Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar - 11/19/24: Morning Joe Kisses Trump Ring, Trump Confirms Military Mass Deportations, Ben Affleck Stuns With AI Hollywood Take

Episode Date: November 19, 2024

Krystal and Saagar discuss Morning Joe kisses Trump ring, Trump confirms military for mass deportation, Ben Affleck stuns with Hollywood AI take.   To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.com   Merch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad. Listen to Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Clayton English. I'm Greg Glott. And this is Season 2 of the War on Drugs podcast. Last year, a lot of the problems of the drug war. This year, a lot of the biggest names in music and sports. This kind of star-studded a little bit, man.

We met them at their homes. We met them at their recording studios. Stories matter, and it brings a face to them. It makes it real. It really does. It makes it real. Listen to new episodes of the War on Drugs podcast season two on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

The OGs of uncensored motherhood are back and badder than ever. I'm Erica. And I'm Mila. And we're the hosts of the Good Moms Bad Choices podcast, brought to you by the Black Effect Podcast Network every Wednesday. Yeah, we're moms. But not your mommy. Historically, men talk too much.

And women have quietly listened. And all that stops here. If you like witty women, then this is your tribe. Listen to the Good Moms Bad Choices podcast every Wednesday on the Black Effect Podcast Network, the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you go to find your podcast.

Hey guys, Ready or Not 2024 is here, and we here at Breaking Points are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election. We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio, add staff, give you guys the best independent coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that. Let's get to the show. Good morning, everybody. Happy Tuesday. We have an amazing show for everybody today. What do we have, Crystal?

Indeed we do. We got two guests in the studio today, so that's going to be exciting. We've got Maurice Mitchell from the Working Families Party talking about the race for the new DNC chairs. It's kind of a big deal in terms of the war that is on for the future of the Democratic Party. We've also got Trump has confirmed his intention to use a national emergency and military assets to fulfill his plans for mass deportation. Shelby Talcott is going to join us to talk about that and other Trump transition news. We've got a little debate cooking between Sager and producer Griffin about some Ben Affleck comments with regard to AI. We're also taking a look at how liberals are fleeing Twitter and heading over to Blue Sky and what to make of that. Also something that did not make it in the show yesterday because we talked too much

and debated too much, but very important and significant news about the Biden administration green lighting long range missile use into Russia from Ukraine and what that could ultimately mean. I am also taking a look at the ad Kamala's corporate donors did not want you to. And the big debate that is unfolding in the Democratic Party about what went wrong and what the future should hold. Maurice Mitchell from the Working Families Party is going to join us as well to weigh in on that. Thank you to all those who have been signing up for premium subscribers. BreakingPoints.com if you want to go ahead and take advantage. We've got big plans this year.

It's going to be fun already. Look at these amazing stories that are here. Not just polls, politics, and all advantage. We've got big plans this year. It's going to be fun already. Look at these amazing stories that are here, not just polls, politics, and all that. We're talking about Ben Affleck, blue sky, Ukraine, and so much more. So there's a lot of policy on the deck for the next, at the very least, first two years of the Trump administration before the midterms. And I'm really excited to shift and start thinking deeply about that. Actually covering a presidency is really exciting. We got to do it all together the first time with Joe Biden, and we get to redo it again with President Trump. So breakingpoints.com if you want all of that and want to see some of the interesting things that we have that are coming next. Yes. And whether or not you become a premium subscriber, please also

like and share our videos on YouTube. It really helps out in the algorithm so other people can see what we're up to over here. Appreciate and love you guys as always. That's right. All right. So yesterday over on MSNBC, Joe and Mika of Morning Joe revealed that they had made a trek down to Mar-a-Lago to restart relations with Trump. The like just self-aggrandizing way they talk about all of this is amazing. In any case, take a listen to what they had to say. Joe and I went to Mar-a-Lago to meet personally with President-elect Trump. It was the first time we have seen him in seven years.

Now, we talked about a lot of issues, including abortion, mass deportation, threats of political retribution against political opponents and media outlets. We talked about that a good bit. And it's going to come as no surprise to anybody who watches this show, has watched it over the past year or over the past decade, that we didn't see eye to eye on a lot of issues. And we told him so. What we did agree on was to restart communications. My father often spoke with world leaders with whom he and the United States profoundly disagreed. That's a task shared by reporters and commentators alike. We had not spoken to President Trump since March of 2020. Other than a personal call Joe made to Trump on the morning after the attempt on his life in Butler, Pennsylvania.

In this meeting, President Trump was tearful. He was upbeat. He seemed interested in finding common ground with Democrats on some of the most divisive issues. And for those asking why we would go speak to the president elect during such fraught times, especially between us, I guess I would ask back, why wouldn't we? Their saga is so much about this that is incredible. I mean, the first thing that comes off is just like, I mean, she's comparing herself to her father. Who is the national security advisor of the United States. Right.

Just throw everybody out. You're just some jerk-off morning show host. Like, what are we talking about? So they are so narcissistic and so self-aggrandizing. So that's the first thing. The second thing is that literally weeks ago, Joe was comparing Trump to Hitler.

Yes. Mika was in tears. Literally in tears. On the eve of the election, talking about her concern about Trump. So they were, you know, happy to profit off of fear of Trump before he's elected. And now I think it's equal parts, you know, fear. They see Matt Gaetz coming in at DOJ.

They see Steve Bannon saying, hey, he's going to go after MSNBC hosts, starting with Ari Melber and working down the list. And also their constant desire to suck up to power. I mean, same thing. Like these were the two morning show hosts. Remember, these were Joe Biden's favorite morning show hosts. They were on the phone with him constantly. And by the way, Democrats, in terms of media figures who are responsible for the current state of affairs, you would be hard-pressed to find two individuals who are more culpable for the destruction of the Democratic Party and the

ushering of Trump back into the White House than these two people. Number one, aggressively smearing and destroying Bernie Sanders and his movement both times around, blocking that path of actual left economic populism that would have been far more successful in defeating Trumpism than warmed over neoliberalism. Number two, these were the people who rallied the troops around Joe Biden, blocked any sort of primary process from happening. After even after that disastrous debate, they were there still saying, oh, I still think he's the guy still backing him up. So they are so complicit in this ultimate situation. And not to mention, where else are never Trump Republicans more featured and more centered and their concerns more catered to than this show? And what was the most disastrous part of Kamala Harris and the Democratic Party's strategy in this election than their desire to go after the mythical Liz Cheney voter that does not exist?

That could have been hatched and maybe was hatched in the Morning Joe green room. So it's just extraordinary all the way around and really quite disgusting. The MSNBC audience is furious. And frankly, they should be because these are a bunch of liars, grifters and con artists who are happy to con the audience. And now that Trump's in power, go and suck up to the next powerful individual because that's just what they do. Oh, absolutely. And that's what that's the cognitive dissonance that you need to say, because this is what it's all in the game. Right. absolutely. And that's the cognitive dissonance that you need to say because this is what? It's all in the game, right?

And I actually kind of agree with that. But the point is, is that you can't be telling people that this is literally Hitler reincarnate and you're a dictator. And then when they get elected, then you're like, oh, well, look, it's the game. And comparing yourself and narcissism to your father, your actually successful and intelligent father, Zbigniew Brzezinski, National Security Advisor of the United States who sat across from Khrushchev and others, you know, in his capacity as a diplomat.

You're not a diplomat. You're a freaking morning show host. And as you alluded to, we have some side-by-side footage of what it was like not that long ago. Let's take a listen. This is not a reach. I could

go back and talk about Nazi Germany and I'd do it. I'd do it without any concerns whatsoever. And if people can't start drawing the parallels, well, you're just stupid or you have your head in the sand or you're one of them. Yeah. So Nazi Germany, 1933. It's like, which is it? And so actually you didn't mean it the entire time. It was a con. Or you did mean it and now that, you know, quote unquote Nazi Germany and or Hitler has been elected, then you've decided you're like, oh, actually we just need to respect the will of the people. So there's inherent narcissism. There is business, obviously. That's a huge part of it because a lot of this is Morning Joe wanting to preserve its access of which, by the, it had a ton of access in the first Trump administration. And, you know, a lot of MAGA people don't like to hear it.

There's nothing that Donald Trump loves more, actually, than access, talking to and gossiping with the liberal media, literally seen in firsthand. There's a reason why he gets to have breakfast. Apparently it was bacon and eggs, by the way, the diplomatic reception. Yeah, the restarting of communications. Just incredible. And I also love how scripted their entire answer was. So you see self-aggrandizement.

You see business. You see hypocrisy. I would say it's the total MSNBC cocktail that is going on over there. Absolutely. And, you know, the other way this should be seen is, as we've been discussing on this show, and I'll talk more about in my monologue today, there's basically sort of, there's a war going on in the Democratic Party right now about what just happened and what it means for the future. And there's effectively two camps. One camp on which the side of Joe and

Mika is effectively the status quo. Like nothing is that wrong. Or if there is something that's wrong, it's just like the wokeism. And we need to continue on this, like punching left as much as we can, which is already the status quo in the Democratic Party. And actually what we need to do is to capitulate to some aspects of Trumpism. You see that with, I think this is example number one, Joe and Mika going down to Mar-a-Lago is a case in point of that. Jared Polis, his comments about RFK Jr., Cory Booker, his comments that also seem to be favorable to RFK Jr., even in advance of the election, Jeff Bezos not making the endorsement at the Washington Post, Zuckerberg, Sundar Pichai, Tim Cook all calling Trump to make nice with him. That is one direction. I think it's

the most likely direction that the Democratic Party goes in that they say, hey, we want to work with you on your mass deportation, immigration policy. We actually want to shift to the right and be where you are more or less and run as basically like Trumpism light. I think that's the most likely direction. And it bears a lot of commonalities and has a lot of echoes with what Bill Clinton did in the 90s, where it was, OK, I see that this neoliberal direction of Reaganism has won. So we're just going to basically do like our version of that on the Democratic side. And I'm not going to say that it couldn't be electorally successful. I think it could. But that sort of capitulation to Trumpism is one path. And that's the path that Mika and Joe are signaling and pushing for here.

The other path is to offer something that is a completely contrasting vision that is anti-establishment, but in a left economic populist direction. So rather than immigrants and cultural elites being the scapegoats, it's, hey, it's the Bernie Sanders. The problem is the millionaires and the billionaires. The problem is the rigged Democratic establishment. The problem is the corrupt media. That's the other direction they could go in. They're less likely to go in that direction because it threatens the class interests of their donors, something else I'm going to talk about in my monologue today. But that's basically the contours of the war right now.

So that's part of what makes this so significant outside of just like Joe and Mika being ridiculous people and grifters and con artists and liars who just will sell their audience whatever they think is convenient in the moment. What is more significant about it is, you know, they're clearly taking sides in this battle within the Democratic Party. And, you know, they are quite influential. They are quite influential. The other thing that I would say in terms of their motive saga that you were alluding to is we're going to talk in a minute. I mean MSNBC ratings are in the toilet like bad. And I think that it's – this always happens if there's some bad news for liberals, the ratings tank. Same thing on Fox News.

When there's some bad news for Republicans, their ratings tank, whatever. Those are usually temporary blips and things kind of return to some sort of a steady state. I think MSNBC is in real trouble here, though, because their whole theory of the world has centered around the idea of an anti-Trump coalition with these never-Trumpers being the way and the model to follow in order to defeat Donald Trump. And their view of the world was just completely repudiated. It is thoroughly incorrect. It is totally wrong. And a lot of liberals are now feeling very disenchanted with their own mainstream institutions. So whether it's the New York Times, the Washington Post, certainly, but also MSNBC, I think real damage has been done. And there's a danger that those

people just don't come back. You also don't have, you know, last time around the Trump administration, you had all the Russiagate thing, which was like a spy novel. That was the best thing that ever happened. It was exciting for them to tune into night after night. What's Rachel Maddow going to piece together and how does the story end? Blah, blah, blah. You just don't have that same intrigue for them to draw the audience back in with, which was also, you know, them selling their audience a bill of goods that turned out to be much less, dramatically less than what they ever portrayed. So I think they're in real trouble. And I think Joe and Mika realize that it's not going to be their ratings that allows them to hang on.

In fact, their ratings have never been all that great. Yeah, that's true. But it's just like very high, very wealthy and people in power who watch it. And so the other thing they can bring to the table is access. So if you have access to the party in power, that gives you some cred that makes you valuable within the organization. And so I think it's also, you know, life insurance policy for them within MSNBC, where the audience is going to be furious with them. But they are making the calculation that it's worth accepting that fury from most of the MSNBC audience in order to have that level of access to power.

Yeah, you alluded to the ratings. Let's go ahead and put that on the screen. A12, please, up on the screen so we can see this. And you can actually see here the amount of primetime viewers that are in the key demographic for their shows. So Ari Melber, for example, 66,000. Joy Reid, 76,000. Chris Hayes, 77,000.

Alex Wagner, 53,000. The Last Word, 53,000. And Stephanie Ruhl at 62,000. This is primetime, guys. And this is the key demographic, which is what the- It's the only thing that matters. That's the only thing that matters for the advertisers. If you is the key demographic, which is what the— It's the only thing that matters. That's the only thing that matters for the advertisers.

If you look at the weekend, it's more insane. We're talking in the 20s, even in prime time. They're lucky to crack 33,000 there at the 5 p.m. hour with Al Sharpton on the weekend. I mean, I don't have to tell everybody here who's watching a YouTube show or listening to a podcast that we would be bankrupt, literally, if we're trying to run a business of our scale with numbers like that in the key demographic. You know, we have literally millions of people who watch this show, not just our show, all kinds of different shows on YouTube and elsewhere, which are almost, I think almost 100% of our audience is in the key demographic just for, you know, in terms of looking at where the age divide is there. But I also want to get to something deeper, something you said. If you've watched MSNBC for eight years, you were sold a bill of goods. You

were sold a false view of the world. If you watch the show, if you watch really a lot of shows that are non-mainstream, there was a theory of Trump in 2016, which I think we definitely talked a lot about here on the show. We're like, no, this is not an aberration. This is not like, you know, there's a theory that you could have an anti-Trump coalition, but the shifts that took place in 2016 were fundamental and they were a lot more than just Hillary Clinton was bad or Russia stole the election. We had major demographic change. There was immigration, there was trade, it was 40-year reckoning, the Iraq war. You're not going to get any of that on MSNBC and you haven't for the last eight years. Every once in a while, a guest will pop up and tell the truth, and it goes viral because it's like, wow, it's so shocking to actually see somebody in that format.

But again, if you're watching here and you were prepared for a Donald Trump victory, and not just a victory. You were prepared for even the case that has now happened, the popular vote, the realignment, all of those, the young male shift to the right, the gender gap that's happened between men and women, the Latino male realignment, young people's disillusionment with Israel policy. We've covered that ad nauseum for years in and out. I don't really know how you can function as a Morning Joe viewer. So in a certain sense, they were fooled. I mean, they literally were hoodwinked from reality over the last eight years. In a certain part, I almost feel bad for them. But that's also why it's so disingenuous

for them to act this way now today. And that's the key point, is that they're shapeshifters and they're narcissists. And this actually shows what the entire game is all about at the end of the day. Over the past six years of making my true crime podcast, Hell and Gone, I've learned one thing. No town is too small for murder.

I'm Katherine Townsend. I've received hundreds of messages from people across the country begging for help with unsolved murders. I was calling about the murder of my husband at the cold case. They've never found her. And it haunts me to this day. The murderer is still out there. Every week on Hell and Gone Murder Line,

I dig into a new case, bringing the skills I've learned as a journalist and private investigator to ask the questions no one else is asking. Police really didn't care to even try. She was still somebody's mother. She was still somebody's daughter. She was still somebody's sister.

There's so many questions that we've never got any kind of answers for. If you have a case you'd like me to look into, call the Hell and Gone Murder Line at 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Michael Kassin, founder and CEO of 3C Ventures and your guide on Good Company, the podcast where I sit down with the boldest innovators shaping what's next. In this episode, I'm joined by Anjali Sood, CEO of Tubi, for a conversation that's anything but

ordinary. We dive into the competitive world of streaming, how she's turning so-called niche into mainstream gold, connecting audiences with stories that truly make them feel seen. What others dismiss as niche, we embrace as core. It's this idea that there are so many stories out there, and if you can find a way to curate and help the right person discover the right content, the term that we always hear from our audience is that they feel seen. Get a front row seat to where media, marketing, technology, entertainment, and sports collide. And hear how leaders like Anjali are carving out space and shaking things up a bit in the most crowded of markets. Listen to Good Company on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. She was a decorated veteran,

a Marine who saved her comrades, a hero. She was stoic, modest, tough. Someone who inspired people. Everyone thought they knew her. Until they didn't. I remember sitting on her couch and asking her, is this real? Is this real? Is this real? Is this real? I just couldn't wrap my head around what kind of person would do that to another person that was getting treatment that was, you know, dying. This is a story all about trust and about a woman named Sarah Kavanaugh. I've always been told I'm a really good listener, right?

And I maximized that while I was lying. Listen to Deep Cover The Truth About Sarah on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. The way you know that they're really screwed over there is that you had even Jen Psaki coming on and basically being like, you know, this whole Never Trump thing. She went on Morning Joe, the home, the beating heart of Never Trumpism and said, you know, maybe this was not the right group to go after because guess what? They only exist in your green room, guys.

So, you know, you're screwed when that happens. When David Brooks is out there writing columns like, you know, maybe Bernie Sanders had a point when Senator Chris Murphy, who is no renegade, is out there saying, you know why we were so aggressive against Bernie Sanders? It's because we didn't want his program of class warfare to impact our high net income base or donor class. Like when you have figures like that admitting that the last eight years have been a lie, a mistake, a ruse, a con of their own base, that's how you know that the whole MSNBC edifice is crumbling. And it's one of the more hopeful things, frankly, to come out of this election because it has been a disaster for anyone who is on the left, who does want a different

direction for the Democratic Party. I can't tell you how influential MSNBC has been. I mean, I genuinely think, and Sagar, you can tell me if I'm wrong, that MSNBC is by and large the reason that Joe Biden was able to win the nomination. Oh, absolutely. No, there's no question in my mind. If you remember back in 2020, what happened? Okay, Bernie Sanders was winning. He did, you know, Pete claims he won Iowa. We all know Bernie really won Iowa. We'll say he did well in Iowa.

He wins New Hampshire. He goes on to Nevada. Just romps, like wins overwhelmingly in Nevada. And the Democratic Party has an oh shit moment. Like Bernie Sanders could actually be the nominee. Jim Clyburn makes his move. Obama makes a bunch of calls behind the scenes, basically gets everyone to drop out. Joe Biden wins South Carolina expected. Then everyone drops out and the media coalesces behind him and behind this narrative of those first three states really didn't matter,

really didn't count. The only thing that matters is South Carolina. And by the way, Joe Biden is the only person who could defeat Donald Trump. So they aggressively sold this narrative to the Democratic base and the Democratic base desperate to defeat Donald Trump was like, OK, I guess we're going with Joe Biden then. And then Joe Biden comes from behind. I mean, the way the polls shifted during that time period was like nothing we have ever seen before because of the MSNBCs of the world leading the charge to coalesce the Democratic base behind him. And at that point, it was so effective because liberals still had so much trust in places like the New York Times and MSNBC and CNN. So when they said, it's got to be Joe Biden, guys,

he's the only one that can win. They said, all right, well, I guess that's what we're going to do. You're not going to have that dynamic anymore. Those same places do not have the same level of trust and influence with the Democratic base that they once did. I truly believe that that trust, not that it's like totally gone and no one's going to blah, blah, blah. I don't want to overstate it. But that level of just obedience to whatever the narrative is coming out of those mainstream institutions, I truly think that's gone and broken. And I think that is a very positive and hopeful thing if there's going to be any prayer of the Democratic Party doing anything interesting going forward. That's right. We also have Jon Stewart who weighed in on this in only the way that he can. Let's take a listen.

Abortion, mass deportation, threats of political retribution against political opponents and media outlets. Oh, I bet you really laid down the gauntlet, Joe. I bet you walked in there and just let him have it, didn't you, Joey? I'm going to do a one-act play called Joe and Mika Go to Mar-a-Lago. Mr. President, your rhetoric is outrageous. I cannot in good conscience... Ooh, are those macaroons? The pink one is raspberry. We've learned nothing!

Even those putting up resistance to Trump's agenda don't seem to understand who they're dealing with. Yeah, I mean, it's too perfect. Too perfect. And John goes on this whole thing, too, about how Democrats are just wholly unable to grapple with the hardball tactics that are deployed by Trump and by his people. Where, you know, when it's Democrats in power, it's like, oh, my God, the parliamentarians said we can't do it. So guess what, guys? No minimum wage hike. Sorry. Our bad. We tried really hard. And then with Trump, it's like, I want Matt Gaetz at DOJ. And they're like, well, there's not the votes for it. And he's like, I don't care.

I have this way of doing a recess appointment. And Democrats are left falling back on, like, the norms. I don't think that's appropriate. I mean, that's what they do. Yes and no. I mean, that's what they do. Yes and no. I mean, it's certainly. Yes. Yeah. But when they want something, when they want something,

they also do it. Like, let's not pretend that either. So it's like an example. DACA legalizing literally a million people with a pen. What is it? The pen and the phone. Like, it's not like Democrats. How many years ago was that, Sagar?

Okay, that's the most outrageous example. I'm just giving you one of where they're literally willing to use. I mean, the student loan thing is like didn't pass through Congress, decided to try and do it through executive action. Failure, by the way. And how did that work out? I mean, they got like a piddly amount compared to what he was going to. Exactly.

I mean, that's the thing is like two years. I guess one thing I will say is that I think you're right, that the priorities that they just crumble on are things they don't really care that much about. No, the point is, is that anybody who's in power— They don't serve their base. The Republicans actually serve their base. Yes. Democrats do not serve their base whatsoever. In fact, their whole MO, which is part of how they end up in this situation, is to, like, smear and deride their own base. Like how many years have they aggressively gone after the young base of their party? And then you wonder why young people are drifting away from the

parties because you didn't, you spent years saying that they were bad and wrong and anti-Semitic, et cetera. So yeah, there's just a very different orientation between the way the Democratic Party approaches these things. I way the Republicans do. I think I could see why you think that, and perhaps we may have arrived at this, but the Republican base has also been anti-illegal immigration for like 20 years and actually hasn't gotten anything. So will they get something this time? Like, maybe. But, you know, don't forget, even under the Donald Trump administration, quote unquote, nothing fundamentally changed, no major piece of legislation passed. Will it happen this time?

Maybe. I'm actually still very skeptical. I think I don't underestimate the power of the business lobby or any of these people in stopping what is eventually going to happen. Chaos is already the status quo. We're going to talk about that with Shelby Talcott. And I think that chaos is a vacuum of which business lobbyists and others prefer. It's possible that Trump is a much more organized figure. I don't see a ton of evidence for that. I think certain things that they ran on that have now coalesced ideologically over eight years can and will happen, but that does not mean it will be like as a coherent ideology. It's not FDR that we're dealing with here, at least is the way that I'll

put it. But overall, the way that I think that we can look at this is the MSNBC. The problem is, is I can't discount them because they also have a Scotsman effect of like who is left in the actual Democratic Party. And the people who are left, yes, they may be disillusioned. But the truth is, is that rich white people are now the Democratic base, right? Like those are the people who overwhelmingly moved and voted and showed up for Kamala Harris. And those people still do have a deep amount of institutional trust. And when they don't have institutional trust,

it's not the way that you and I talk about, right? They'll be like, the New York Times wasn't tough enough on Trump. Like that's literally what they think. They think that the media, they think that if more Americans had not been, if Trump had not been quote normalized or whatever, that they would not have voted for him. Obviously it's a stupid ideology, but that's what they think.

So I'm not, I wouldn't count them out yet. I think that even on MSNBC, they'll find their way. You know, they'll find an agenda and all these other things that they can come to together. And I am, I wouldn't say just yet that these rich whites are willing to abandon MSNBC and those institutions. I could see a big surge for things like Midas Touch. And, you know, if people do go online, it'll be like, yeah, literally Midas Touch, Brian Tyler Cohen. But, you know, even them, though, even like Midas Touch has been on the like, you know what, Bernie was right. Oh, really? I don't count myself too familiar with Midas Touch. I do think that, I think you're

correct, though. I do think there will be more of a migration to YouTube and podcasts among some portions. In fact, you already see it with you know, actually we see it over on Crystal Kyle and Friends. Ryan sees it on Dropsite. David Serota sees it on Lever News.

Over Nathan J. Robinson, like they're seeing it too. There has been a surge in like, all right, this shit has not helped me understand the world. And so I do need to search out other alternatives. Michael Moore actually put out a big post of like, here's some other places to go. Yeah, and so I do think there will be a shift too. And just because of the economics of YouTube, even if you have people who are, you know, basically like, you know, blue resistance figures like the Midas Touch guys, there's just a different ecosystem and a different set of incentives over on YouTube.

That's fair. So you end up with different commentary. I mean, that's part of why the pod save dudes have been like they're a mixed bag. Don't get me wrong, but they've been better at, they wanted Joe Biden out. They've been better in analyzing what happened than, for example, Joe and Mika, certainly, just simply because they're in a different medium. And so that helps to create like a different perception of the world. So, you know, I do think you'll see a kind of splintering from, like I said, I don't want to oversell it. Like the New York Times and the Washington Post are still going to exist.

MSNBC is going to still have some viewing audience. But when you consider how old and how scarce their audience is already, yeah, I just don't think they're going to have the same level of dominance that they did in terms of setting 100% of the discourse. One thing that has been amusing to me, though, is the number of people like Chris Murphy or whoever who will go on MSNBC to talk about how they should do more independent media. And it's like, you know, we do exist. Yeah, right. We haven't had,

Rokhan is still the only person. We've had a request pending with Chris for two years, just so everybody understands. Very good point. Yeah, I understands. Yeah. Very good point. Yeah, I'm just saying. Very good one. And it's not like, I mean, here we are with this audience that is cross-ideological and people who are open to, you know, different ideas and having their minds changed and whatever. And we haven't had one Democrat reach out to us and be like, you know what, let's do this thing.

Except for Roe. That's right. He's the only one. He gets a lot of credit for that. But it is funny to me that they're like, oh gosh, we should do more independent media. But then they don't actually do that. They just go on MSNBC to talk about how they should do that. That's right.

All right, we've got Shelby Talcott standing by. Let's get to her. Over the past six years of making my true crime podcast, Hell and Gone, I've learned one thing. No town is too small for murder. I'm Katherine Townsend. I've received hundreds of messages from people across the country begging for help with unsolved murders. I was calling about the murder of my husband at the cold case. They've never found her and it haunts me to this day. The murderer is still out there. Every week on Hell and Gone Murder Line, I dig into a new case,

bringing the skills I've learned as a journalist and private investigator to ask the questions no one else is asking. If you have a case you'd like me to look into, call the Hell and Gone Murder Line at 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Michael Kassin, founder and CEO of 3C Ventures and your guide on good company. The podcast where I sit down with the boldest innovators shaping what's next. In this episode, I'm joined by Anjali Sood,

CEO of Tubi, for a conversation that's anything but ordinary. We dive into the competitive world of streaming, how she's turning so-called niche into mainstream gold, connecting audiences with stories that truly make them feel seen. What others dismiss as niche, we embrace as core. It's this idea that there are so many stories out there, and if you can find a way to curate and help the right person discover the right content, the term that we always hear from our audience is that they feel seen. Get a front row seat to where media, marketing, technology, entertainment, and sports collide.

And hear how leaders like Anjali are carving out space and shaking things up a bit in the most crowded of markets. Listen to Good Company on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

She was a decorated veteran, a Marine who saved her comrades, a hero. She was stoic, modest, tough, someone who inspired people. Everyone thought they knew her. Until they didn't. I remember sitting on her couch and asking her, Is this real? Is this real? Is this real? Is this real?

I just couldn't wrap my head around what kind of person would do that to another person that was getting treatment, that was, you know, dying. This is a story all about trust and about a woman named Sarah Kavanaugh. I've always been told I'm a really good listener, right? And I maximized that while I was lying. Listen to Deep Cover, The Truth About Sarah on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,

or wherever you get your podcasts. Very excited now to be joined by Shelby Talcott. She's a national political reporter at Semaphore, great friend of the show. It's good to see you, Shelby. Nice to see you. All right, so let's talk a little bit about what's going on with the transition. Let's start with this. Let's put this up there on the screen.

We have a 4.03 a.m. retruth here from Donald Trump. Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch says, good news reports are incoming. Real Donald Trump administration is prepared to declare a national emergency and will use military assets to reverse the Biden invasion through a mass deportation program. He retruths and says true at 4.03 a.m. So are we to take this as the late night or I guess early morning slash late night either or in Trump's case musings on truth social? How does this comport with your own reporting down in Mar-a-Lago talking to the transition team? Yeah, well, first, I'm really excited that we're back to 4 a.m. tweets for the next four years. It's been a while. But yeah, Donald Trump has talked a lot about his mass deportation plan.

And when you talk to people close to him, you know, Stephen Miller has gone into depth about this. His border czar, Tom Holman, has talked a lot about this. And they all sort of have the same idea, which is use every single resource possible. And in some cases, use resources that are not currently possible to implement the plan. So they've talked a lot about starting with criminals and national security threats. Stephen Miller has spoken at length about sort of expanding some of these holding centers for undocumented migrants. Donald Trump has talked about using the National Guard and local police. And so I think everything's on the table. Stephen Miller has talked about invoking the Insurrection

Act and declaring a health emergency. So they are thinking of essentially every single option in order to implement this. And this is clearly Donald Trump's focus, because if you look at who he started with when he was first deciding who was going to be in his cabinet, it was all sort of these national security folks. The boarders are Stephen Miller is his deputy chief of staff. And so you're seeing that that's really the focus for the campaign. Any sense of how many people we're talking about here? Because, I mean, actually estimates vary of the number of undocumented immigrants, 12 million to 20 million, somewhere in that range. So, I mean, any exercise of this scale and scope would be absolutely massive. So any sense of how many people they're actually thinking about here. I mean, when I talk to people close to Trump, they say as many people as possible, and that ultimately depends on what they're actually able to do. If you look at the number of ICE officers right now, it's not enough.

It's not even nearly enough to do what they want to do, but they're hoping that they can get the resources, whether it's through executive orders, whether it's through Congress, to drastically ramp up the resources that they have, which would drastically ramp up the amount of people that they could theoretically deport. So do they need Congress is an important question. I think it depends. I think that they're hoping that they can use some things with executive orders. I mean, I would be, you know, I've talked to people who say that they would be shocked. They're very close held with their executive orders, but I would be shocked if there are not executive orders floating around in the Trump transition team right now

that directly try to address some of this immigration. But I do think that some of the things that they're probably going to have to go through Congress. I mean, they threw it at the wall last time. They can try all they want, but we all saw the court system. The Congress is ultimately the only way. It's possible.

I mean, it's theoretically possible. That actually gets to a bigger question of there is a sense that Trump himself promised. He said, I've learned a lot of my lessons from last time around about personnel. How does that, how true is that? You and I were there, we covered the first term, unlike a lot of people who got into politics now. So how different is it from the last time around? How similar is it from last time around? Well, he's clearly trying, he's clearly appointing people that he believes are loyalists. What I think is interesting, though, is some of these folks, you know, you still have all of these different factions inside Trump world who are vying for different people. Some of those people

are maybe not the best choice for Trump, but the best choice for people around Trump. You know, I thought it was interesting that Donald Trump tapped Will Scharf, which is his personal or his lawyer over the past two years for the staff secretary position, because Will Scharf is Leonard Leo's prodigy. And Leonard Leo obviously had a falling out with Donald Trump years ago and is super influential in conservative orbits. And this potentially could be sort of Leonard Leo's way into the administration. Can you tell the audience who Leonard Leo is? He is a sort of donor, longtime federalist guy. You know, he was involved in some of Donald Trump's judges' picks back in the day, but they had a falling out.

They are not close anymore. He has been iced out of the Trump campaign, but he's super, super close with Will Scharf. That's right. And so I think that is notable. So you have people like that in Trump's orbit now who have already been tapped. I think it's going to be really interesting to see, for example, if they get confirmed how Marco Rubio and Tulsi Gabbard work together because they are very different. And so I think Trump is trying to pick loyalists, but it is such a he has 4000 positions to appoint. Are all of them going to truly be loyalists or are we going to see something like 2016 where some people have different opinions and there's going to be drama.

Tell me more about the Elon Musk relationship, bromance, etc. We talked some yesterday about this, but there's a sense that Elon, with some members of the transition team, has sort of worn out his welcome. We also see publicly him praising Javier Valle for getting rid of tariffs. It's the polar opposite of the direction Trump obviously wants to go. And we also see him backing his own pick for Treasury Secretary, which would also, I think if it came from anyone else, would probably rub Trump the wrong way. What can you tell us about those dynamics within the transition team? I mean, I know Donald Trump has said, sort of joked multiple times now that, you know, he's still around. He's still here.

Can't get him out of Mar-a-Lago. Yeah. And I think that's true. Taking pictures with the family. No, literally. Yeah, literally with the family. And I think that's true. I mean, he's hanging around Mar-a-Lago every week.

But I think they're still in that bromance stage. From my interview, I think Donald Trump sort of is fascinated by Elon Musk. Elon Musk spent $200 million to help get Donald Trump elected. You know, some people in Trump's orbit are a little miffed that Elon Musk is so close. He's sitting in on transition meetings. He's weighing in privately and publicly on who he thinks Donald Trump should pick. But, you know, Trump loves, to an extent, people who love him and people who are sort of fanboying. And I think right now that's how he is viewing Elon Musk. Yeah, to have the richest man in the world as your fanboy, I'm sure that's pretty potent stuff. Yeah, he's going to a Starship thing today, isn't he?

Yeah, he's going to the launch of a SpaceX rocket. They were at the UFC fight together. Yeah. Let's put this up there on the screen. One of your latest reports here about the Trump transition co-chairs are both in limbo on cabinet jobs. So this includes the Cantor Fitzgerald CEO Howard Lutnick and also Linda McMahon, who was, what was she, small business under Donald Trump last time around? So what's going on, you know, inside this Treasury fight? I've been fascinated by it. Originally, it's Scott Besson and Howard Lutnick there. Elon endorses Howard. Now,

neither of them appear to be in contention, mostly because Trump is pissed that, what, people are leaking against each other. Hilarious. With Linda McMahon, too. I mean, she, I mean, she didn't give $200 million, but she gave a decent amount of money there to Donald Trump. So what's up with those two? And what position, like, are they jockeying for and are they likely to get now? So Linda internally for months has made it clear that she wants commerce. And for months it's been pretty clear that she's the only clear contender for commerce. But she has not yet been offered the position.

And I've been told by a few people that she's pissed about it. Interesting. And one of the reasons that people are theorizing that she has not gotten the position is because Donald Trump is essentially waiting to see if he needs to use that commerce position as sort of a holdover from a more important spot. Say if Besant doesn't get Treasury, maybe they'll drop him down to commerce. And as for the Treasury, it is, there's drama there. So we're seeing Howard and Scott as the two frontrunners for a while now. Well, Scott was really the core frontrunner. And then Howard started sort of vying for the position himself.

And it's gotten to the point where Donald Trump is really annoyed by the public jockeying. With Donald Trump, I think it's really interesting because as much as he loves a little bit of the drama and he loves sort of, in the case of Elon Musk, somebody who fanboys around him, he also hates when somebody is too aggressive in trying to get into his orbit. And I've been told in the case of Howard that that has certainly happened. Well, he put himself after J.D. Vance at MSG. It's like, who are you? You're a transition chair. Why are you speaking before Donald Trump? He's introducing Elon Musk.

He made himself a central character, I guess, throughout this entire thing. So throughout this, it's only been, what, 15 days or something like that over the transition. We talked about Elon and the drama, but those other factions like you're talking about, is it your sense similarly of like different ideological coalitions that are coming at war? And ultimately, what sways Trump? This is like the eternal question. What is the reasoning behind his decisions? Because for every Matt Gaetz, you also get a Marco Rubio, right?

Like what's going on behind his decisions? Because for every Matt Gaetz, you also get a Marco Rubio, right? Yeah. Like, what's going on behind that? It's a good question, because I think, you know, Donald Trump's first and foremost concern, as you said, is loyalty. But he also has all of these factions vying for him. Treasury is interesting, because I feel like it's mostly sort of a lot of people support Scott. And then there's sort of Howard, who had spent months trying to convince Elon Musk to publicly come out for him, which he ended up doing. So it's sort of like Howard and Elon. So that's kind of a unique situation. I also think that when it comes to some of these, you know, Treasury, Commerce, some of these more economy-focused jobs, it's less about almost loyalty, right, compared to, okay, we need someone

who's going to implement Donald Trump's mass deportation plan. Like, that's, like, top of the list for Donald Trump. Commerce is, he doesn't care about it as much right now. So I think that there's all, it depends on the position, essentially, right? Gotcha. that there's all it depends on the position essentially right so you have uh kennedy you had um omid malik who is a big donor who's been in his corner for a long time you had tucker you had all of these folks vying for kennedy for hhs um there's less of that sort of overt camps when it comes to treasury gotcha um and how doesD. Vance fit into all of this?

I noticed he wasn't at the UFC fight. He wasn't at the RFK Jr. McDonald's hostage photo taking session. And I don't hear him brought up much in terms of like, you know, being part of these factions or part of these internal conversations. Yeah, Vance has sort of been pretty quiet over the past few weeks. And I think that's by design. I think he's more involved in things that involve Congress. You know, he is having conversations with lawmakers. I think that's going to be one of his key roles as vice president because he was just in Congress and he's so close to some of those folks. And so I think he's working on sort of cultivating and making those relationships behind the scenes rather than being sort of a forward-facing role sitting in on every single

decision. He also has three young kids. So he's still back and forth from Ohio. So he's certainly involved in these decisions, but it's much less of a forward-facing role. And I think that's why I decide. That's smart. All right. Well, Shelby, we always love talking to you. Thank you for joining us. Great to see you, Shelby. Thanks for having me. Over the past six years of making my true crime podcast hell and gone, I've learned one thing. No town is too small for murder. I'm Katherine Townsend. I've received hundreds of messages from people across the country begging for help with unsolved murders. I was calling about the murder of my husband at the cold case. I've never found her, country, begging for help with unsolved murders. Every week on Hell and Gone Murder Line,

I dig into a new case, bringing the skills I've learned as a journalist and private investigator to ask the questions no one else is asking. Police really didn't care to even try. She was still somebody's mother. She was still somebody's daughter. She was still somebody's sister. There's so many questions that we've never gotten any kind of answers for. If you have a case you'd like me to look into, call the Hell and Gone Murder Line at 678-744-6145. Listen to Hell and Gone Murder Line on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Michael Kassin, founder and CEO of 3C Ventures and your guide on Good Company, the podcast where I sit down with the boldest innovators shaping what's

next. In this episode, I'm joined by Anjali Sood, CEO of Tubi, for a conversation that's anything but ordinary. We dive into the competitive world of streaming, how she's turning so-called niche into mainstream gold, connecting audiences with stories that truly make them feel seen. What others dismiss as niche, we embrace as core. It's this idea that there are so many stories out there, and if you can find a way to curate and help the right person discover the right content, the term that we always hear from our audience is that they feel seen. Get a front row seat to where media, marketing, technology, entertainment, and sports collide.

And hear how leaders like Anjali are carving out space and shaking things up a bit in the most crowded of markets. Listen to Good Company on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. She was a decorated veteran, a Marine who saved her comrades, a hero. She was stoic, modest, tough, someone who inspired people. Everyone thought they knew her, until they didn't. I remember sitting on her couch and asking her, is this real? Is this real? Is this real? Is this real? I just couldn't wrap my head around what kind of person would do that

to another person that was getting treatment, that was, you know, dying. This is a story all about trust and about a woman named Sarah Kavanaugh. I've always been told I'm a really good listener, right? And I maximized that while I was lying. Listen to Deep Cover, The Truth About Sarah on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. All right, guys, we have a very special treat for everyone out there in the world. Producer Griffin is joining us live to have a big fight with Sagar about Ben Affleck's comments on AI. Griffin, thank you very much.

We actually just tagged you in this morning because I felt you were more competent to make this case than I was. So thank you. Yeah, me and Sagar normally fight before the shows, so it's good to do it on camera this time. That's right. People get to see behind the scenes. Griffin is not just some random dude. He literally is a former NYU film student. He lived in Hollywood. He worked on multiple movies.

He's literally a film prodigy who at the age, what was it, 20 years old? He had a movie that went to Sundance. So he's not just somebody. He's actually, he knows what he's talking about. Absolutely. Most importantly, a member of the Ben Affleck fan club. I've seen the town over 10 times and I'm a Dunkin' Donuts rewards member. So I'm with love for Affleck. Amazing. Amazing. All right. Let's start. Let's go ahead and get to the comments in question from Mr. Affleck that sparked this whole debate. Let's take a listen.

A bunch of actors that are completely recreated for this market or that market. A, that's not possible now. B, will it be possible in the future? Highly unlikely. C, movies will be one of the last things, if everything gets replaced, to be replaced by AI. AI can write you excellent imitative verse that sounds a little bit, and it cannot write you Shakespeare. The function of having two actors or three or four actors in a room and the taste to discern and construct that is something that currently entirely eludes AI's capability and I think will for a meaningful period of time. What AI is going to do is going to disintermediate the more laborious, less creative, and more costly aspects of filmmaking that will allow

cost to be brought down, that will be lower the barrier to entry, that will allow more voices to be heard, that will make it easier for the people who want to make Good Will Hunting to go out and make it. Look, AI is a craftsman at best. Craftsmen can learn to make stickly furniture by sitting down next to somebody and seeing what their technique is and imitating. That's how large video models, large language models basically work. A library of vectors of meaning and transformers that interpret in context, right? But they're just cross-pollinating things that exist. Nothing new is created.

Not yet. Not yet. Yeah, not yet. And really, in order to do that, look, craftsman is knowing how to work. Art is knowing when to stop. And I think knowing when to stop is going to be a very difficult thing for AI to learn because it's taste.

And also, lack of consistency, lack of controls, lack of quality. AI, for this world of generative video video is going to do key things more. I wouldn't like to be in the visual effects business. They're in trouble. Griffin, Ben Affleck basically arguing there that AI in Hollywood will be a net benefit. It will lower costs, allow a sort of creative flourishing. What say you?

So it's complicated because he's right and he's wrong. I think that he is certainly overlooking the fact that he's like, oh, if you're in the visual effects business, you're in trouble. But if you're in the majority of the below-line industry businesses, you're in trouble, whether it's being an editor, a sound mixer, the background extras, even some of the foreground actors are getting their likenesses stolen right now and repurposed for ai and they're testing it right now mainly in like commercials and stuff um i do think he's right in certain areas where it's like oh it's going to give more

freedom to individuals to create bigger things than they could on their own if someone wanted to create a goodwill hunting. But I think the big elephant in the room he's forgetting is none of this is happening to improve art or give people more opportunities. It's for executives to make a few more million while they slash tens and thousands of film industry jobs over the next like 10 to 15 years. And they're going to do it before the art is good

or if it ever gets good. They're going to do it before the art is good or if it ever gets good. They're going to do it now in service slot. So I understand what you're saying, Griffin. I think that the counter is that this is technology. I mean, one of the examples that he gives, for example, is that House of the Dragon won't take two years. You can have a new season that will come out, but the scripts and all of that will remain creative.

And I get, you know, yeah, if it worked in the visual effects business, that sucks, but reducing the economy of scale and making it so that the technology is easier could actually create more opportunities, first and foremost. But second, this is a technological inevitability. Like in the 1980s, the CGI effects and all that were terrible. They were very costly. Eventually, as they go down, then you were actually able to create a lot of new content, new roles and all of that are there. That doesn then you are actually able to create a lot of new content, new roles and all of that are there. That doesn't mean I'm not sympathetic to a lot of the people

who were, what was it, like Disney animation, right? A lot of it was hand-drawn. And then the Pixar revolution comes in and changes all of that. We still got great movies. Now, unfortunately, it did mean that thousands of people didn't have to sit there and hand-draw, but that was, you know, physically, it was very inefficient. So I didn't have a real problem with what he said, because what you were telling me is that a lot of people in Hollywood are very angry at him. But, you know, in a certain sense, it's like you're angry at technology. You're going to choose ultimately what is going to be the cheapest option. I thought it was a very insightful answer because what it does show is that while the technology and the craft and the inputs themselves will reduce, that the actual creative inputs and what makes Hollywood and movies and content really so fantastic, that actually can't

be programmed. So in a certain sense, I didn't think he was an AI doomer. I thought that it was a real optimistic way of how AI is just physically a tool and nothing is ever going to come and replace us. So two points to there. So let's focus just on the video effects just for a second. So, I use this example a lot of the Marvel slop. Marvel movies continue to get worse and worse, but technology is getting better, but we continue to funnel down to the lowest common denominator because it's more money for the film executives. I use the example of Pirates of the Caribbean 2, Dead Man's Chest. This is a very popular example online. An incredible film. There's a scene in the CGI of that. It's a 2006 film of Davy Jones. He's an octopus man and he's playing the piano with his tentacles.

And it was 20 years ago and it looks better than any CGI you see today, which I think is an example of, well, yeah, technology can improve, but executives aren't using it to make better art. They're using it to make more money. Now, to your point about like, oh, individual creators can then like go and like make goodwill hunting and a director can be untethered from the production costs and on all that stuff. And I do see that example, but for me it's like a lot of people think like the director can like make the whole movie,

but like a Martin Scorsese movie is good. Not just because Scorsese is good, but because he is as the director is channeling the talents, the experiences and the art from real humans. All these people on set. Should I frame the camera this way? Should we dolly it? Should we like these people? How are we doing their hair and makeup? These aren't all decisions just coming from Martin Scorsese's brain. He's channeling other people's art and creativity, and I don't think we're going to see that with AI systems in the same way. But I see it. That's actually a good example where Scorsese, the reason that Scorsese movies are great

is because Scorsese does things his way. Tarantino, same way in terms of his rejection and wants to do a lot of the stuff in real time. One of the reasons that Tom Cruise movies are so fantastic is he insists on doing the stunts himself and making it as real as possible. That's what makes them outliers and what makes them fantastic. So great script, great acting, great visual effects. While yes, there's still going to be a lot of Hollywood slop. I mean, I personally swore a blood oath that I was done with Marvel after Ant-Man and

the Wasp. And I just said, I'm done. I'm done. You know, and it's like, I saw Shang-Chi. I came to a turn. I stuck with them. I stuck with them through WandaVision, through all the, and I finally, I just said, it's over. You were dead ender. I'm a dead ender for sure. It's one of those though, where they did pay a cost, right? You know, they have had diminishing returns while they certainly did make some money on those movies, their cultural cache and Marvel universe, et cetera, is going downhill. Whereas we've had major success of a lot of the films that you're talking about that bring the individual filmmakers taste. So it will just be like a technological standard, but what makes great films great films and the ability of people like Ridley Scott or any of these others to have some visual effects,

but ultimately rely on the genius of their directing, the humanity, and also be able to compel studio funding, which is really what they're best at. They can get big budget films and direct it towards these resources. I still feel like that niche will always exist. In Hollywood, it's just like the example he gave about House of the Dragon, that seems like the most apt one. And again, I get it.

If you work in visual effects, it probably sucks. But if you worked as a, I don't know, like a boom guy in the 1980s and your job eventually phased out, that's a little bit nature of the business too. Yeah, but with house of the dragon, like it's not going to just be the video effects. It's going to be the scripts. It's going to be like the majority of the actors on screen. It's going to be even like, they're going to start face tuning people. So you don't need hair and makeup. You're going to need like all these, all these different things that aren't

just a cost, but are a creative input that makes something that's unique, that actually is art, that touches the heart. I use the Netflix slop example a lot. If you go on Netflix right now, Netflix, to cut costs, has completely homogenized how they make film. That's why every film you see on Netflix is called Tall Girl. And they're all shot with the same camera and the same bland look. Everyone talks about, why do things look like gray worm meal? It's because it's cheaper.

It's because it's cheaper. It's not because it's better art or because the director's got to express themselves more. It's because it's more homogenized. Well, you know, another example of that, Griffin, I think is YouTube shorts. I banned my kids from watching them at all because all they are.

I'm not a great parent, but I'm this one thing I did take a stand because all they are is AI slop. That's it. Because that's what the economics makes sense for. So even if only one out of 100 like takes off or whatever, because they're all so shitty and so low quality, they cost nothing. So that seems to me the direction that this is ultimately going to go in. And I also question the idea, the premise of like, oh, now more independent creators, it'll be lower cost, et cetera. Using AI will be low cost for major studios because they have the technology suite and the licenses because AI is already like a monopolistic business. So they'll have

that technology suite. They'll have the resources to do all the things that you're talking about. Independent filmmakers are not going to have access to that level of technological. That's a really interesting point. Yeah, that's a really interesting point. And let's let's even say they do. OK, like let's say there's a program that you can sign up for that's 30 bucks a month subscription fee, and you can make a whole world and like design everything. Why would any studio need to buy it from you or distribute it when they can just do it themselves? It's like, great, throw it up on YouTube and it gets 50 views.

We're going to just make the exact same thing and not pay you because we don't need you because everyone can do this now. So there's that element too. I do want to like, I want to give a little bit of like a devil's advocate to something Ben says, where like anyone can make goodwill hunting as an independent filmmaker. One of the things that has triggered me most over my career is a lot of articles saying, wow, with technology, like anyone can make a movie now. You can make a movie on an iPhone. That's bullshit. That's not true. You can shoot it on the iPhone, but then you're going to need to spend a hundred grand from somewhere to sound mix it, get it ready for a theater, do all that post. So like there are all these costs that make it.

So only rich kids really make independent film. When I produced indie film, it was never because someone had a good idea. It was because I knew a rich kid whose mommy and daddy were willing to give them a quarter million dollars to like go shoot a film. So I think there is something there to like democratizing certain parts of it, but I don't think that that's what the executives are doing. I don't think that that's how they're going to try to control the system of delivery with all of it. And ultimately, I think it's going to continue to just homogenize art and creativity. I think most of the movies that Sager loves were not made with any AI.

And I would be surprised if 10 years later, Sager's favorite movies are the AI ones versus the great films we've seen. You're not wrong, right? You're absolutely not wrong. But here's the sad part, that Netflix slop, it exists for a reason. People watch it. They like it. I mean, let's put this up on the screen from the Atlantic. There's no longer any doubt that Hollywood writing is powering AI. They talk specifically here about how, what was it, 85,000 TV episodes and 53,000 other movies were used by AI systems to be trained on writer's work to be able to fill in certain things, including every film nominated for Best Picture from 1950 to 2016, The Simpsons, every episode of The Wire, The Sopranos, Breaking Bad. Do I ever think that AI will be able to

produce any of those shows or even incredible movies that I just listed? No. But there's a lot of people out there, unfortunately, Griffin, who like Outer Banks. I couldn't tell you what Outer Banks is about. Honestly, I couldn't tell you. If I looked at the Netflix top 10 TV shows right now, it is just straight shit, like every single one of them. But they're top 10 TV shows right now. It is just straight shit for like every single one of them. But they're top 10 and they get hundreds of hours. If I recall, what was that movie

with The Rock on Netflix? Was it Red Notice? That, I mean, you know, that was a huge movie. People liked it. They actually liked it. I hate to say it. Hitman.

There's another one. I didn't watch Hitman, but I know that was a big one. There was a, what, Gray Man? Okay, I haven't watched. Gray Man, is that Ryan Gosling? But I don't think any of those films were made with AI. Those films were made by humans and that's why you liked them. was a a big one there was a great man okay i haven't won gray man is that ryan gosling but i don't think any of those films were made with ai those films are made by humans and that's why you

like them definitely well what i'm giving an example is that just generic replacement level film and tv on netflix people enjoy it you know even those crappy fake animated series that they do for children which look horrible but they're they're always like number six, you know, number eight. You and I are always going to be on HBO watching prestige television, but there's not a big market for it, unfortunately. Yeah. I mean, I do, I do think you're right. I think it's a question of like, um, how do we continue to protect art? And if we value art, how do we protect it? That should be like the main goal of people like Ben Affleck talking about this, not like all the fun things that you can do in the future with

AI, but like, how do we like protect and keep on making creative pictures that require humans, in my opinion, as opposed to, um, just kind of letting things fly and seeing where things go next, because most of the stuff is slop. You're right. A lot of people watch it. And I think that the industry right now is kind of in a big evolution right now. You know, everyone went big into streaming. There was so much slop. And even back in the day, like if you turn on cable, 90 percent of the shows were bad. Remember the 10 percent good ones. right? But like, ultimately, I think if you're a lover of film, if you're a lover of art, all of this AI stuff and the things that drive what they're developing it for, it seems to be anti-art and pro-slop. And I think

that people like Affleck need to kind of do everything they can with their cache of power to prevent that as long as possible. Yeah. I mean, to me, there's a vibe from Affleck of like, well, I'm going to be fine. Yeah. You are, buddy. He's on the lifeboat. Yeah, you're good. But how about the rest? The other thing that to me gets to the core that the disagreement that you guys are having is, you know, to me, art should have value outside of the ability to commodify it, outside of just like the market dynamics. And the move towards more and more AI and more and more slop undercuts art and just makes it about the like, you know, capitalist market incentives. And I think that that is a loss. I think that's a loss for the country, for the culture market incentives. And I think that that is a loss.

I think that's a loss for the country, for the culture, et cetera. That as you said, Griffin, it's pro-slop and anti-art. Well, I like it. Can we all agree we need a town too, Griffin? Do we need a secret? Yes, we need a town too, a chat GPT town too. I've got it right here.

It's great. The town is misspelled and Ben Affleck has three eyes, but it's great. We're going to make money. We're making money, folks. And the biggest question, here's the thing, executives, if you're listening, who's going to wait all the tables in LA if you fire all these people? That's the big question. I guess robots also. There's a big underground market. That's right. You're going to wipe out the entire service industry in Los Angeles. Come on. I don't have any fresh towels in my Chateau Mormont hotel right now. They're going to live to regret it. That's right. Love it.

I know a lot of cops. They get asked all the time, have you ever had to shoot your gun? Sometimes the answer is yes. But there's a company dedicated to a future where the answer will always be no. This is Absolute Season 1. Taser Incorporated.

I get right back there and it's bad. Listen to Absolute Season 1. Taser Incorporated, on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Clayton English. I'm Greg Lott. And this is Season 2 of the War on Drugs podcast. Last year, a lot of the problems of the drug war. This year, a lot of the biggest names in music and sports. This kind of star-stud that a little bit, man.

We met them at their homes. We met them at their recording studios. Stories matter and it brings a face to them. It makes it real. It really does. It makes it real. Listen to new episodes of the War on Drugs podcast season two on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,

or wherever you get your podcasts. The OGs of uncensored motherhood are back and badder than ever. I'm Erica. And I'm Mila. And we're the hosts of the Good Moms Bad Choices podcast brought to you by the Black Effect Podcast Network every Wednesday. Yeah, we're moms, but not your mommy.

Historically, men talk too much. And women have quietly listened. And all that stops here. If you like witty women, then this is your tribe. Listen to the Good Moms, Bad Choices podcast every Wednesday on the Black Effect Podcast Network, the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you go to find your podcasts. This is an iHeart Podcast.