal of

[00:45:54] move X coverage to the left. Right.

[00:45:57] There are all kinds of advantage advantages to be seen

[00:46:01] offering criticisms and alternative views. Right.

[00:46:05] So wholly worthwhile, of course.

[00:46:09] To your second point, getting folks to read, watch, consume something different.

[00:46:14] I mean, interesting, but difficult.

[00:46:21] Because our attention is so scattered these days.

[00:46:24] Right. I think that there's a there's such a push towards in like

[00:46:31] niche, niche, niche, independent journalism.

[00:46:34] We're seeing this with the rise of newsletters and substack

[00:46:37] and that sort of thing of like sort of of journalists like me. Right.

[00:46:41] Basically, I'm running a one woman publication for people

[00:46:44] who like the Andrea Grimes daily. Right.

[00:46:48] And I can hope and try to cultivate,

[00:46:51] you know, a bigger audience all the time.

[00:46:54] But it's really sort of a finite resource there on that.

[00:46:58] You are not you do not contain multitudes.

[00:47:01] I contain multitudes, but but you are not personally multitudes,

[00:47:05] not personally multitudinous.

[00:47:08] You know, and you know, it's

[00:47:11] figuring out what people actually want and what they will tolerate

[00:47:14] and what they will go for, and especially what they would pay for

[00:47:17] is obviously one of the biggest questions in journalism today.

[00:47:21] Um, you know, I think that

[00:47:25] once you get comfortable with where you get your news,

[00:47:29] it's kind of hard to move away from that.

[00:47:32] And I speak, you know, sort of from personal experience. Right. I

[00:47:37] I have my five, six, seven publications,

[00:47:41] magazines, shows that I really like,

[00:47:43] TikTok creators and influencers. Right.

[00:47:46] And I you kind of have to twist my arm to get into something new

[00:47:50] because there are so many options. Right.

[00:47:52] So I don't know. Tough, but interesting on that one.

[00:47:58] So the other then the other is to try to and I could make it a fourth

[00:48:01] or conflate it is helping alternative stuff be better,

[00:48:06] which could I could also or instead say or in addition, say,

[00:48:10] starting new stuff, which might include the Andrea Grimes daily.

[00:48:14] I mean, this is really where I think the true win is possible.

[00:48:20] You know, I think that

[00:48:24] cooperative journalism models,

[00:48:27] reader consumer owned journalism models,

[00:48:32] those sorts of things have a lot, a lot of promise.

[00:48:36] I think nonprofit models are still great.

[00:48:39] I mean, I know that it's really difficult to run a nonprofit newsroom.

[00:48:43] I have worked for enough of them and seen what that looks like from the inside.

[00:48:48] But we have some great examples, ProPublica, the Texas Tribune,

[00:48:51] the 19th, right. Prism Rewire. Right.

[00:48:55] Like there there are these options as long as

[00:49:00] there is long term commitment and investment

[00:49:05] on both the leadership and the readership level. Right.

[00:49:10] And, you know, funding great journalism is expensive.

[00:49:14] Investigations are expensive.

[00:49:16] And producing, you know, really well reported work is expensive.

[00:49:22] It takes talent. It takes time. It takes dedication.

[00:49:26] And, you know, I but I do think people will pay for it.

[00:49:31] I think people appreciate it. I think readers appreciate it.

[00:49:34] I think we've seen that there are models that can make it work.

[00:49:37] So I think improving the alternative left progressive press,

[00:49:43] better funding it is the is the most viable way forward.

[00:49:51] Ownership models.

[00:49:53] So I heard everything including and I am I think a lot about the ownership model thing.

[00:49:58] Is it a benevolent purpose trust? I forget about it, but there's a new

[00:50:01] I don't know the name of it, but there's a there's a new sort of

[00:50:04] or more newly used ownership structure that

[00:50:09] that allows for an organization to be a little bit commercial,

[00:50:14] but still but then make sure that it's held to a purpose.

[00:50:17] So it kind of has it has a board that preserves it.

[00:50:20] You can imagine you can imagine a bank, you can even imagine an insurance company.

[00:50:23] But I think for those and I've and I've raised money before. Right.

[00:50:27] And I've raised money from people, of course, who have it.

[00:50:30] And I've raised money. People have it who care about things.

[00:50:32] That's why they would give it.

[00:50:33] But I wasn't giving them anything back except for gratitude

[00:50:37] and hopefully mildly less bad democracy. And when

[00:50:41] and they would own a company, they would sell the company.

[00:50:43] So what are we going to do to make sure that who we sell it to

[00:50:46] is going to do what we want?

[00:50:48] Well, typically what that's the quote Don Draper.

[00:50:51] That's what the money is for.

[00:50:53] You don't get to decide anymore. They get to decide.

[00:50:55] So then you take the money and you got to do something with it.

[00:50:57] I do think as Steyer is done, the Steyer family is done

[00:51:00] with Beneficial State Bank as as that we should be looking

[00:51:05] that we do need to talk to the not quite oligarchs among us

[00:51:10] and say, if you if you actually believe what you say

[00:51:14] and don't want an oligarchy, then don't just leave money

[00:51:17] to the hospital. Don't just leave money to the Children's Fund.

[00:51:19] Leave money to democracy.

[00:51:20] And we need real institutional support

[00:51:24] to make sure that oligarchy doesn't just run everything.

[00:51:27] Because this is another thing, another thing in terms of change.

[00:51:29] And I haven't read the book that you plugged. But.

[00:51:33] But I would almost without writing it,

[00:51:34] I would still ask for a second edition or a fourth edition

[00:51:37] if there had already been three.

[00:51:39] And that's because one thing that's different now

[00:51:42] from the muckraking era and the progressive era, 120 years ago,

[00:51:47] is that it used to be that Upton Sinclair

[00:51:50] would write something about an oligarch who owned factories,

[00:51:56] who ran trains, who controlled oil.

[00:52:00] Now the oligarchs control media, control information,

[00:52:04] control brains, control the conversation, control the narrative.

[00:52:08] So what's Upton Sinclair supposed to do?

[00:52:11] What's the muckraker supposed to do?

[00:52:13] What's the progressive Republican, to be clear,

[00:52:15] journalist 100 years ago, supposed to do?

[00:52:18] Where are they publishing?

[00:52:19] This is to me, if we don't say this.

[00:52:22] And I'm using a little bit of my louder voice because I wanted

[00:52:25] something I started saying before,

[00:52:26] because I want to not fall into the same trap.

[00:52:28] This is the thing I started saying a little while ago.

[00:52:30] I used to get frustrated.

[00:52:31] I remember I remember when the journalism

[00:52:35] was covering kids in in.

[00:52:40] Let's take the insurrection.

[00:52:41] Let's take the Trump election.

[00:52:43] And I remember and you've plugged NPR and I, roughly speaking,

[00:52:46] in favor of public media for sure.

[00:52:48] And I am not always in favor of the tone of voice.

[00:52:52] Oh, sure.

[00:52:53] Because I was just imagining, I'm just imagining what happens.

[00:52:58] What happens if we did have martial law?

[00:53:01] What happens if we did have just full on?

[00:53:04] What if January 6th had been successful?

[00:53:07] And I'm just imagining the NPR journalist saying

[00:53:12] democracy was lost today.

[00:53:14] Some people were in favor of it.

[00:53:15] Some people were opposed.

[00:53:16] We've interviewed several people who think it's a good thing.

[00:53:19] The democracy has gone away and the United States is changing its name

[00:53:21] to the disunited states of not America anymore or something.

[00:53:25] And some other people who think it's a problem

[00:53:27] and they're organizing a protest.

[00:53:28] Let's hear the important perspectives of the protesters.

[00:53:31] And I'm like, at some point you have to be willing to be a little louder.

[00:53:36] Because at some point it's serious.

[00:53:38] And this is sort of what you're saying in the New York Times.

[00:53:40] At some point, you have to say this is different.

[00:53:43] Of course, their response could be well.

[00:53:45] It could be better than the New York Times and still be a challenge response.

[00:53:47] But if we yell, we'll be yelling every day

[00:53:49] because there's so much to yell about now.

[00:53:52] And this is part of the problem, which is why I go back to ownership,

[00:53:55] which is why I go back to model.

[00:53:57] I don't have a question.

[00:53:58] I screwed up. I screwed up the whole darn show.

[00:54:00] I screwed up the whole darn show.

[00:54:01] You triggered me into your crimes.

[00:54:03] Um, I mean, you know, I here's what, though.

[00:54:07] Again, I would reiterate again that, you know, the criticizing NPR

[00:54:13] or WAPO or New York Times to push them to the left is simply not going to happen.

[00:54:17] I think you're absolutely right that the day democracy falls,

[00:54:20] you know, they're going to be out there at the diner in Ohio

[00:54:24] asking people what they think about it. Right.

[00:54:26] And that'll be, you know, the coverage. Right.

[00:54:28] That's even better.

[00:54:29] That's even better.

[00:54:30] Calling the diner and asking, what do you think about the fall of democracy there?

[00:54:35] I mean, they'll do it. They'll do that.

[00:54:37] Mark my words. It will happen. Right.

[00:54:39] So and and but.

[00:54:43] That's not our only option in terms of making sense

[00:54:49] of an event like the fall of democracy or the slow

[00:54:55] crumbling demise of democracy as we're seeing now. Right.

[00:54:58] Which is why, you know, we're seeing crackdowns on TikTok, on social media.

[00:55:04] Right. Which is why there's so much opposition to alternative platforms

[00:55:09] and alternative forms of information sharing.

[00:55:12] Right. It's why politicians want to make us afraid for those of us

[00:55:18] on the left, I think specifically, you know, to speak our minds, et cetera.

[00:55:24] Right. That's why they want to get rid of critical race theory.

[00:55:26] It's why they want to ban books about and for queer kids. Right.

[00:55:31] You know, so there is this push, right.

[00:55:33] This top down push to silence free thinking and free speech,

[00:55:38] especially left leaning speech and ways of thinking. Right.

[00:55:42] But we also have such interesting new ways of communicating as well.

[00:55:47] And if we can preserve those, I think what

[00:55:52] if we ever come out the other side,

[00:55:55] we'll live in a very interesting and more equitable and just world.

[00:56:00] You know, if we get into sort of like fabulous tech futures

[00:56:03] that have nothing the fuck to do with AI. Oh, I'm sorry.

[00:56:06] I did. I think we can say that.

[00:56:09] I also as an editing machine.

[00:56:11] I think it's, you know, interesting tech features.

[00:56:13] I think you can say whatever the fuck you want.

[00:56:15] AI and nonsense. Right.

[00:56:17] But like really talking about communicating with each other

[00:56:19] in interesting ways and telling our own stories.

[00:56:22] And that's why I keep going back to the idea of cooperative

[00:56:25] and reader owned publications. Right.

[00:56:29] I think offer such interesting perspectives and alternatives

[00:56:33] to what is inevitably going to be the interview

[00:56:36] about the fall of Rome at the diner.

[00:56:41] What makes you want to yell?

[00:56:43] So I raised my voice in this conversation.

[00:56:45] I shouldn't be the only one with the permission to do that.

[00:56:48] You don't have to yell. It's totally up to you.

[00:56:49] But what are the things that happen that you're like that

[00:56:53] that don't feel like they deserve the, well, what do you think?

[00:56:57] That's interesting.

[00:56:58] What are things that happen?

[00:56:59] They wish they had a little bit bigger font or had a little bit

[00:57:02] bigger volume or a little more flash.

[00:57:05] Yeah. Well, I mean, abortion is my issue. Right.

[00:57:07] And I cannot ding dang stand

[00:57:13] the normalization of anti-abortion

[00:57:18] lobbyists, anti-abortion politics, anti-abortion leaders. I

[00:57:23] flipping hate the credulous

[00:57:26] New Yorker profile of Jonathan Mitchell. Right.

[00:57:29] That's like, what makes this guy tick? Right.

[00:57:33] It's fucking fascism.

[00:57:34] Fascism makes the motherfucker tick like that's what the guy does.

[00:57:38] He hates women and he wants to ban abortion.

[00:57:41] And that's his whole goal in life. Right.

[00:57:45] I just can't take this fascination

[00:57:49] with right wingers, especially anti-abortion folks,

[00:57:53] as if there's something deeper and more interesting to what they're doing

[00:57:58] beyond the bare desire

[00:58:02] to oppress women and trans people like that's it.

[00:58:05] That's the whole game. It's what they like to do.

[00:58:08] It's motivated by white Christian hetero patriarchy.

[00:58:13] They're not particularly brilliant.

[00:58:15] They're not even particularly evil.

[00:58:18] I it's like they're truly like banal, boring, bat shit people.

[00:58:24] But they continue to be treated.

[00:58:27] In the mainstream and legacy press, as if they are credulous

[00:58:32] people with interesting ideas that should be taken seriously rather than

[00:58:37] lying liars who love oppression.

[00:58:40] And it just really grinds my gears.

[00:58:43] I appreciate it. If you would like to raise your voice,

[00:58:47] you of course have the opportunity to do that.

[00:58:48] And how would one not be particularly if one has to face those choices,

[00:58:53] if someone has to has lived experience or adjacent to it.

[00:58:57] And how could one only treat this as both sides of the issue?

[00:59:02] How could one not think that this had base and basic

[00:59:06] and essential and fundamental humanity involved in it,

[00:59:09] including what makes us feel the things that we care about

[00:59:12] and where we actually live?

[00:59:14] And I struggle with it.

[00:59:17] I struggle with it.

[00:59:18] I struggle with how many times I should yell or not.

[00:59:21] I do. I do.

[00:59:22] I struggle with it strategically.

[00:59:25] I struggle with it with the next generation that I know of protesters

[00:59:28] who does things like stop traffic.

[00:59:30] And my strategic brain says, no, you want to run a protest

[00:59:33] of the people watching the protest, want you to be in charge.

[00:59:35] Don't run a protest of the people who are watching the protest

[00:59:38] want you to just go away forever.

[00:59:41] But at the same time,

[00:59:43] if I were a high school student, now, if I were a college student now,

[00:59:48] I can't imagine wanting to be polite.

[00:59:52] And so I so I'm still I don't want to say I'm stuck.

[00:59:55] I still manage to get through the day.

[00:59:57] But I am I am a more robust version of ambivalent.

[01:00:01] If ambivalent didn't mean like, I think strongly

[01:00:05] things that occasionally conflict, I think them very strongly.

[01:00:08] I feel very strongly

[01:00:10] by and here is something I just want to ask you about.

[01:00:13] How do we make?

[01:00:14] OK, so I'll put the question first, and then I'll

[01:00:16] so it makes it reminds me that there's going to be one.

[01:00:20] I'm sorry.

[01:00:22] How do we help make the important stuff interesting?

[01:00:25] Now I'll explain.

[01:00:26] I took well, it was officially a media training to say

[01:00:30] I took a media training would suggest that I media trained.

[01:00:32] I am not saying that I took a media training.

[01:00:35] It was brief

[01:00:37] and in the media training and it was for a nonprofit organization.

[01:00:43] They gave a simple formula.

[01:00:45] So this is how I was taught to find a story.

[01:00:48] It is a simple formula.

[01:00:49] X is happening

[01:00:52] and it is interesting because of why X is happening

[01:00:56] and it is interesting because of why.

[01:00:59] And then the critique of a story would be, all right, X.

[01:01:02] You found something that's happening.

[01:01:04] Solve for why?

[01:01:05] Why is it interesting?

[01:01:06] And this was very useful almost every time they use this formula

[01:01:08] that would improve somebody's like in the little training

[01:01:11] and the little class would improve what they were doing.

[01:01:13] Oh, this is why it's interesting.

[01:01:14] Why is it why is it why is it?

[01:01:16] It was excellent.

[01:01:18] Mm hmm. It stuck with me, though.

[01:01:20] It stuck with me.

[01:01:20] That was seven years ago, eight years ago.

[01:01:24] And it stuck with me because now what I have seen happen

[01:01:28] is a great deal of expertise garnered around making any number of things

[01:01:33] happening interesting, including things that are not important.

[01:01:38] In fact, what I would say is they didn't solve for what I call the real

[01:01:43] why, which is why does it matter?

[01:01:45] Yeah. Why is it important?

[01:01:47] So I know how to make sports interesting, or at least I know

[01:01:49] I see other people who are able to do it.

[01:01:52] I know how in fact, in fact,

[01:01:55] legions of news now seems to take the habits and conceit

[01:02:00] and trappings of journalism to take stuff that isn't important

[01:02:06] and make it seem so and make it seem interesting.

[01:02:09] What I'm interested in,

[01:02:10] the kind of stuff I think you're interested in, is trying to take

[01:02:13] the important and make it interesting.

[01:02:15] How do we do that? Any tips?

[01:02:19] Um, gosh, I mean, if I truly knew the answer to that question,

[01:02:24] I would be on a yacht somewhere enjoying the fruits of my labor

[01:02:29] or somebody else's labor in implementing my ideas.

[01:02:35] We're all capitalists at heart, aren't we?

[01:02:37] Um, so, uh, gosh, I think that, um, hmm.

[01:02:50] How are you defining interesting?

[01:02:55] Makes me want to keep getting it.

[01:02:57] Makes me want more of it.

[01:03:00] Connects synapses and gets it makes some chemical reaction

[01:03:04] inside my brain that I feel.

[01:03:07] Right. Moves in some way.

[01:03:12] Um, I mean, I think creating,

[01:03:15] being really successful at that kind of thing is as much about

[01:03:21] delivery model and messenger as it is about subject matter.

[01:03:26] Right. Um, and you know, that, I think, is a particularly difficult

[01:03:33] balance to strike.

[01:03:36] When when folks get it right, it really works.

[01:03:40] Um, you know, I think that.

[01:03:45] Gosh, I don't know.

[01:03:46] I mean, the example that's coming to mind for me in terms of like a truly

[01:03:52] like recognizable phenomenon of combining meaningful with interesting

[01:04:01] would be something like the John Oliver show or The Daily Show.

[01:04:03] Right. Where you're you're able to convey really important ideas

[01:04:09] and sometimes very serious ideas.

[01:04:10] Right. In humorous ways.

[01:04:13] Right. I mean, that I and actually I don't actually watch

[01:04:17] either of those shows with any regularity, and I never have.

[01:04:20] But in terms of what I know works, I think that's like a pretty good example.

[01:04:25] Right. Um, but, you know, I think, you know, if we're talking about print,

[01:04:31] right, then you want something that's satisfying to hold in your hand.

[01:04:36] You want a book that feels good. You want paper that's nice.

[01:04:38] I even like the feel of newsprint on my hands.

[01:04:41] Right. Um, like there are so many factors in

[01:04:46] messaging that are about so much more than the message.

[01:04:51] And there are so many things that turn readers, consumers, listeners on or off

[01:04:57] that has nothing to do with the message.

[01:05:02] You know, coming from a background

[01:05:03] working in communications for reproductive justice organizations

[01:05:07] and messaging on abortion,

[01:05:10] um, the package is often as important as the message itself.

[01:05:15] Right. The place that these conversations happen,

[01:05:18] the person who's having the conversation, the tenor of the conversation,

[01:05:22] the length of the conversation. Right.

[01:05:25] Um, man, I don't know.

[01:05:27] I it's it might have been a fair question.

[01:05:29] It's on my mind and you can see and it's been how are you doing for time, by the way?

[01:05:33] I'm fine. Yeah. All right.

[01:05:35] Because because I've been a little bit because we've gotten stuck

[01:05:39] on where I am stuck and where I am stuck is the fundamental question

[01:05:43] of what are we going to do about the political conversation?

[01:05:45] And how do we get the political conversation

[01:05:46] and the public conversation to yield the public interest?

[01:05:49] Right. And I am and I'm stuck there and I will acknowledge my stuckness.

[01:05:54] So a year ago, you said there was a very clear answer

[01:05:58] as to whether Biden will secure reelection.

[01:06:01] Your answer was maybe. Yep.

[01:06:04] And in all that's happened over the past 12 months,

[01:06:07] the Republican primary to the New York election interference trial,

[01:06:11] the various Supreme Court scandals turning,

[01:06:15] taking various boats and turning flags upside down.

[01:06:18] Promises from Project 2025 to gut the federal civil system,

[01:06:23] to pursue mass deportation.

[01:06:27] Is there any any more clarity when you read

[01:06:31] the prognostication tools regarding

[01:06:35] Joe Biden's chances?

[01:06:37] And that's to make no mention of gold Donald Trump's sneakers

[01:06:41] and the Donald Trump Bible.

[01:06:46] Um. Are you asking if I think his chances

[01:06:50] still maybe improved in a year improved or gotten worse?

[01:06:54] Um, I don't think they've changed significantly.

[01:06:58] Yeah. Um, I would love to have a different answer to that.

[01:07:07] I think that, I mean, oh, God.

[01:07:17] I mean, in the column that you're referencing.

[01:07:21] It's more or less sort of restating the obvious over and over

[01:07:25] and over again for about 1100 words, which is that Donald Trump

[01:07:28] is a criminal and Joe Biden isn't.

[01:07:32] And so like to even talk about

[01:07:36] policy issues or missteps or mistakes or whether the guy

[01:07:39] can remember his own ding dang name, right?

[01:07:41] Like, I don't like one of them is a criminal

[01:07:44] insurrectionist and the other one isn't.

[01:07:47] And that hasn't changed other than one of them has sort of become

[01:07:52] more of a criminal over the last year.

[01:07:54] Right. Um, you know, so to the extent

[01:08:00] that Joe Biden's chances improve, I don't know.

[01:08:03] Like I we're still in the same shitty soup we've been in.

[01:08:08] Right. Um, I think that Biden has not done himself any favors

[01:08:14] on abortion or on Israel and Palestine.

[01:08:18] I think that young folks are not loving what they're hearing

[01:08:22] from the Biden administration on both of those issues.

[01:08:26] I don't think that that's going to have a massive impact

[01:08:31] on the election itself in terms of the presidency.

[01:08:35] It probably could have some impact on down ballot races,

[01:08:40] especially in really competitive districts.

[01:08:42] Right. Um, but yeah, I don't know.

[01:08:46] I mean, I, I'm curious to know what you think.

[01:08:51] Um, I think it's a very clear maybe.

[01:08:54] Hey, it's very clear.

[01:08:55] Maybe I, I have thought for a long, I thought

[01:09:01] Donald Trump was going to lose earlier.

[01:09:03] Clinton. I'm still, well, he did lose to Hillary Clinton.

[01:09:06] Let's be clear about that.

[01:09:08] Yeah. And, and I still trust, um, I'll put it, I'll put it this way

[01:09:14] so I don't sound like a conspiracy monger.

[01:09:16] If someone told me that there were in fact, ballot irregularities

[01:09:21] or in fact that the weird voting machine stuff that was reported

[01:09:26] during that election, if I learned that stuff in fact did manipulate

[01:09:31] votes in several states, I would be no more surprised about that

[01:09:38] than I was about the announcement of who became the next president.

[01:09:43] Yeah.

[01:09:44] That's the way I would put it.

[01:09:45] So, uh, I have, uh, what I believe is that Donald Trump

[01:09:50] cannot be elected president.

[01:09:51] He can't.

[01:09:52] Right.

[01:09:52] He is, he is, there is not a majority of Americans who elect him.

[01:09:57] I also believe there is not even a 46% plurality of Americans who, if given

[01:10:04] unvarnished information would vote for him.

[01:10:08] Right.

[01:10:09] My concern is there are so many forces that are from the most

[01:10:15] oligarchic controlled media we've ever seen.

[01:10:17] Uh, and I don't just, I don't primarily mean, uh, legacy media.

[01:10:22] I don't primarily mean like, like newspapers and broadcast news.

[01:10:26] Not what most people do.

[01:10:28] Right.

[01:10:29] Most people think, uh, to third, fourth and fifth party candidates who are getting

[01:10:35] buoyed either with their knowledge or without their knowledge by the very folks

[01:10:40] who want to topple democracy to more effective foreign interference on our

[01:10:48] elections than I think we've ever seen.

[01:10:51] Yeah.

[01:10:51] We've had it.

[01:10:52] There've been various attempts in the past, but it's never been that

[01:10:54] quite this event because there haven't been as many unregulated and hard to

[01:10:58] regulate tools to do that.

[01:11:00] Pre social media was harder.

[01:11:02] You had to rig CBS news or some darn thing that I am more fearful.

[01:11:08] I am more convinced that the Republican candidate cannot win.

[01:11:11] And I'm more fearful about the state of our decision-making processes than

[01:11:14] I've ever been and where that irresistible force and that immovable

[01:11:17] object meet and what happens when they do.

[01:11:22] I got no crystal ball any better than yours.

[01:11:25] Yeah.

[01:11:26] I, I, I do have a question that might go, okay.

[01:11:30] This is my second question.

[01:11:31] Here's my, here's my, here's my porch game.

[01:11:33] Okay.

[01:11:34] I have a, people come to my porch and I asked this question very often.

[01:11:38] I've been asking a little bit less lately, but cause I kind of

[01:11:41] got my answer a while back.

[01:11:44] Who is the worst president of your lifetime?

[01:11:48] I want what I'm going to try to do.

[01:11:49] I want to rank the worst presidents of your lifetime.

[01:11:53] Uh-huh.

[01:11:54] And it is not a game to guess our ages.

[01:11:57] It's just, it's just, it has a particular point, but who's, if you start ranking

[01:12:02] the worst president of your life and think about it for a moment, let's see

[01:12:05] if you don't have to play my game with me, but I want to invite you

[01:12:08] to, if you're not pressed for time.

[01:12:09] Yeah.

[01:12:10] I mean, for me, it would be a real tough contest between Reagan and Trump.

[01:12:16] All right.

[01:12:16] I think it's hard to overstate the lasting legacy of Reagan.

[01:12:22] I don't think Trump could, I don't think the threat that Trump poses to democracy.

[01:12:29] I don't think that America's current state of chaos would be what it is.

[01:12:37] Had Reagan not laid that foundation.

[01:12:41] There's always sort of an argument that the earlier thing is more

[01:12:44] impactful than the later thing.

[01:12:45] Cause later things are often by the way, the more the

[01:12:49] thing is more impactful than the later thing.

[01:12:51] Cause later things are often by the earlier thing.

[01:12:54] And, but, but maybe also that two terms of Reagan versus one term

[01:12:59] of Trump is one thing, but two terms of Trump, you might be an easy decision.

[01:13:02] But let's say, okay, those are your bottom two.

[01:13:04] Who's next?

[01:13:04] Who's next worst?

[01:13:08] Um, goodness.

[01:13:11] Um, probably I'm tempted to say W Bush, but that's kind of only

[01:13:18] because I don't know an absolute ton about HW's term or legacy.

[01:13:25] Um, but I would put W next, I think probably then let's go HW and then

[01:13:32] let's go, oh, now I'm having trouble remembering then let's go Clinton

[01:13:39] and then Obama, I guess, am I missing anyone in there?

[01:13:42] So Nixon, Nixon, maybe before your time, you were not alive for Ford.

[01:13:48] Correct.

[01:13:49] All right.

[01:13:50] So then, uh, so then you've got, were you alive for Carter or you after Carter?

[01:13:55] I'm after Carter.

[01:13:56] All right.

[01:13:56] So then, uh, so, so then the only person you, so you said, you

[01:14:01] said Clinton, then Obama.

[01:14:04] Okay.

[01:14:05] You left one out.

[01:14:05] Where do you put Biden?

[01:14:07] Fuck me.

[01:14:10] I frequently forget he's president.

[01:14:12] Um, this is my game.

[01:14:15] Yeah.

[01:14:16] Um, I would put Biden, I guess between Clinton and Obama maybe.

[01:14:29] So, so, so, so your reaction is what I, this is the game because I asked this.

[01:14:38] Well, I asked this question.

[01:14:40] I don't ask who's the best president of your lifetime, of your lifetime.

[01:14:43] I don't ask that it's a hard, it's a hard question for people to answer,

[01:14:46] particularly people who are lefties who are like kind of mad at the country.

[01:14:50] Right.

[01:14:50] I asked what the worst present country and it's, and it's pretty much generally,

[01:14:55] uh, it's generally Trump.

[01:14:57] Uh, sometimes there's, you know, George W.

[01:14:59] Bush or Reagan in that answer.

[01:15:01] Cause I'm not usually asking Republicans when I ask the question.

[01:15:04] Right.

[01:15:05] And the, uh, occasionally, and sometimes I'm talking very often, I'm

[01:15:09] talking to somebody who's older than you and they'll do, and they'll put,

[01:15:13] they'll put Carter in there somewhere and they'll kind of rest on them.

[01:15:15] We'll have a definition.

[01:15:16] Well, what do you mean by good president?

[01:15:18] Because Carter, Carter, they basically want to be able to say Carter

[01:15:21] think is a really good man, but they wish that he would have done more

[01:15:23] things like FDR and LBJ and, and the, uh, and the person that is left

[01:15:30] nearly every time is Biden.

[01:15:34] And, and, and, and, and then when they're, then they stroke and, and,

[01:15:38] and then when they're left, he's either number one or number two every time.

[01:15:42] So, so what I'm left with is for a person who is politically progressive,

[01:15:46] Joe Biden is the best or second best president they have ever seen.

[01:15:52] If I ask them that question, they have to say no, cause they're pissed off

[01:15:56] about something and he's old and was something else, but if you're

[01:15:59] great, not a curve, okay.

[01:16:02] You're great on a curve.

[01:16:03] What do you got?

[01:16:04] That's better.

[01:16:05] And so I do.

[01:16:07] I'm glad we played the game and thank you so much for playing it.

[01:16:10] And, and, and it does lead to a question.

[01:16:13] Why do we think?

[01:16:15] And I have my own thoughts about this, but it shouldn't yours.

[01:16:17] Why do we think that it is so very, very hard to find almost anybody to say

[01:16:24] almost anything positive about Joe Biden?

[01:16:26] And I am taking off the table because he's a bad, you know, he's

[01:16:29] the worst president in our lifetime.

[01:16:30] Cause we already know that ain't true or that he's in the middle

[01:16:32] because we all that's not true either.

[01:16:35] And I'm going to take off the table cause he's accomplished nothing.

[01:16:37] Cause he accomplished a bunch.

[01:16:38] I'm also going to take off the table because he's a nasty evil man who

[01:16:42] is a, is a perpetual criminal because that's not him.

[01:16:44] That's the other guy.

[01:16:45] Right.

[01:16:47] I'll, I'll, I'll leave on the table, but mention he's old.

[01:16:52] Okay.

[01:16:53] He's an old white guy and people tired.

[01:16:55] You know, a lot of people left are tired of them and, and not only

[01:16:57] and more than tired of them like, like have deep, um, uh, legitimate,

[01:17:03] uh, uh, like legitimately reinforced generational anger at them.

[01:17:10] Uh, and that's, and I'll very much leave that on the table.

[01:17:13] Uh, but why do you think it's hard for Joe Biden to get sort

[01:17:17] of a let's go Joe movement?

[01:17:22] Um, I'm trying to, I'm okay.

[01:17:26] So I'm thinking back to, um, when, when Biden was first, like

[01:17:36] genuinely on my radar running with Obama.

[01:17:42] Um, and I was a young starry eyed liberal at that point.

[01:17:47] I wouldn't have called myself a progressive.

[01:17:49] Um, you know, Biden seemed like a cool grandpa.

[01:17:53] I was like, that guy, that guy seems like a nice, cool

[01:17:56] granny's got the shades raised sort of like giving this, this

[01:18:00] like cool grandpa vibe.

[01:18:03] Um, and I, I, it is so difficult for me to get back in

[01:18:11] that mindset of remembering feeling that way about him now.

[01:18:15] Um, because, uh, he, I mean, look, he seems like an

[01:18:22] intelligent and capable person.

[01:18:24] Obviously we're talking about him being on the better side

[01:18:28] of presidents in my lifetime.

[01:18:30] Right.

[01:18:31] Um, but he's, um, the stuff he, the stuff that I think he

[01:18:42] sucks on the issues I think he sucks on.

[01:18:46] I feel very passionate about, I think he sucks on abortion.

[01:18:51] I think he's been bad on Israel and Palestine.

[01:18:54] By sucks on abortion, it sucks on abortion because he won't

[01:18:56] topple the, because he won't advocate to get rid of the

[01:18:58] filibuster or what's the, like, where does it manifest?

[01:19:01] Because he's afraid of the issue overall.

[01:19:04] And I think it's fairly clear that he is personally anti

[01:19:07] abortion and has trouble not making that clear in the way he

[01:19:12] talks about abortion as an issue writ large.

[01:19:15] Right.

[01:19:16] Um, so I think that there's a lot he love more he could have

[01:19:22] done since the fall of Dobbs and even in the runoff, right.

[01:19:26] To protect, enhance and expand abortion access.

[01:19:30] Um, even on a pure messaging level, I think the man could do a ton more.

[01:19:35] Um, anyway, so because reproductive freedom is so

[01:19:45] integral to the, the, the experience of being human and

[01:19:55] the experience of having freedom to do anything else.

[01:20:00] For me personally, I, his other achievements while laudable,

[01:20:09] successful, whatever, right.

[01:20:11] Um, it makes me harder.

[01:20:15] Like I just don't really like the guy.

[01:20:17] I don't find him charming and affable anymore.

[01:20:21] I don't consider him like the fun grandpa.

[01:20:25] I, I feel, I actually like, I sort of feel.

[01:20:32] This is like a wild parasocial thing to say, but like, I feel

[01:20:40] like sort of some hostility from, from him.

[01:20:44] Like, I feel sort of like this guy wouldn't like me.

[01:20:48] This guy wouldn't want to hang out with me.

[01:20:51] This guy wouldn't find me a charming granddaughter.

[01:20:57] Right.

[01:20:57] I think he doesn't feel like he's on your side and he doesn't feel

[01:21:00] like he's on my side.

[01:21:01] It doesn't even feel like he can pretend to be on my side.

[01:21:04] Right.

[01:21:05] He, it, and I think that is probably at the heart of why I don't feel

[01:21:13] personal enthusiasm for the guy.

[01:21:16] Um, I mean, I also though don't really feel that any politician is on my side.

[01:21:22] I wasn't a massive Obama like Stan or fan, right?

[01:21:26] I don't go in for politicians writ large.

[01:21:31] It's like, I'm not, you know, even folks like Wendy Davis here in Texas,

[01:21:35] who's an icon, I have tremendous respect for her, but I'm, you know,

[01:21:38] not just going to get the cheerleader out constantly.

[01:21:42] Right.

[01:21:42] I think that idolizing politicians is the most foolish of fool's errands.

[01:21:48] Um, but there is something specific about Biden.

[01:21:55] And unusually so, I think for a Democrat or someone

[01:22:00] ostensibly politically left, that does feel kind of like he's just not

[01:22:06] for or about me or my people or my issues.

[01:22:11] So, and I think about this and I do not have the answer, uh, and, and, and

[01:22:16] nor would I quibble with, I mean, your answer is your answer.

[01:22:19] So I wouldn't even attempt to edit it anyway.

[01:22:24] Uh, answers have occurred to me through writ large, right?

[01:22:28] Uh, that, that are, that lie alongside answers that might be better

[01:22:33] than what I'm going to say more important.

[01:22:35] Cause I think very often things have multiple reasons, right?

[01:22:37] Cause my question is not only about you or isn't only about me.

[01:22:40] It's why generally, right?

[01:22:41] Like why, why does it seem like, like where the good stuff, a

[01:22:49] good stuff Biden has done, you can Google it and you will find stuff,

[01:22:52] but it's not like a whole lot of Reddit threads.

[01:22:54] It's not what I see on Twitter, which doesn't exist anymore.

[01:22:57] It's not what it's not what I hear from lefty commentators, right?

[01:23:00] It's not like it's like, and by the way, when I go back, when I go back,

[01:23:05] when I asked my dad this question, I think he puts, he puts up and my dad's

[01:23:13] old, my dad just turned 89.

[01:23:14] Okay.

[01:23:16] He puts.

[01:23:18] I didn't his top three.

[01:23:20] Yeah.

[01:23:20] And to be clear, if I said who was the top three present, he wouldn't

[01:23:22] have done it, he wouldn't have said like, like I do it from worst, right?

[01:23:26] And he has a long ass list.

[01:23:27] That's forgive me for asking Carter to me.

[01:23:29] Carter's like young, you know what I'm saying?

[01:23:31] Like, like, and I don't even know why I was thinking Nixon.

[01:23:33] I like, but, but literally last person asked this question was my dad.

[01:23:36] And for it, and Nixon was like, and I have asked that question, not just

[01:23:41] your lifetime, I've asked this question in the last 50 years.

[01:23:43] That's that's very often.

[01:23:44] I don't just do lifetime.

[01:23:44] It last 50.

[01:23:47] And I, but there are a few other things I think he's got against him.

[01:23:51] In addition to those things, I think the personal relatability

[01:23:54] thing is harder for the, for the democratic voter, for the modern

[01:23:57] democratic voter, the majority of them are not white males and the

[01:24:00] definite majority of them are not white males over the age of 60 or 65 or 70 or 75.

[01:24:05] So I think just, just natural ability.

[01:24:06] I do think that's a thing.

[01:24:09] The, uh, I do think there's something about the narrative, something

[01:24:12] about the, I have hypothesized, right?

[01:24:14] The right wing media wants to topple him.

[01:24:17] Once people not to like him.

[01:24:18] I think this happened to Hillary Clinton, right?

[01:24:19] Hillary Clinton, before she was a candidate for president was popular.

[01:24:22] People forget this.

[01:24:23] She was popular.

[01:24:24] She had cool sunglasses on and she was popular.

[01:24:26] Right.

[01:24:27] And then they, and then they got their misogynistic, like brilliantly

[01:24:31] sharp talons out and eventually she was scarred up to heck and, and, and not

[01:24:36] only in the minds of right wingers, but in the minds of people that just

[01:24:40] the conversation leaks towards them.

[01:24:42] Right.

[01:24:43] Second, the foreign oligarchic and anti-democratic powers want to topple

[01:24:47] him and the Western Alliance and the democratic small D democratic project.

[01:24:51] The oligarchic media wants to topple him and definitely does not want to

[01:24:55] give any credit for the roughly, roughly speaking progressive or big D

[01:24:59] democratic stuff that he has done.

[01:25:01] That's the stuff that they hate.

[01:25:02] They'll put up with some other stuff, but they don't, they hate that stuff.

[01:25:05] Don't want to.

[01:25:06] And then the left not to cheapen this view to be clear has a problem with

[01:25:11] power.

[01:25:12] It's kind of part of the project.

[01:25:14] Yeah.

[01:25:14] They're not, it's you don't want to be motivated politicians.

[01:25:17] Your, your goal is not to have a totalitarian leader, right?

[01:25:20] You're not sure you'd want a four term president FDR redux, right?

[01:25:23] Like it's, it's so I think, so I call it sort of the pincer problem, you know,

[01:25:28] that he's got a kind of problem for the right and the left, but I think it's

[01:25:30] more complicated than a pincer.

[01:25:32] There's also sort of other angular weird things coming from the side

[01:25:35] that are controlling things.

[01:25:36] And there isn't a kind of, I don't know if I'll call it mainstream.

[01:25:41] I want to find another word, but, but big ish media that is, that is

[01:25:46] like kind of pro Biden voice.

[01:25:48] Who's the pro Biden voice?

[01:25:50] But it ends up being like clowns, like me, middle-aged white guys are like,

[01:25:53] Hey, it's so bad.

[01:25:54] In fact, when I really look at it on a curve, that guy's pretty good.

[01:25:58] I, I wonder.

[01:26:01] Okay.

[01:26:02] May.

[01:26:03] Okay.

[01:26:04] I'm, I don't 100% believe this.

[01:26:06] I'm not sure I even like 20% believe it, but I'm going to say it.

[01:26:10] Um, I think that Biden's overall effectiveness as a politician and a

[01:26:18] president may in fact work against him.

[01:26:25] Read this question because, uh, effective people who are not.

[01:26:37] Overachieving often are kind of invisible, right?

[01:26:41] Um, you know, there's, there's a talent to being the best

[01:26:46] performing middle manager, right.

[01:26:48] And, and you know, that's the person that the corporate executives keep in

[01:26:54] middle management their whole careers because they keep the business running.

[01:27:00] They keep profits going, whatever.

[01:27:02] Right.

[01:27:03] And I think I sort of see Biden in a similar light to that.

[01:27:08] His successes are not stellar and his failures.

[01:27:15] I mean, are not especially spectacular.

[01:27:18] Although I would say he's.

[01:27:21] Uching towards spectacular failure on Palestine, but TBD, I think

[01:27:27] there's room for correction there.

[01:27:29] Um, you know, so I think like the fact that he's just sort of like

[01:27:33] competent makes him pretty forgettable because there's not a lot

[01:27:40] that's otherwise interesting about him.

[01:27:44] I know that's that, no, that's insightful potential.

[01:27:46] I, I find it insightful.

[01:27:48] The, uh, and so it occurred to me years ago was, and I'd serve both as

[01:27:55] a worked toiled both as an activist and inside an elected chamber.

[01:28:01] And, and what I noticed was that effectiveness as an activist was

[01:28:08] closely linked to one's ability to elevate the temperature in the room

[01:28:12] and effectiveness as an elected leader was closely linked to one's ability

[01:28:18] to lower the temperature in the room.

[01:28:20] In fact, the easiest bill to pass is the one that's called a technical fix.

[01:28:24] Oh, it's a technical fix.

[01:28:25] Right.

[01:28:25] Is it?

[01:28:26] And then just sails through and nobody worries about it.

[01:28:27] You say, if you say, this is really important.

[01:28:30] Yeah.

[01:28:30] It's really important.

[01:28:32] Then we were like, I can't do that.

[01:28:34] It's something that's real important.

[01:28:35] I might have to find the reasons I need to stop it.

[01:28:38] And it's easier to stop something than it is to make something happen.

[01:28:41] So what you just said is that resonates.

[01:28:43] That really resonates.

[01:28:44] We've been at it for a while and I really appreciate your time.

[01:28:48] What did I miss?

[01:28:49] What did I not ask you?

[01:28:50] No, no, it's I really appreciate your time.

[01:28:52] What did I miss?

[01:28:53] What should have I asked you that I failed to and, or is

[01:28:56] there anything you want to plug?

[01:28:57] Yeah.

[01:28:57] Any last thoughts on Texas?

[01:28:59] We don't have to cover any coverage that you now find boring, but,

[01:29:02] but anything you want to want to talk about on Texas?

[01:29:05] Um, no, I mean, I, the thing that I will say about

[01:29:12] Texas while I have a captive blue state audience in front of me,

[01:29:19] um, is that we are trying really the fuck hard down here.

[01:29:26] Genuinely, like we're trying to unfuck things.

[01:29:29] Like there's some really bad ass activism happening here in Texas.

[01:29:34] And it's just a real bummer to hear from.

[01:29:41] Blue state and coastal liberal folks, Texas should just succeed.

[01:29:45] Fuck that place.

[01:29:46] Cut them loose.

[01:29:47] You know, that sort of thing.

[01:29:49] Like we know like we're it sucks to be here, but we're working on it.

[01:29:55] Right?

[01:29:55] Like we're doing the best we can.

[01:29:57] Um, and there's so much cool activism happening here.

[01:30:01] Um, there's some really great political ideas at the local county city

[01:30:06] levels that we're trying, right?

[01:30:08] And yeah, like that shit is getting beaten back by our horrible

[01:30:11] governor and attorney general.

[01:30:13] But again, we're trying right?

[01:30:15] So my, my plea to those, you know, sort of watching from afar is to try

[01:30:24] to appreciate that, like genuinely there are a lot of people here who

[01:30:30] are trying to lift up each other and to improve this state and

[01:30:36] don't write us off.

[01:30:40] Thank you very much for that.

[01:30:42] Cause I want you to mess with Texas and I want your friends to

[01:30:45] mess with Texas and it does.

[01:30:48] When Texas went America, like I think though is not succeed

[01:30:52] Texas, any happening, but when Texas went America and, and, and

[01:30:57] even as you were talking, I was just thinking about all the

[01:30:58] opportunity because it can be a grassroots state.

[01:31:01] It isn't just one media market, right?

[01:31:03] And it's, and not all of it is as expensive.

[01:31:06] Not all of it is as expensive as California.

[01:31:08] So it's a, all right.

[01:31:10] So mess with Texas, mess with Texas, Andrea Grimes.

[01:31:13] Thank you so much.

[01:31:14] We will try to honor your state in a pro democracy, constructive way.

[01:31:19] And we'll also honor your time by not stealing any more of it.

[01:31:23] And thank you, Andrea Grimes for being a democracy nerd.

[01:31:26] Thanks.

[01:31:26] I appreciate it.

[01:31:27] Cheers.

[01:31:30] Democracy nerds recorded in sunny Portland, Oregon, produced by Kyle Curtis.

[01:31:34] Thanks also to technical producer Sig Seliger logo designed by Kat Buckley

[01:31:38] at K Buckley graphics.com I am Jefferson Smith.

[01:31:42] Thank you so much for listening.

[01:31:44] You can rate and review, hope you will and follow democracy nerd

[01:31:47] on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube past episodes of the show.

[01:31:50] Democracy nerd can be found online at democracy nerd.us.

[01:31:55] Go America.

[01:31:56] Thank you.

[01:31:57] Thank you.

[01:31:58] Democracy.