Morning Brew Daily - Fox Buys Roku for $22B & The UK Bans Social Media for Kids

Episode Date: June 16, 2026

#868: Fox acquires Roku in a $22B deal to power its streaming aspirations. The UK is the latest major country that moves to ban social media use for kids under 16. Fans continue to loathe the mandatory hydration breaks during the World Cup because they believe it’s less about player safety and more about commercial breaks. Then it’s Toby’s Trends that looks into why everybody is loving dates…the fruit, that is. Finally, the stock market cheers for US-Iran peace deal. To learn more visit https://www.servicenow.com Subscribe to Morning Brew Daily for more of the news you need to start your day. Share the show with a friend, and leave us a review on your favorite podcast app. Listen to Morning Brew Daily Here:⁠ ⁠⁠https://www.swap.fm/l/mbd-note⁠⁠⁠  Watch Morning Brew Daily Here:⁠ ⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/@MorningBrewDailyShow⁠ Paid endorsement. Brokerage services provided by Open to the Public Investing Inc, member FINRA & SIPC. Advisory services by Public Advisors LLC, SEC-registered adviser.  Investing involves risk. Not investment advice. Agentic Brokerage is an AI-powered conversational tool that allows you to enter instructions for a set of self-directed, recurring transactions (your “Agent”) for your account. Outputs from Agentic Brokerage are provided for informational and illustrative purposes only, and should not be considered investment recommendations or advice. Complete disclosures available at public.com/disclosures. See terms of match program at https://public.com/disclosures/matchprogram. Matched funds must remain in your account for at least 5 years. Match rate and other terms are subject to change at any time. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

AI is uncharted territory, and many leaders are trying to navigate through without a guide to help them. That's why Morning Brew created The Intelligence Shift, a new podcast with PWC. It's all about how AI is fundamentally changing different industries. Host Dan Priest is joined by a top-tier roster of industry leaders who share real stories and real lessons learned. Get guidance from industry experts. Listen to the intelligence shift wherever you get your podcasts. Good morning, Brue Daily show. Simon. And I'm Toby Howell. Today, Harry Potter and Matilda don't even think about opening up

Instagram. The UK is banning social media for kids. Then Fox is buying Roku for $22 billion. It's Tuesday, June 16th. Let's Ride. If you wanted to capture the essence of the United States of 2026 in an object, what would you choose? That was the question facing the America 250 commission, which yesterday revealed the contents of a 900 pound time capsule that will be buried on July 4th and dug up 250 years later in the year 2276. The commission asked for help by requesting keepsakes from all 50 states, five territories, and three branches of government, and everyone took it in a different direction. Maine submitted a bone from an endangered whale.

Georgia sent in a painting of the Masters logo, and California offered a prediction by a chatbot of what the state would look like 250 years from now. Maryland initially tried to submit old bay seasoning, naturally, but that was rejected because it could degrade over time. Yeah, I'm actually less interested about what's inside than in how you keep what's inside preserved for 250 years because it's an engineering problem. The AP described how engineers plan to keep things safe.

Water is the enemy. Time capsules typically fail because water gets inside and destroys everything that you so painstakingly curated. This time capsule is stainless steel. They chose a cylinder instead of a box because corners and edges are more likely to crack over long periods of time. also sealed the contents inside at a 35% relative humidity, which is moist enough that the paper contents won't dry out, but it's dry enough to avoid moisture damage. Plus, they also buried

it 10 feet underground, which protects it from temperature and weather swings. The quote from the engineer who designed the capsule, Philadelphia would have to be six feet underwater in order for this time capsule to even possibly take on water. So looks like everything is in good hands. I think they should just go visit my parents' basement to learn how people accumulate things, over time and nothing even seems to go anywhere. It seems to stay there for a decade. So maybe they should just go and take notes. And now a word from our sponsor, ServiceNow.

Neil, AI was supposed to handle the parts of the job I hate. Instead, it just describes them, suggest what to do about them, and then leaves me to do it. That's not help. That's homework. ServiceNow's AI specialists are different. They're not a tool. Think of them as digital teammates who can actually do the work. They can resolve cases, process requests, close loops without generating

extra work for you. When you can truly delegate to AI, you can get back the work only you can do, the work that requires a person with ideas and judgment and, you know, a pulse. To put AI to work for people, visit servicenow.com. That's service now.com. Fox is moving deeper into your living room and making itself comfortable. The Media Empire spent $22 billion to buy the connected streaming giant Roku yesterday, giving it a major foothold in the streaming industry. Fox is mostly sat on the sidelines for the streaming wars, focusing instead on selling ads for live sports and news. It did dip a toe into the streaming wars back in 2020 when it acquired Tubeby, but its Fox One app launched last year has yet to attract a big

subscriber base. But Roku is a major player reaching over 100 million households globally. It also occupies a unique position within the streaming landscape. When you buy a Roku, you can load it up with other streaming services like Netflix, Hulu Prime. So if you're any one of those companies, you have to play nice with Roku. Analysts describe it as a TV gatekeeper who gets a little sugar whenever you sign up for another service through its platform.

But investors in both companies aren't necessarily a fan of the team up. Fox hasn't really needed streaming up until this point since its sports and news divisions are money-making machines. So why bring in Roku, which has struggled to turn to profit consistently, just to try and make a late play

for streaming relevance. Neal, Fox's stock finished the day down 15% and Roku down 2%. Marrying content and distribution like Fox is trying to do here is very difficult. It has not worked out in the past, but it's fascinating because historically, the order's been the other way around the distribution company has bought the content company. If you go just back a decade, there were all these internet and telecom companies trying to buy content companies or media companies. You had AT&D, Verizon, AOL, they all were buying Time Warner and, and, you know, Yahoo and it did not work out. I mean, AOL's purchase of Time Warner in 2000 for $165 billion was considered the worst corporate deal of all time. Fox is doing the opposite. It is a content

company historically that says actually maybe the future TV isn't through content. It's by owning the means of distribution. It's by owning the platform by which you can get to all the other streaming services. And remember, actually, Fox has been selling off some of its content in 2019. It sold its movie studio. It's stake into Hulu. It's entertainment assets to Disney for $71 billion and really started to focus on the things it did best, which was air NFL football games and air Fox News into, you know, your parents' living room because those are the moneymakers of this Fox empire. But if you are Fox, you're looking around and saying, all right, cable is dying. We've heard that written on the walls for the past,

you know, decade or so. And that's not good for you because those news and sports channels do still rely on cable. So how do you solve that problem? You solve it by, buying yourself a new distribution network, which is 100 million households that currently subscribe to Roku. So it was trying to, you know, make a late play for the streaming world. But really, it was just making it a late play to make sure that cable dying off doesn't kill off its main core businesses. And it's taking an unorthodox approach into the streaming wars now because it's

betting on ad-supported free streaming. So it bought Tooby a few years ago, which actually has been a, seems like a stroke of genius, because 2B is huge and a lot of Gen Z loves it. But ad-supported streaming has been kind of in vogue. Even Netflix, all these other streaming platforms say, well, people are not going to necessarily pay $20 a month for my service, but maybe they'll pay $599 or even if we give it to them for free and we'll just sell ads on it.

And this is a growing market. Ad-supporting streaming plans now represent almost 50% of all premium subscription video-on-demand signups in the U.S. Two years ago, that was just 39%. So it is climbing. And then when you look at the numbers of how much market share a Fox Roku streaming service would command, I mean, it's number three behind YouTube and Disney. It's going to take up 10.2% of total U.S. TV viewing time by any media company that's ahead of Netflix.

It's ahead of Paramount. It's ahead of NBC Universal. It's head of Amazon. I think the biggest risk here and maybe why the market was not looking so kindly on this deal is that Roku's biggest advantage has been neutrality. because it works with Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Comcast. Anyone who has a Roku knows that some of those streaming services literally appear on the remote of Roku, and they liked Roku because, hey, if I'm Netflix,

this gives me a chance to move into more households as well, but now that Fox owns it, will those relationships get a little strained? Will Roku continue to act as this unbiased platform company? That remains to be seen. In addition to the fact that Roku has struggled making money, and Fox has been very good at me. making money of late. Those are probably some of the reasons why the market was not so happy that these two are teaming up. Moving on, British Prime Minister Kier Starmer is embracing his new role

as headmaster at Hogwarts. Yesterday, he announced that the UK is banning children under 16 from using social media. The sweeping rule, which goes into effect next year, will apply to popular apps like Snapchat, Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube, but not to messaging platforms like WhatsApp. In justifying the ban, Starmor framed the issue as an existential battle over childhood, a battle that kids were losing, at no fault of their own, to the big tech companies. Starmers said, quote, every parent can see it with their own eyes. Social media is making children unhappy. I've heard firsthand from families crying out for change and we will do right by them.

If the policy were successful, he added, we'd see a cultural change, a sense that actually you can grow up differently. The UK joins a growing list of countries blocking kids from accessing social media, which was pioneered by Australia six months ago. Starmor said he was directly inspired by Australia's approach, using it as a model to his own policy. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was overjoyed to have an ally in this fight, calling the UK's ban an important step. Of course, not everyone agrees it is an important step, or even a worthy one. Digital privacy organizations hate the idea of internet age checks,

and tech companies are very much opposed as well. Under Australia and the UK's laws, they're on the hook for tens of millions of dollars if they don't take reasonable measures to keep kids off their platforms. Toby, the bans, they are spreading. It looks like kids are taking it well, soon as this band was announced, the BBC went into some classrooms and started interviewing kids. The BBC asked one girl, what was your screen time last weekend? She said, nine hours. And the BBC interviewer said, you're going to have a lot more time to fill. What are you going to do? She said, stare at a wall, which, you know, maybe is preferable to what's going on with kids in adolescence right now with the relationship with social media. But this ban definitely

goes further than Australia. The government is considering preventing strangers from being allowed to contact children. They want force breaks in that infinite scrolling algorithm. And the reason why they feel emboldened to do this is that there's just tons of public support for it. More than 90% of those polled supported an under 16 social media ban. The government received 116,000 public submissions. The second largest consultation response since the UK's same-sex marriage consultation in 2012. That just shows how everyone is pretty aligned that social media is bad for kids and we want to do something about it. Well, not everyone is a line.

I mean, the tech companies say that this is a bad policy because let's just see YouTube statement. They said it would push kids out of curated, supervised beneficial experiences toward anonymous less safe services. They say, look, we are regulated by the government. We have to do certain things around our content that we put on our platforms. If the kids are banned from going on YouTube or Instagram,

which are above board, what's going to happen when they go into even darker internet space? and they think that these policies will do that. The other line is that this is not going to work. Like, we could do all these age verification things, but kids are still going to find a way to go online, so it's just misguided policy. There should be other ways to create more safety for children online

than these blanket bans, and they point to what's happening in Australia because, yes, Australia banned kids from going on social media six months ago, but in a recent survey, 70% of parents said their children were, still on those banned platforms. And in a report from March, the E-Safty Commissioner from Australia said that, quote, despite overall reductions in account ownership, a substantial number of children aged under 16 retain accounts. I guess the counterargument to that that, you know, politicians

are making is that, listen, they know kids are going to find a way around these social media bands, but it's similar to alcohol restrictions just because some teenagers are still going to go to your parents' basement and drink alcohol, it doesn't mean that you just give up altogether and trying to regulate it. And really a lot of them are pointing to the next generation. If they don't grow up on social media, it will become this new normal, basically, for the kids of the world.

That is why they're saying, even though some people are going to slip through the cracks, even though some people are still going to access it right now, maybe in the future it will become a less normal thing to do for kids. Up next, the vibes for the World Cup have been even better than anticipated. Excellent games. Joyous fans, the U.S. looking dangerous. but there is one element that's dragging the mood down, hydration breaks.

For the first time in the World Cup's 96-year history, FIFA has instituted mandatory stoppages around the 22nd and 67th minute of each game, effectively dividing the beautiful game in two quarters. The official explanation, FIFA said it wanted to protect the players' health by giving them hydration breaks while running around in the steamy American summer. But fans are not buying that. They're convinced it's a money grab to enable six additional minutes of commercial during each game.

And that's exactly what's been happening. When the World Cup games kicked off on Thursday, Fox, which broadcast the games in the U.S., cut to commercials after announcing a, quote, power-aid hydration break. This may not seem like a huge deal to fans of American sports. Commercials are intrinsic to broadcast like football and basketball. After all, the Super Bowl is probably more about the ad breaks than the game itself. But soccer, that's different. The sport is characterized by its constantly ticking clock interrupted only by the whistle for

halftime and full-time, a play. could be writhing on the grass in pain and his teammate would play on if it didn't look too serious. So the backlash has been severe with fans, coaches, and some players outraged over the creeping commercialization of the game. Toby, before we move on, might if I just grab

some water, I'm a little thirsty? Here's the thing. It is very hot in here, so I will allow that. But zoom out, follow the money here because the financial piece of this is difficult to ignore. If Fox gets two minutes and 10 seconds of commercial break two times a match, that is

across 104 matches total, that's 832 new 32nd advertising slots that previously had never existed at World Cup. So that is why people are saying, read between the lines here, buddies. We just talked about how Fox makes money. It's through selling ads on sports. Yeah. So I don't know if it's going to go away anytime soon either because the 2030 World Cup, that goes to Spain, Portugal, and Morocco.

Also, you know, hot during the summers. 2034, that goes to Saudi Arabia. so maybe these regions with extreme summer heat, the water breaks are just going to become the new normal for this tournament because you're just going to make so much money as a broadcaster when you can toss in these extra ad slots. One of the amazing reasons why fans think that FIFA is full of it is that in 2014 they also instituted hydration breaks. But that was not mandatory. It was only when there was a threshold. There was a temperature threshold. This was in Brazil.

and when the temperature rose above 32 degrees Celsius, 89.6 degrees Fahrenheit, that's when those games triggered a hydration break. But now it is mandatory for every single game. The stadiums in the hottest places in the United States, Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, and Los Angeles have domes. So when you're watching the first game on Thursday, when they went to a hydration break,

the temperature was 71 degrees Fahrenheit. So the fact that FIFA in the past instituted a voluntary hydration break at something like 90 degrees Fahrenheit. And now they're doing a blanket one where teams and domes playing at 71 degrees are getting them. That's where people say this doesn't add up. This has to be a money grab. And also just tactically, they have been proven as a chance to switch momentum during games. There are these graphs of who has the ball more, who's offering more of an attacking threat. And oftentimes water breaks provide a reprieve for the team.

that are under siege right now. And it's made for some interesting tactical tussles. The one I'm thinking above is Cape Verde versus Spain yesterday. These are a juggernaut versus one of the last teams qualify for the tournament. And the star of that unlikely zero-zero draw yesterday was Kate Verde's goalie, who was a 40-year-old named Vazenia. He gained 4.4 million Instagram followers and less than a day after, you know, providing this unlikely tie.

He started a match with 45,000. Now he has more than Joe Burrow, Lamar Jackson, Aaron Judge, Josh Allen, and Jalen Brunson. So again, I don't know how much water break contributed to this, but it does a little bit. I don't get that transition. Well, here's the transition, Neil.

If you are a team that's, you know, defending for their life as Cape Verde was against Spain, the extra break, you know, a little extra reprieve, maybe some fresher legs. We have seen a little bit of the underdogs perform well so far on the turn. I wonder if tactically water breaks are contributing to that. Yeah, as one ex user put it, I love soccer because you can score zero goals like

K. Verde did and have it be the best day in the history of your nation. And truly was incredible scenes. I mean, this is archipelago off the coast of West Africa. There's 500,000 people, which is less than the population of Sacramento. And they just went toe to toe with Spain. Nill nil, Dravasinia is a new hero. And I do have a soft spot for K Verde because I was driving around. southeastern New England, which is where there's a big diaspora of of these people in the

United States. I got lunch at a K-Var-D place. So good. So good a new Bedford. All right. We're going to take a quick break and come back with Toby's trends right after this. Toby, let's do some free word association. Financially stressed. Toby. What about unexpected $1,000 medical expense? Crying, stress, lots of stress. Duck? Afflack. Smart man. Afflack pays claims fast, accurately and fairly. Their plans can even help businesses and employees save tax dollars when payroll deductions are pre-taxed while coming at no direct cost to businesses. To learn more, just head to aflac.com slash morning brew daily. That's a-fellac.com slash morning brew daily. Toby, do you have any strong assets? Uh, yes, I have great legs. Toby, I mean the investment kind,

the ones that make up a multi-asset portfolio, like what you can build on public, with stocks, bonds, options, crypto, and more. With Public, you can now create agents that can monitor the market, manage your cash, and execute your trades. Just enter a prompt, approve the workflow, and put your agent to work. Head to public.com slash morning brew. That's public.com slash morning brew. Paid for by public investing, full disclosure and podcast description.

Neil, it feels like every week there's a new AI model making headlines. And somehow I'm expected to keep up with all of them. Fair. But Minimax's new one. M3 is one worth paying attention to. Their open weight model combines frontier level coding and AI agent capabilities, a massive 1 million token contacts window, and native multimodal understanding. M3 is built for coding, agent and visual understanding, helping developers and businesses build more capable AI products and automate complex tests. It's available today through APIs and leading

AI platforms. To learn more and start building with M3, visit minimax.io. That's mini max.io. Move over protein bars and whatever mysterious powder wellness influencers are stirring into the water this week. America's newest health food obsession has been around since before the pyramids, and it's what I want to talk about on today's edition of Toby's trends. Dates which humans have been eating for roughly 8,000 years are suddenly everywhere. They're showing up in smoothies, workout snacks, desserts, coffee, and your social media feed. Last year, U.S. sales of dates jumped 33% as consumers look to replace ultra-processed foods with more natural ingredients.

Dates are a star in that regard. They are naturally sweet, which makes them great substitutes for sugar and other sweeteners on TikTok and in my apartment. People are stuffing them with peanut butter and dipping them in chocolate for a guilt-free sweet treat. They're also packed with fiber, which has been catching up to protein as the nutritional trend at Dajor. Retailers are actively hunting for new, fun, date-based product. to put on shelves. You can now find candy-dusted dates, nut butter stuff dates, birthday cake flavor date balls

everywhere you look at your local grocery store. The date craze has gotten so intense that growers in California say they can't plant nude trees fast enough to keep up with demand. Neil, I've heard the dating scene is rough, but maybe everyone is just focusing on the wrong dates. Why not both? Call it a

double date. Let's talk about fiber, which some are calling the next protein. Now, dates have a lot of fiber, about three pieces of them, contained about five grams, and you're supposed to get 25 grams per day for women and 38 grams for men. So you're contributing to your daily fiber intake there. However, the average American is consuming only 10 to 15 grams daily. So when dieticians look at the craze over protein and the potential craze over fiber, they say, why is everyone eating so much protein because we already have enough protein, but we definitely

don't get enough fiber. So I think that is at least one of the factors pushing dates to this new level of stardom. And you have to remember, too, dates are definitely tied to Middle Eastern and North African food culture as well. The Middle East and Africa still account for 85.3% of the global date market share. And they typically see a spike in consumption along with breaking fast for Ramadan in other holidays like that. So it has this very deep cultural role in some parts of the world. But now you're Right, it's being adopted by, you know, health spaces because it's got a lot of fiber. They're naturally sweet. Dietitians are saying this is not new to us at all.

We've been recommending you put dates in your smoothies for, you know, years now because it makes them sweet without, you know, bumping up other sugar content. So I think you're absolutely right that it is the new, ride whatever wave that makes it good. Like maybe before it was the fact that it was naturally sweet. Now it's the fact that it's got a lot of fiber in it. whatever it takes, just rebrand yourself, even though you're an old food into it, you know, this new, you can teach old dog new tricks, and that tricks is just say that you have a lot of fiber in it. And there are plenty of startups that are getting into this space. And I think it helps that

date lends itself to like a punny name. So there's so many companies, just date, date better, date fix. And they're all doing weird things with dates. We haven't talked about this, but they're very versatile. You can do a lot of different things with them. You can stuff them with nut butter, dip them in chocolate. Some are getting even weirder with. There's a company called Julees that does sour watermelon dusted dates. Date fix, does dates blended with orange blossom water in squeezable pouches

before workouts. And we haven't talked about this element as well, which is the social media aspect. It's dates have blown up on social media. Oftentimes of people just like trying them for the first time or doing weird things with them. And oftentimes that is where these companies in the CPG space that are want to go on grocery shelves, take their cues. They're saying, oh, my God, people are doing these really interesting things on social media with dates that are catching on. Why don't we do them put in a package and sell it for $15? I think that they are here to stay. I do remember every time

that we have dates in my household, my fiance basically asked Alesca, hey, Alexa, what are the health benefits of dates? And you get things like improved digestion, reduce risk of heart disease, reduce risk of cancer, reduced risk of type two, diet of beauty. So it's just one. of those things that feels good for you and taste delicious at the same time, that's an enduring health trend, if you ask me. First time I realized dates, or I just kind of dates came on my consciousness, was driving through the Coachella Valley from like L.A. to Palm Springs. And that is the hub of date production in the United States. And you just see date things everywhere, dates, smoothies,

so many roadside stands selling dates. And I was like, huh, maybe I should start eating dates. But right now, of course, with the date craze, they're saying, we don't have enough land like I'm scrambling. There's going to be a huge supply shortage. So we just talked a few weeks ago about the weight protein shortage. Wouldn't be surprised if the price of dates went up because of insane demand and just not enough production. Okay, let's sprint to the finish with some final headlines. Stocks ripped higher yesterday after the U.S. E signed a deal with Iran to extend a ceasefire and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. The NASDAQ gained over 3% to notch a new record, thanks to rising tech shares, and the Dow joined it at an all-time high. Meanwhile, oil

tumbled almost 6% to its lowest level since March when the war was just beginning. However, details remain scarce about what terms are actually in the deal and both sides have released contradicting statements about what they agreed to. Not to mention, both the U.S. and Iran acknowledged they punted their toughest conversations around things like Iran's nuclear program to a future date. Wall Street didn't mind. Yeah, the market essentially is pricing in the best possible case scenario here. There's thinking that oil will start to flow again. Energy costs will go down inflation pressure will go down. Maybe that reduces the odds that the central bank will have to keep rates higher for longer. Obviously, now the question is, does this diplomatic agreement survive?

It's almost like dating someone from another state. The idea of a peace deal is better than the actual hashed out piece deal, at least in the market's eyes. But you mentioned it. Stocks did not mind at all. I just want to call out SpaceX. SpaceX jumped Another 20% on its second trading day. It's up another 10% today in pre-market trading. When it opens today, it's set to be bigger than Amazon and could chase down Microsoft by the end of the day. Elon Musk added more money to his net worth yesterday than Warren Buffett has ever made in his life. Just unfathomable numbers.

Also, anything that flies is doing well. Shout out United Airlines as well. Obviously, airlines are a big beneficiary of energy prices going down. and United closed at a record high yesterday, rallying on the fact that the war might be coming to an end. Moving on, there are political scandals, and then there are political scandals that sound like they were generated by the VEP writers. In Alaska, officials have spent the past few weeks trying to answer a surprisingly difficult

question, what do you do when two candidates running for the same U.S. Senate seat have the exact same name? The answer, as determined by Alaska's division of elections, is you kick one of them out of the race. Dan S. Sullivan is Alaska's Republican incumbent senator first elected in 2014 and now seeking a third term. Dan J. Sullivan is a retired teacher in Fisherman who is filed to run against him. But Dan J. will not be allowed on the ballot because it was ruled that his candidacy was more about creating confusion than mounting a serious campaign. Because Alaska uses a ranked choice voting system, critics argue that having two candidates with the same name could siphon votes from the incumbent by confusing voters,

about which Dan Sullivan they were actually selecting. Dan Jay, the Challenger, insists he's a legitimate candidate who just simply happens to share a name with the incumbent senator, but state officials weren't convinced. Neil, might be the first campaign where there was too much name recognition. Okay, so he has plausible deniability because Dan Sullivan is a very generic name. It's not like it was John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt, right? Like Dan Sullivan, people are named Dan Sullivan, and the challenger, I'm just going to call him the challenger of the fisherman. He said he was just a victim of circumstance. He called it a matter of

faith that they called that they just shared the same name. And he said he'd been weighing a run for years. On the other side, the Republicans in the office in Alaska government and also the ones running the elections are calling him a Democratic plant that's just intended to help the Democrat taking on the incumbent. And they raised a few red flags. So first of all, when he first filed to be on the ballot, it was this member, this guy's name is Dan Jay. Sullivan, the fisherman and challenger, and he wanted to be listed as Dan S. Sullivan, which is the same exact middle initial as the incumbent senator. So, okay, one red flag there. And then they said no. And then he just wanted to come back as Dan Sullivan without any middle initial. So

according to officials, it didn't seem like he really wanted to create a discrepancy by including his middle initial that would delineate between he and the incumbent. They also noted that his website and campaign logo seemed to mimic that of the incumbent senator. So these were a few of the pieces of evidence that suggested that he was only doing this to confuse people. What do you believe? Do you think he was going in with a heart of pure gold or does you think he was trying to meddle with the election?

God, at first I thought it was just a crazy coincidence because I'm like, Dan Sullivan. Everyone's named Dan Sullivan. After reading what they flagged, it seemed like he maybe has some ulterior motives, especially when he tried to file a ballot originally under a judge. different middle initial that happened to be the one that happened to be the one of the incumbent senator. It seemed like he was intentionally trying to deceive based on the evidence that I've seen. I liked that you initially saw the best in people, though. That's usually I feel like my position, but I'm glad that when it came down to Dan Sullivan, you were on the Dan Sullivan side,

and I won't do any between which one I was talking about right there. That is all the time we have. Thanks so much for starting your morning with us and have a wonderful Tuesday. To share your thoughts on the episode or anything else, send an email to Morningbrewdaily at MorningBrew.com or DM us on Instagram at MB Daily Show. Let's roll the credits. Emily Milliron is our supervising producer. Raymond Lute is our senior producer. Our producer is Olivia Graham

and our associate producer is Olivia Lake. Technical direction by Nina Miller. Hair and makeup is taking an extended hydration break. Devin Emery is our president and our shows of production of Morning Brew. Great. Saturday, Neil. Let's run it back tomorrow. Toby, did you take the elevator to our floor this morning?

I did. You could say I was elevated here. Ever heard of Elevator? travel rewards. Are you talking about the Capital One VentureX business card that offers double miles on every purchase? You know it. The founders of unfiltered hospitality know it too. They use their Capital One VentureX business card to scale their team and their business. Is it true that you can earn an early spend bonus, a $300 annual travel credit, and a $10,000 mile anniversary bonus? Yes, it is. You can maximize your rewards potential and get back to the

things that matter the most to your business. Those are pretty sweet perks for just a $395 annual fee. The sweetest. Smart business, better travel, terms apply. Go to Capital One.com slash morning brew.