Offline with Jon Favreau - Is TikTok a Secret Threat to America? With Scott Galloway

Episode Date: August 7, 2022

For a closed-captioned version of this episode, click here. For a transcript of this episode, please email [e-mail] and include the name of the podcast.

Fox and CNN and MSNBC are literally dumpster fires compared to the nuclear mushroom cloud that is TikTok. Because it's done in isolation. If TikTok has a video of Nancy Pelosi looking as if she's drunk, by the time it's noticed on TikTok or even on Facebook, a billion people have seen it. If Fox runs that, literally two minutes later, people are all over Fox. The top program at CNBC gets 180,000 viewers. So if you want to talk about influence, I mean, Sean Hannity has less influence than the top 10 influencers on TikTok. We just don't know about it. Our 16-year-old doesn't rail against Tucker Carlson or say they love Stephanie Ruhl. They're just watching this entertainment feed that slowly but surely shapes their views of the world and of America. I'm Jon Favreau. Welcome to Offline. Hey, everyone. My guest this week is Scott Galloway. You may know Scott from his podcast, The Prof G Show, New York Magazine's Pivot, which he co-hosts with friend of Offline,

Kara Swisher, or from his excellent newsletter, No Mercy, No Malice. Scott's one of those guests I've wanted to have on since I started the show, someone who knows way more about the internet than I do and could speak to just about any offline topic. But I invited him on to talk about the one media platform that, in Scott's words, has, quote, risen to the Iron Throne, TikTok. So as a Twitter addict, I've been slow to get on TikTok, but apparently I may be the only one. As of 2021, TikTok commands more attention per user than Facebook and Instagram combined. And it has more monthly users than Snapchat, LinkedIn, and Twitter combined. The app was 2021's most visited website.

It feels like overnight, or at least over a pandemic, TikTok went from a dance app for teens to the world's most influential social media company. I was recently struck by two pieces that Scott wrote about TikTok for No Mercy, No Malice. In the first, he writes about why the platform has become so big and powerful so quickly. In the second, he argues that TikTok is actually a threat to America. Scott's argument is that TikTok's video format and algorithm make it incredibly addictive, that its data collection capabilities make it incredibly powerful, and that its owner, the Chinese company ByteDance, make it a dangerous propaganda tool that's controlled in part by the Chinese government. In fact, Scott thinks that when Donald Trump tried to ban TikTok, he was right.

We talked about this and so much more. The power of propaganda in our politics, the responsibility of big tech companies, and how to raise kids who aren't addicted to screens. much more. The power of propaganda in our politics, the responsibility of big tech companies, and how to raise kids who aren't addicted to screens. I came away from the interview surprised about all the things I didn't know about TikTok and somewhat alarmed about what I found out. As always, if you have any questions, comments, or complaints, feel free to email us at offline at crooked.com and do please rate, review, and share the show. Here's Scott Galloway. Scott Galloway, welcome to Offline. It's great to be here, John.

So you're someone I've wanted to have on for a while. Go on. You've never said that before to a guest, have you? I've said it to a few guests. There's a few guests I've wanted to have on for a while. You're one of them showed up early and i overheard like who is sky calloway again can someone give me a quick briefing on sky cal no i read about you in the new york times today you have a nice big profile on a buffoon who seeks attention that was my favorite quote from one of my fans you're welcome i was just like i i this i never got this what is going on anyway i could have talked to you about any offline related topic but i was struck by

uh two recent pieces you wrote in your excellent newsletter no mercy no malice about tiktok which you argue is on track to become uh one of the most valuable and influential media platforms in the world and one that is also a national security threat that the United States government should ban. I want to get to why you think that a bit later, but I'd like to start by unpacking the first part of your argument. You wrote that while streaming platforms like Netflix and Disney Plus were focused on subscribers, TikTok ascended to the iron throne of the content kingdom. What do you mean by that? Well, so TikTok, if you will, I think one of the biggest myths in marketing is that choice is a good thing.

Choice is a tax on consumers. And that is consumers don't want more choice. They want to be more confident with the choices presented. And I think that perfectly summarizes TikTok. And that is you don't have to figure out who to follow. You don't have to figure out, supposedly the average American household spends 10 minutes every day deciding what to watch on Netflix. And the only decision you have to make on TikTok is to click on the icon or to tap on the icon and it starts basically the ultimate streaming network, but it only has one program. But that program, because of the signal liquidity

provided to you, and what I mean by signal liquidity is inputs that it's getting from its user base. So Netflix gets two or three every hour. I watch this great program last night called Blackbird. It's actually on Apple TV+. Apple can determine if you watch it all the way through, if you watched episode two, if you stopped it in the middle. And then based on that, it'll come up with a recommendation engine and a home screen that helps you zero in on stuff you want. The signal liquidity on TikTok is hundreds of, because it's only 30 seconds or 15 seconds long, did you watch it all the way through? Do you go to the creator? Do you swipe up? Do you pause? So within just a couple hours of being on TikTok, you find yourself watching essentially a streaming video network that is more unique to you and has an

opium-like addiction. I didn't realize I'm super interested in watching people get adjusted by aggressive chiropractors, or that I really enjoy getting information watching videos on dogs. I knew that. Or I'm very fond of people talking about social justice issues who also happen to be incredibly hot. I sort of knew that. So you have this streaming network that rather than a kind of a social graph, it's put together an interest graph, has a billion people, has grown to a billion faster than any application in history did it, I think, in about a half or third of the time of Instagram, which now has the number two spot. You have 55% of your user base are creators making videos. So you have about a half a billion people creating content. Keep in mind the entire streaming

industrial complex globally employs about 800,000 people. Are they as talented as the streaming content creators? No, but some are very talented. And you have something that if you have a young boy at home, I have 11 and 14 year olds, it's reminiscent of the opium dens back in the mid-20th century or early 20th century in China. We have to pull my 11-year-old out of this thing. He lies on his side and he starts watching TikTok and you can just see him go into another sort of, I don't know, psychedelic-like state. So I think TikTok is doing to Netflix what Netflix did to Hollywood or what it is doing to Instagram, what Instagram did to all traditional media. And that is if you look at the number of people who are going to the advertising page, that is corporations that want to see how they

advertise on TikTok, it's up 41%. That same page of Google Snap and Twitter are off 12, 18, and 24%. So one is ascending and the others are declining. And this will be my last point. I realize I'm blathering on here. I think TikTok sandbags their numbers. Every other firm looks for ways to position their numbers in the most optimistic light, hoping that more people buy their stock. I think TikTok is actually sandbagging their influence and their numbers because there's a huge concern around the power of this platform and how fast it's growing. But I think right now, based on whether TikTok can create a Chinese wallet fuel between them and the CCP, it will be one of the five most valuable companies in the world within the next couple of years. For people who don't know, what is the

business model for TikTok? How do they make money? You just mentioned advertising. What are some of world within the next couple of years. For people who don't know, what is the business model for TikTok? How do they make money? You just mentioned advertising. What are some of the other ways it makes money? That's a great question. I think it's mostly an ad-driven platform like Facebook that because it has all this incredibly rich data set, it can serve you ads at exactly the right moment. I mean, I think we've all had that moment on Instagram where we're at a Beyonce concert and an ad for her album comes up and you think, okay, is somebody watching me? And the answer is yes. And the reality is consumers talk a big game about privacy, but privacy is something that's

only taken seriously by people over the age of 40 that live in Washington, D.C. or Brussels. The behavioral data reflects that people are comfortable with their privacy being violated as long as there's utility or a coupon at the end of it. Uber knows where you're going during the day. With a thin layer of AI, Uber could identify people who are on their way to terminate a pregnancy. It could determine your HIV status if you're having affairs. And we decide to take that risk because it provides great utility. Google, the greatest hack in history that would create social chaos is simple. If somebody hacked Google and could publish your name, your face, and then a chronological history or listing of your searches, that would create social chaos. Divorce courts.

The media couldn't begin. It would be like page six million every day or a million page sixes. So it knows your sexual fetishes, your health habits, whether you're contemplating a divorce or marriage. So we gave up our privacy willingly a long time ago. People have some sensitivities around health information, political affiliation, or sexual orientation. But for the most part, we basically said violate our privacy. And so what I think this company is able to do is zero in with this algorithm. And just as they feed you unbelievably powerful content, I think they'll be able to feed you unbelievably relevant ads

that will get higher and higher CPMs that are really entertaining. But if you look at it, it earned 4 billion revenue in 2021, and it's projected to hit 12 billion this year. So it's the fastest growing $1 billion plus media company in history. It's going to triple to $12 billion. And so that's, what is that, a 200% increase in revenue versus 14% in the industry. Twitter was down 1% in the last quarter. So it is ascendant. And what's unusual about it is they actually played down their numbers. I mean, to the data issue, sometimes I wonder if people don't care about privacy or people don't know exactly what data of theirs is being collected and is known by some of these companies. Obviously, part of TikTok's big advantage is its ability to collect a ton of data on us. What data is TikTok collecting?

What does it know about you if you're on TikTok? Because I've heard about all these privacy issues with TikTok, the data issues, stuff like that. If you're on TikTok, if it's on your phone, what does it know about you? Well, it knows your location. It knows what you find entertaining. It also knows your kind of political leanings. It knows kind of your consumption of media. So I don't know, if it's okay, I'll bridge right to what I think the threat is. I don't think the threat is for espionage. So I believe Facebook, in their wildest dreams, the CIA, the NSA, and the Mossad couldn't have come up with Facebook.

Facebook knows your relationships, where you are, who means what to you. It basically is the ultimate tool for an espionage agency to not only find out where you are and what you're doing, but what points of leverage they have against you. Who's important to you? What relationships do you value? Who do you have the most interaction with? TikTok is not the ultimate espionage tool similar to Facebook. TikTok is the ultimate propaganda tool. And that is it would be very, very subtle. And I realize I sound a little tinfoil hat, and I think some of this, if you're not careful, comes off as xenophobic or anti-Chinese or worse. And that is take Joe call anti-democracy, anti-capitalism, or not even anti-capitalism, but highlights some of the issues or externalities around our system.

Make a position American a bad light, whether it's Kim Kardashian saying women need to work harder or Jonathan Haidt talking about how polarized we are, how we became stupid in 2013, whether it's Joe Rogan bringing on someone who says that mRNA vaccines alter your DNA, all TikTok or the CCP would need to do is kind of put their thumb on the scales of content that is what I'd call less or more critical, questions our system, and start running it increasingly more often in contrast to the very positive content those content creators produce about America. And essentially, we might raise a generation of Americans that just feel worse and worse about our system,

our leadership, and take for granted the incredible system we have. And I think it would just be incredibly easy. And I wouldn't doubt, I'd be shocked if they aren't doing it already. So when you have people spending 15 hours a month on Facebook and everyone freaked out about that, eight hours on Instagram, six hours on Snap, and get this, John, 29 hours a month on TikTok, you have what is the most dominant information, the most dominant media source in the world across the most powerful nation in the world. And it just would just very elegantly and seamlessly and covertly be so easy to start raising a generation of people who just feel a little bit worse about our elections, are a little bit more cynical about democracy, are resentful of capitalism. So I think it's a real, it's an

existential threat. Just for people who might not understand the relationship between TikTok and the Chinese government, can you talk about what that relationship is and how China sort of exerts control over companies like this? Because I think the people don't quite understand that they know that TikTok has connections to China, but I don't know that they quite get the power the Chinese government would have to sort of step in and put their thumb on the scale, like you're saying. So I don't consider myself an expert on this, but the very basics are TikTok is owned by ByteDance, which is a Chinese company. And the general assumption is, and it's a safe assumption, that there is no separation between the CCP and Chinese companies. And that

if the FBI shows up to Apple and says, all right, we have a terrorist who's just killed 17 people and we have his iPhone and we want to know if there are other attacks being planned right now, we need into his iPhone. Apple can say no. And both parties can go to a judge and a judge based on laws and precedents can decide whether or not Apple has access to that phone. I think the CCP can skip that. I think they can leapfrog that and call Jack Ma and say, all right, you've been running around shitposting the CCP. We're either going to disappear you and your family, or you're going to decide to step down and start painting. There's just a level of control. It's an autocracy. There just really isn't a comparison

between, in my view, the two systems. And I would argue there's just no separation between a Chinese company and the CCP. And I don't blame the CCP for wanting to weaponize what is the ultimate weapon. I think this thing is much more powerful than any aircraft carrier squadron or any anti-aircraft missile battery technology or hypersonic missile. Because if you look at what America geopolitically, we are actually in a very strong position geopolitically. Our inflation, as bad as it is, is less bad than anywhere else. We're food independent. We're energy independent. We still attract the most innovative organizations and people in the world. But at the same time, the thing that threatens us is we increasingly

don't like each other. Americans have forgotten that Americans will never have allies that are stronger and more committed than other Americans. And yet a third of the people in each party see people in the other party as their mortal enemy. That is the threat. And TikTok can start leaning on that. And I believe the CCP just, the CCP decided, all right, the industrial tutoring complex is bad. Rich kids are similar in America, are ending up in our best schools disproportionately. So they took a multi-billion dollar publicly traded industry, the industrial tutoring complex, and they just shut it down. They said to their ride hailing company, Diddy, if you're not going to share information with us,

or at least it feels like this happened, We're going to just shut your ass down. And so the line between the CCP and companies, in my view, is just non-existent. And so unless TikTok or ByteDance, and by the way, I want to be clear, I know some people at TikTok. I think they would like that wall to exist because they're all capitalists. They want their Gulf streams. They want to have financial security and buy homes in the Hamptons. And they recognize that if this becomes just a whiff of a propaganda tool of the CCP, they're probably going to be severely hamstrung or even booted out of the US and Western Europe, and they're not going to make nearly as much money. So I think the executives there don't want the connection. They want a Chinese wall. They want a separation. I don't know if they can

manage that because the CCP can just a few calls to people they have leverage over. They will also disappear people. I mean, if you look at what happened to Jack Ma, it's exceptional. What if Jeff Bezos just disappeared? What if Jeff Bezos started shitposting the government as he does sometimes, talk about freedom and how the government needs to do the following things, and all of a sudden no one could find him? I mean, it just wouldn't happen here. And then he showed up and said, I'm stepping down from Amazon and I'm going to start making pottery. And I'm going to stop talking about the government. That is what happened with the most successful private company, or I'm sorry, a for-profit company in likely the history of China.

So to somehow think that TikTok plays on the same level playing field as us now, I just don't think it's accurate. I think there's things they could do if they spun the American entity, American shareholders, American regulation, data stored on American servers. But I think it is very hard to make the case that we don't have what I would call this real, real threat from the CCP that will be just incremental, gnawing, insidious that could potentially massively influence a new generation of Americans. Last night, I was scrolling through Twitter, which is my drug of choice, and I saw a former Democratic digital strategist, Wally Nowinski, tweet, always hard to tell if it's the normal algorithm or if we're getting a preview of what propaganda

is like when China owns a social media network. But my TikTok feed today is 50% videos about Pelosi visiting Taiwan. None are pro-visit. Doesn't seem like a coincidence. Well, look, I know, John, by the way, I love your Twitter feed. Thank you. I'm addicted to Twitter. It is my dope. When this airs, I'll immediately go on Twitter and think, do they like me? I am desperate and I am addicted to affirmation. And Twitter is a propaganda tool that's been weaponized and such that they can lie to their advertisers and exaggerate their numbers and engagement. They let it run rampant. But the thing is, Twitter has a highly influential group of people, but it's actually quite small.

America's youth is not on Twitter. It's a lot of people who have an outsized footprint in Washington in the media. But your kids, John, do you have kids? I do. I have a two-year-old, so I'm terrified of when he finally discovers TikTok. Yeah. So I'd say there's a one in 20 chance your son is ever on Twitter. The youngins just aren't into Twitter. So I don't think Twitter has nearly the influence on a rising generation that a TikTok has. But Twitter. So I don't think Twitter has nearly the influence on a rising generation that a TikTok has. But Twitter, if I say something, I've been very critical of Putin for a long time. I get the same things in my comment thread. Scott, love your comment,

but you have it wrong on Russia. And I'll get dozens of comments or replies that say effectively the same thing. And then you click on them, John, and I'm sure you've done this. And it's a photo of a dog and someone with seven followers. Now, I'm going to go out on a limb here. Who just joined last month. That's right. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say, if I'm in charge of propaganda and communications at the GRU, I can either spend hundreds of millions of dollars or billions trying to put assets in place on the ground in the US or figure out espionage tools or build aircraft carriers, or I can just have a troll farm undermine the credibility, slowly but surely, of anyone who is anti-Putin. And I believe, so I have been very critical of some privately funded VC-backed startups.

And the moment I criticize Bitcoin, the moment I criticize Tesla, the moment I criticize the portfolio of a VC, I start getting all this shit posting in every one of my posts. Because I think these people, these entities have decided, let's undermine this guy's credibility. Some of it is accurate. Some of it is justified. A lot of it is people who aren't who they say they are, who are trying to undermine your credibility because they find that your talk track is either not in line with their Bitcoin position or their Tesla long position, or they work for the Chinese government or the GRU. Now that sounds very paranoid, but it doesn't mean I'm wrong. And what I would say is I'm getting a lot of pushback and I think some of it's justified. I said that I think that corporate

espionage on the part of China is totally out of control. It's the fastest way to grow an economy. It's what we did. We stole IP from British and Irish manufacturing in the 20th and 19th centuries. And I believe China is doing it now. It's the most profitable way to grow your economy is to steal IP. And if I were a Chinese student and I'd come from modest backgrounds and the Chinese government said, we're going to give you a scholarship. You show a lot of promise. We're going to get you into a great American school. We're going to let you live there. But occasionally we're going to call you and just ask you a few questions and get your advice. I would say yes. I would prioritize my patriotism, the well-being of my family back home over my regard for the country that accepted me.

And I said that. I think corporate espionage is, they play the long game. I think it is everywhere in the United States. And I got a lot of pushback saying that was anti-Asian and given the environment of hate crimes against the Asian community, it was especially poorly timed. And I think that has absolutely justified their gag reflex. I stand by it though. I think there's a ton of corporate espionage. I worry sometimes that those of us on the left spend more time worrying about big tech working with the Defense Department than worrying about what the Defense Department is trying to defend us against. I don't think we take these threats seriously enough. Well, look, I was – if you just take the Chinese government, right? Forget about the country of China, the Chinese people. If you take the Chinese government, I was persuaded by your argument about the propaganda threat for a few reasons.

A buddy of mine sent me the story, the Trojan horse piece, and he said, he's like, this has been my theory for a couple of years now. And of course, you point out in the piece that you can't use TikTok in China. China doesn't want its own population exposed to TikTok, right? And so you have this extremely addictive media platform. You have a Chinese government that is an authoritarian government. And, you know, you mentioned Putin, like I can't imagine many people in either party allowing Vladimir Putin to control one of America's largest media platforms. And that was even before his invasion of Ukraine. And we, of course, saw what happened in the 2016 election where whether it was successful or not, you can have the argument. Vladimir Putin and the GRU still tried to use the kind of propaganda that you're talking about to influence an election. Clearly, as TikTok becomes one of the largest media platforms in the world, especially by an entire generation in this country, whether they're putting their thumb on the algorithm or not, we know they have the power to. And we know that their interests are not directly aligned with ours. Those things are sort of like basic truths here

without trying to be paranoid about anything else. So if you were the Chinese government, why wouldn't you try to put your thumb on the scale at that point? That's what I would do. I mean, I think they'd be stupid not to. And the Chinese, when they realize this, and their owners don't have a leg to stand on when they talk about importance of open platforms and free speech. It's like they took Google, Facebook, and TikTok and said, no, we're not going to allow any of that shit here.

I mean, but it's good for you guys. You know, you should do it. I think it's a real issue. And when you talk about the cable networks, and I want to be clear, the cable networks are guilty of the same thing. They realize that if we figure out, okay, you're a progressive, so we're going to watch, you're going to read the New York Times or MSNBC, and we're going to make Ted Cruz look like an asshole every day because it tickles your sensors and it divides us. We're going to do everything that positions the other

side in a negative light. Fox does the same thing with us. But Fox and CNN and MSNBC are literally dumpster fires compared to the nuclear mushroom cloud that is TikTok. Because it's done in isolation. If TikTok has a video of Nancy Pelosi looking as if she's drunk, by the time it's noticed on TikTok or even on Facebook, a billion people have seen it. If Fox runs that, literally two minutes later, the people are all over Fox. And also Fox can be sued. Fox can, if they let the MyPillow guy come on and saying that voting machines were weaponized by Hugo Chavez and it hurts the Dominion voting company, Fox can be sued. And they all of a sudden, and I'm sure you saw this, all of their anchors in a unified mea culpa go, we have no evidence that these machines were weaponized. These quote unquote emerging

nascent platforms aren't subject to the same scrutiny or liability. So you have something that is much more powerful than any cable news network. A cable news network is empty calories. This podcast, I don't know what your downloads are. My downloads of Prop G and Pivot are about 125,000 and 250,000 respectively per month. The top program at CNBC gets 180,000 viewers. So if you want to talk about influence, I mean, Sean Hannity has less influence than the top 10 influencers on TikTok. We just don't know about it. Our 16-year-old doesn't rail against Tucker Carlson or say they love Stephanie Ruhl.

They're just watching this entertainment feed that slowly but surely shapes their views of the world and of America. Yeah, and as you mentioned, that it can be subtler forms of propaganda as well, and that you're just elevating content that tends to be more divisive or that tends to polarize people more without them actually knowing it, which is what really good propaganda is. Why do you think that the US government hasn't banned a platform controlled by the Chinese government or at least heavily regulated it? And why haven't other governments? Well, one, a lack of domain expertise. Somewhere between four and eight percent of our elected officials have a background in technology or engineering. So these issues get very complicated very fast. It makes you look younger to embrace these

platforms. Everybody wants to put on, to put on mom jeans or bell bottoms and pretend that they're hip and with the cool crowd. And the way you do that is you immediately, to be American and an innovator and trying to look younger when you're a 75-year-old insurance broker from Dallas who's now in Congress, your go-tos are free speech, markets, innovators, capitalism, money, the markets. You're not, well, this is a threat. We should shut it down. That's just not, that just makes you look old. That's like, oh, you don't get it, boomer, right?

I hear this stuff and I don't like the way I sound saying it. We need to embrace. This is a chance to make money. This is the young people like it. It's the future. Our system is so strong that we value free speech. And I buy into all of that. But this isn't free speech, in my view, or it's free speech that's being weaponized under the auspices of free speech. And the free speech argument has been so bastardized, perverted, abused.

This is a private company, and it's owned by an organization with strong links or a connection to the CCP. We don't have any obligation to provide them with free speech. Private companies don't have any fidelity to the free speech. All this bullshit around Elon Musk yelling free speech as it relates to Twitter Twitter is a private company Fox Fox doesn't have an obligation to let AOC and Elizabeth Warren comment on every program they have nor does MSNBC have an obligation to hear what Marjorie Taylor Greene thinks about every every single

piece of content they're private. They can craft the narrative they want. So this lack of domain expertise, this embrace or this idolatry of innovators, this idolatry of money, and this hard work to go ahead and sort of kick it out. I mean, Trump got very little right in my view, but one thing he got right in my, was China. And that is, he said, the relationship here is asymmetric in terms of benefits. And he was, in my opinion, had the correct instincts around kicking TikTok out or shutting it down. Now, like everything he did, even when his impulses are correct, he doesn't have the discipline to actually follow through. And then his tactics are kind of head up his ass. I know I'm going to carve it up like my birthday cake and give it to my buddies. That holds no water. The courts say you can't do this. Microsoft holds their nose and says, okay, fine if he wants to give it to us, but it doesn't work.

And here we are and nothing's happened. So I think we lack, it's unpopular, it makes you look older, and we lack the domain expertise of thoughtful people. And I'm being overly critical. Senators Bennett, who's trying to create a digital czar, Senator Klobuchar, Mark Warner from Virginia, these people do understand tech. But I also think they have very strong lobbyists in D.C. So a variety of reasons. I mean, I remember when Trump proposed shutting down TikTok and it was in the middle of the campaign. And I was like, wow, that's pretty politically stupid for him because this is so popular and so many young people are on this that this isn't going to go well for him. I was actually kind of surprised. I mean, it does bring up a big question, which is like, how do you build

public support for banning an app that's so wildly popular among Americans, especially young Americans, especially apolitical Americans, right? People are not going on there for political content like they would to CNN, MSNBC, Fox, Twitter, right? Most of this stuff is apolitical. So again, the propaganda is more subtle. And then also, how do you do that without making, you know, I do think there's a danger in making a more explicit case against the Chinese government that may escalate tensions with that country, which I don't think serves anyone's interest to have our leaders out there escalating tensions with China, which is a huge economic and military power. So

you have to balance that as well. The question I would have for you, John, were you worried about the same escalation and tension when they kicked out Google or Facebook? So it's going to be difficult because there's big opportunity for money here. This company will go public. Goldman will take it public. There'll be huge fees. People want to buy this stock. And you want to see, like, when I try and take my phone away, you're going to find this. And it's really weird.

If you want to understand addiction, just spend, get kind of, I don't want to term this lazy. And I'd like to think I understand the externalities of hardware devices and these interactive platforms better than most people. And I've let my sons digress into device addiction on occasion because I want them to leave me alone so I can go on my devices and satisfy my needs. But it's really scary the extent to which we are addicted to these things. And I can't imagine the withdrawal systems or the withdrawal effect or health impact if we tried to take TikTok away from this generation and how angry they would get at their parents. There'd be real backlash. But I would argue that our government is here at the end of the day to prevent a tragedy of the commons and think long term and lay out the case that this is a real threat and we can't control this threat. It's so insidious because it would be so easy. It would be so easy to get away with this and just make us feel worse and worse about our nation slowly but surely. I believe that this would inspire a spin of US assets where I think everybody wins. I think the people in China who have started this company deserve to make billions. And I think it would be good for the Chinese economy to have that sort of revenue recognition. I think it's an amazing product. I think Facebook and Google

need more competition. So I would like to see TikTok thrive in the United States. I would like it to be all the incentives, if you will, to be more in line with American incentives. And unfortunately, even the companies that are domestically controlled have prioritized shareholder value over the well-being of the Commonwealth. That's a bit of a different talk show. But when you layer in an autocratic government that is an adversary and wants to see American weakened globally, then the shit gets even more real. And so I'd like to see basically us say, all right, you spin it to American shareholders and you get paid for it. I'm not suggesting we, you know, Robinhood the thing and just take it from them, but it's got to come under the control

and incentives of US entities, period, full stop. Otherwise we can't have this here. I mean, let's say that that more optimistic scenario comes to pass and you take the Chinese government out of the equation here. You still have, as you have described and talked about, a platform that is incredibly addictive as you just mentioned particularly addictive for children like do you think tiktok is especially addictive for children for for specific reasons or do you think

that young people just stumbled upon an especially addictive platform like what do you think it is about kids specifically that are getting so hooked on this well Well, it's not just TikTok. It's as our brain develops, you know, we love reaction to things. And these platforms immediately give you reaction, whether it's the number of likes you get on a tweet or how many comments or if you're a creator, how many people view your video on TikTok. It's also just so entertaining to go down a rabbit hole at TikTok and just see what it serves you. And I mean, I don't know about you, I can get on TikTok and an hour later I look up and it just feels like it was five minutes. So it's radically addictive, but so is Instagram. I'm hugely addicted to Twitter. I'll wake up in

the middle of the night and think, oh, I can't sleep. I know, I'll check Twitter to Twitter. I'll wake up in the middle of the night and think, oh, I can't sleep. I know, I'll check Twitter. Yeah, I know, I've done that too. And I like to think that it's to learn. And I do, it's my newsfeed. But mostly it's this pathetic, desperate need for other people's affirmation

and to check in and to see if my content is resonating, which is pathetic. But at least I'm cognizant of it. I don't think young people with developing brains, especially males who are more prone to addiction, I think they get more addicted. I think that the body shaming and standards that Instagram creates where it throws wealth in your face, it throws amazing bodies in your face or unreal or unreasonable expectations around looks. And then with young people, and this is getting more into Instagram, my colleague at NYU, Jonathan Haidt, has just shown very compelling data that teen depression started to skyrocket about the time social went on mobile in 2013.

And what we have here is that boys bully physically and verbally, girls bully relationally, and we've literally put a neutron bomb in their hands with a phone that has an Instagram app on it. And we've seen massive increases, not only teen suicide, but hospital admissions of self-harm and self-cutting. And these aren't self-reporting. These are actual hospital admissions. So these platforms result in depression. They result in anxiety. And in the case of TikTok, I would argue that it's a national security risk. So I'd like to see a lot of changes amongst the domestic firms. But these companies add a lot of value domestically. And let me put my tinfoil hat on. I can't understand why these companies haven't come under more scrutiny or punishment, either fines, legal action, civil action, antitrust. And I'm convinced that when the Facebook executives

come to Washington, there's a public hearing. And then I think they go behind closed doors in a private session of the Senate Intelligence Committee. And they say, okay, you continue to give us information on bad guys, and we'll continue to look the other way around this shit. I think it's a quid pro quo with US companies. Because I think the reason we find very bad guys almost always involve, I would guess, a platform's cooperation. It's just the ultimate espionage. Every person in the world uses one or more of these platforms. And so them working in concert with our security apparatus, I think has resulted in a lot of good things. But I think that these, for lack of better, I think the Zapp says, all right, then cool your fucking jets around the

antitrust and the other stuff you're coming. And I think that's sort of been an unspoken deal that's been struck behind closed doors. Yeah. I tend to think that your earlier point about their general ignorance of lawmakers around tech issues makes them somewhat impressionable to a lobbyist making an argument that may seem like it's on the level, even though it is not. I think that happens too. So I just want to comment on, you always revise history to make yourself look like the hero.

I went on the board of the New York Times and the first thing I said was, we should shut off Google. And they're taking our great content, they're getting a dollar for it and they're giving us a couple cents and that was being generous. And the general reaction from everyone

on the board in the New York Times was they were so excited to go have drinks with Steve Jobs or hang out with Google. It's like when the dork gets invited to hang out with the cool kids. It doesn't matter if they're there just because they want your weed or they're going to borrow your parents' car or party and trash your place while your parents are out of town, you think, oh, they like me. I'm part of this crowd now. And that's how I would describe traditional media's initial embrace of these platforms

was, oh, we want to hang out with the cool kids, not recognizing that, you know, yeah, they run their fingers through your hair and tell you how cute you are and then shoot you in the fucking face what's the split in your mind between these problems can be solved by or ameliorated by regulation and government stepping in and actually exerting some kind of control over these platforms, putting some standards in place, versus these are behavioral issues and it's on us to sort of change our behavior and the way that we use these platforms and raise our kids and make sure that they don't sort of fall prey to these more addictive platforms like TikTok and Instagram. Look, we all have it. The answer is yes. We all have a personal responsibility. There's just anyone who tells you, oh, we don't, you know, you shouldn't allow your

kids on screens and it's bad parenting. That means one thing. They don't have kids. I know, I know. So I've learned that. Yeah. You know, just wait, just wait. But we do have an obligation as parents. I try and bound it. All right. They get an hour or two hours a day on their phones. And in some ways, it's really powerful. During COVID, my kids would socialize on video games and reach out to their friends. They get their homework on their phones. But we do have a responsibility as citizens. And I'm trying to do something. I'm really inspired. Jonathan Hyde, one of my colleagues, is one of my role models. He said something that really struck me. And I'm trying to live up to it. And it's really hard for me. And it basically distills down to this. You know, Scott, don't shitpost.

Don't ever say anything bad about anybody on Twitter. Even if they say something. And I have a code around this. I don't ever shitpost anybody unless they're much more powerful than me and they draw first blood. So Elon Musk, much more powerful than me, calls me an insufferable numbskull, fine, open season on Elon. But other than that, I never, regardless of how vile or wrong comments are misrepresenting me or whatever it is or my work. I don't. I've stopped getting back in people's faces. And he's basically said, look, we all have a role in this, and that is to be kinder to each

other. And it starts on social media platforms. It starts when someone cuts you off in traffic. I used to be that guy that would zoom up next to them and honk at them, and no one was going to get the better of me. And then you realize, fuck, you don't know what that guy's kid is going through or if they're worried about paying their rent. And so I do think we all have a role to play in just taking the temperature down. Having said that, the big tech companies foment this total falsehood that these problems represent society. And if it wasn't us, it'd this total falsehood that these problems represent society. And if it wasn't us, it'd be another platform. And these problems are unsolvable.

God, what extraordinary bullshit. We kicked one person. We closed one account on Twitter, the real Donald Trump or whatever it was. And 20% to 30% of all election misinformation went away that day. And some people say it was high as 40 or 60% because all of his bullshit, all of his lies would get circulated across his 60 million followers and would infect the entire platform. And then they kick him off nine days after he loses the election and they want applause for being good citizens. But we can solve these problems. There should be carve-outs to 230. You spread vaccine misinformation or things that weaken our defense or something to do with our elections.

An aggressive, creative lawyer can file a class action suit against you just as, John, if this podcast could be reverse engineered to tangible evidence of outcomes that result in teen suicide, this podcast would be shut down. And you would be in a lot of hot water, as would the entity that distributes this podcast. That's not true of social. We need carve-outs from 230. We need more liability. We absolutely need some of these things to be broken up. 93% of our God, Google's our God. You trust Google more than you trust any rabbi, priest, mentor, scholar, or boss. If you want to know what is this, these sores I have on my lip, you don't call a doctor right away. You go to Dr. Google. If you want to know the best way to let your mother die a dignified death, you might speak to a doctor or read,

you know, something on palliative care, but the first thing you do is go to Google. So a query is nothing but a prayer into the universe, hoping some divine entity that sees everything will send down an answer that you can trust. That's what prayer is. We now pray to Google. 93% of our prayers go to one God. The religious world is a lot more diverse and healthy than our Western God. We have zealotry and a dangerous idolatry and worship of one God that tells us what to think about everything. So YouTube should be spun. Instagram should be spun. I think Amazon should spin AWS. They use it to subsidize a retail platform with predatory pricing and no firm can compete with them. A healthier economy,

antitrust. Oxygenate the economy, similar to what we did with the Bells. Break them up, and nine years later, all those companies are worth more than the original AT&T. Regulation, absolutely. Apple should not be allowed to advantage Apple Music, oh, the FTC record $5 billion fine for election misinformation and interference on the behalf of Facebook. Part of the agreement was it indemnified them against anything they'd done wrong to that point. If I showed up to your house, John, and said, for 0.7% of your wealth, which was the representation of $5 billion relative to a $700 billion market cap, I will indemnify you against anything you've ever done wrong. You'd say, sure, where do I sign? That wasn't a fine. It was the best insurance policy

ever written. So we can't issue fines that are big enough until it's clear that Mark Zuckerberg knowingly knew and had information that put beyond a reasonable doubt that his content was depressing and harming teenage girls and that he purposely allocated capital and his brightest people to try and delay and obfuscate from that issue, I think that's a criminal offense. I think he has done a lot more harm to Americans, especially our youth, than a lot of people who are behind bars right now. I mean, I do think part of the challenge here is sort of building public support and awareness, and this is part of what I do on this show, it's what you guys do on your shows as well,

about these issues, which tend to seem invisible to most people who don't pay close attention to tech news and what these platforms are doing. And even like you said, members of Congress who don't know a lot of this stuff. And I think one of the reasons that propaganda works in the case of TikTok is that it tends to be invisible. And people also, you know, I thought about this after the 2016 election. People don't want to admit that something changed their mind that they had no control over. We want to believe that we have agency. We want to believe that we are making up our own minds about issues and making our own decisions and that we want to think that when propaganda works, it works on someone else who wasn't smart and that it could never work on us because we know better. And so I do think part of the challenge here is that there's some people, there's a lot of people, I'm one of them, who think that Mark Zuckerberg and these platforms have caused tremendous harm to the public and especially to democracy. But it's hard to make people see that. It's hard to

make people see that, especially people who don't follow the news for a living. Yeah, the saying that really struck me, and you just articulated it, is that it's easier to fool people than convince them they've been fooled. Because to say to someone you've been fooled, and for them to believe it, is for them to acknowledge they're an ass. I fell for it. And so you're right. 80% of people think they're above average drivers, right? So that's what is so dangerous about this is people will go, oh yeah, dumb people get talked into believing that vaccines that were being used as guinea pigs, you know, but I have real reasons to believe it. And this stuff is just little by little insidious and damaging.

And it's like the movie The Sting, the great Robert Redford and Paul Newman movie. The best con, the best sting, is the mark doesn't know they were conned. I don't know if you remember that movie, Robert Shaw from Jaws fame at the end places a bet and he believes that he fucked up. He doesn't realize he's been had. And that is what is so insidious about these platforms is I think

a lot of, you know, I think the jig is up a little bit. I think a lot of young people are logging off, not a lot, but a significant number are saying, I just don't feel good going on these things. I don't need to see people who have perfect bodies or have all this wealth and are just constantly shoving this wealth porn in my face and making me feel bad about myself. And the algorithms are purposely tweaked to divide us. And it's like, remember when you were in elementary school and if two people start having words, people would circle around them and push them and start screaming, fight, fight, fight. That is what these algorithms do billions of times a day. They turn us against each other. And I do I'm so upset about it is I've been had. I like to think of myself as a generous, caring person. And I turn into a fucking asshole on these platforms.

Yeah, I've been there. I've done it myself. And I see an opportunity. Someone says something negative about me or my content, and I just weigh in. They stick their chin out, and I just make, you know, I use my 550,000 followers, and I go, it's like, sick them, you know. Here's the red meat. This is why they're an idiot, and they were wrong. Go after them, and I get my guardians of gotcha pin, and it's just sort of pathetic, and what I've also noticed, and I don't know if you're like this, John, you become where you pay attention. And I'm trying to purposely spend less time on Twitter because I noticed I was becoming more and more terse, snarky, and judgmental. And that defines Twitter. comeback rather than having a nuanced conversation. Something else Jonathan Haidt has said that I've

really tried to take to heart is you should take gestures with the intent that they were delivered. And that is a lot of people who question my content or say something, you think, oh, you know, they were trying to be funny or whatever. They don't, you know, they're not bad people, whatever. I love what Lynn Alden, who's actually a financial analyst, said about, don't think of your enemies as enemies. Think about them as people you can learn from and let them continue to think that you're their enemy. And I like that. But I found after spending all this time on TikTok, I was more prone. I can't stand the wealth porn. I never fell for that. I never fell for that. I think that's just so obnoxious and the opposite. Coco Chanel said the opposite of luxury is not

poverty, it's vulgarity. I think these posts where you're just with the picture of your feet at Il Pelicano in Italy opening a bottle of champagne, I think that is the definition of vulgar. And basically saying, you fucked up. You're not a baller like me, right? But what I did fall for was the tone and the coarseness of Twitter. And I'm trying desperately to change that because the enemy is within, John. The threat to the US geopolitically is that other people are just letting us eat each other. I mean, no, I do think that for all of us to have the humility to know that we could all fall for it, something, whether it's the wealth poor and whether it's being terse, whether it's, you know, shit posting, you know, I think that's a good first step to have that humility to then, uh, take the next step and actually log off a little bit. And, you know, I had

a young woman named MLM key on this, on this podcast a couple episodes ago. She's a young college student who started a log-off movement among the Gen Z generation. And it was very inspiring to hear because you're right. I think the optimistic side of this, as we talked about what TikTok is doing to a younger generation, is that it is that younger generation that is increasingly deciding that they have to take action and do something about this. So that makes me hopeful. Last question I ask all of our guests. What's your favorite way to unplug? Edibles and streaming content.

Perfect. I haven't had weed as an answer in a while. When I first started the show, I had a couple weeds in a row. But now a couple marijuana answers in a row. I haven't had edibles in a while. That's good. I am just a recommendation. I did edibles and watched, streamed five of the six hours of Blackbird on Apple TV Plus with my wife.

I didn't check out Blackbird. I haven't seen it. Oh, it's fantastic. It's fantastic. And that's not just the edible speaking. It's really good. But as you'll see, let me just give you some advice. You're going to pretend to like what's going on at home. Zero to two is awful, John. And you play no valuable role in that. From two to four, it's less and less awful. And then from like four on, it just gets magical. Oh, I feel like I'm in a good spot then. For me, zero to six months was awful.

And then I've been having, from one to two, I had a great time. I was just on vacation with my son, got to play with him on the beach. And no phone around, nothing else, no work, no Twitter. And, you know, those mornings on the beach when I just had a few hours with Charlie, I was like, this, I feel relaxed for the first time in like a year. I feel happy, fulfilled. This is wonderful. Should do this more. It's the first time.

My guess is, and I don't know you, but my guess is it really is for a lot of, especially a lot of men, it's the first time you feel as if you're here for a reason. I got a letter from my 11-year-old at camp today, letter. He took the time to write this, put it in post, seal the letter up. And the letter is the following, dear dad, how come you haven't written me a letter yet? No letter. That was his letter to me from camp, and I spent about five minutes laughing and just thinking.

So, yeah, that's, but anyways, you asked me what I enjoy. I'm being, I do enjoy the edibles and the streaming, but the thing that really gives me a sense of purpose and peace is time with my boys. Well, that is a good answer that I can relate to. Scott Galloway, thank you so much for joining Offline. Really appreciate it. Thanks and congratulations on your success, John. Offline is a Crooked Media production. It's written and hosted by me, John Favreau. It's produced by Austin Fisher.

Andrew Chadwick is our audio editor. Kyle Seglin and Charlotte Landis, sound engineer of the show. Jordan Katz and Kenny Siegel take care of our music. Thanks to Tanya Sominator, Michael Martinez, Andy Gardner-Bernstein, Ari Schwartz, Andy Taft, and Sandy Gerard for production support. And to our digital team, Elijah Cohn, Nar Melkonian, and Amelia Montooth, who film and share our episodes as videos every week. Check out America Dissected this week. Abdul is joined by Dr. Ruben Warren,

Director of the National Center for Bioethics and Research in Healthcare at Tuskegee University. As some of you might know, 50 years ago this week, it was discovered that the United States government conducted the Tuskegee experiment that involved infecting hundreds of black men with syphilis in order to better understand long-term effects of the disease. Abdul and Dr. Warren discussed the study's long-lasting implications on health inequities. Always check out America Dissected every Tuesday, wherever you get your podcasts.