Pivot - A New Chief Twit, CNN Fallout, and Senator Mark Warner

Episode Date: May 16, 2023

Kara and Scott discuss Taylor Swift's economic impact, and why there are troubles at Disney Plus and Netflix. Meanwhile, over at Twitter: a new CEO, and a censorship controversy. Also, the Trump Town Hall stirs up internal politics at CNN. Our Friend of Pivot, Senator Mark Warner, stops by to talk TikTok, AI, and the Kids Online Safety Act. You can find Senator Mark Warner at @MarkWarner on Twitter. Send us your questions! Call 855-51-PIVOT or go to nymag.com/pivot. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support for Pivot comes from Virgin Atlantic. Too many of us are so focused on getting to our destination that we forgot to embrace the journey. Well, when you fly Virgin Atlantic, that memorable trip begins right from the moment you check in. On board, you'll find everything you need to relax, recharge, or carry on working. Buy flat, private suites, fast Wi-Fi, hours of entertainment, delicious dining, and warm, welcoming service that's designed around you. delicious dining and warm, welcoming service that's designed around you. Check out virginatlantic.com for your next trip to London data, and a matching engine that helps you find quality candidates fast. Listeners of this show can get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more visibility at Indeed.com slash podcast.

Just go to Indeed.com slash podcast right now and say you heard about Indeed on this podcast. Indeed.com slash podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Need to hire? You need Indeed. Hi, everyone. This is Pivot from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. I'm Kara Swisher.

And I'm Scott Galloway. And my son turned 21 today. That's very exciting. He can legally change his name. Actually, right about now is when I had him. Like right now, I was undergoing. Well, it's three hours earlier. You actually gave birth?

Yes, I did. I still don't know how this whole lesbian thing works. I had a cesarean, so I didn't quite give birth. They pulled it right out, pulled them right out of me. Did you get to plan it? Did you get to say, I want this thing out of me? No, there was an issue with a cord around his neck. And so they rushed me into surgery and then they took him out of me.

That was it. That was the entire, he had a perfect head because of that. But yes, I was pregnant, Scott. Try to keep that in mind. I'm going to send you a picture. Wait, you gave birth once or twice? Just once. Just once.

Louis. Perfect specimen. And that's why he's your favorite? No, he's not my favorite. All of us went out last night to Benihana. We had a great time. For Louis' birthday, that's what he wanted, a Mother's Day. And so they're all perfect.

They're all fantastic. Do you think that one of the reasons that Alex is an overachiever is him trying to overcompensate for your love of the natural childbirth love of Louie? Here you are. This is so, like, I'm not even going to say it's anti-gay. It's just ignorant. Can I just tell you? Ignorant is what it is, but go ahead. I went through childbirth twice, and I thought it was the most disgusting thing I'd ever seen in my life. You didn't go through it.

You observed it, correct? Oh, no. It was worse for me. Oh, okay. It was worse for me. Okay. They were literally, at one point, this is all true. The doctor said, if you pass out, I just want you to know, we're going to ignore you.

We're going to focus on the mother and the child. That is correct. That is correct. And I'm like, okay. to ignore you. We're going to focus on the mother and the child. That's correct. That is correct. And I'm like, okay. And I was sitting down at one point and one of the nurses came over and held my hand because I was in such a bad... Anyways, bring me the baby with a bow in its hair while I'm smoking a cigarette outside. How did we get from Louie, my beautiful son, turning 21? Oh, wait, let's go even worse. I met a lesbian this weekend or like a hot 28-year-old lesbian.

And the first thing I always do when I meet lesb now, so I'm like, I know Kara Swisher, which I think gives me big lesbian credibility. I don't think it does. It does not. And she's this really nice, intelligent, hot 28 year old lesbian. And I said, oh, I'll definitely set you up. So if you have any single lesbian friends. We don't all know each other. I hate to tell you.

Don't you know everybody? I don't. Not, no, no, not all the lesbians. So, so far, let's review. Let's review. My pregnancy is all about you. My son, who turned 21 today, is all about you. I think you need to wish Louis Swisher a lovely birthday. I'm going to do more than that. I'm going to take Louis out for a drink. I'm going to teach him a little bit about mating. I'm not sure I want that to happen. Oh, it's going to be great. He showed me his fake ID. He's going to frame it. I got him a camera for his birthday. What

do you think? A really nice, real- Like a cool Leica? Like something poser-ish? Yeah, letting him pick, decide what he wants, but I got him a- He's got a Leica and just wear it around and pretend he's an artist. Yes, he's going to Argentina for the year. So he wanted a camera, and I thought that was a great thing that he wanted. He wanted a good camera. So not a phone camera, a good camera. And he's returning for his, or he's in his senior year at NYU?

No, he'll be a junior next year. So he's doing junior year abroad. Remember, he took that year off. Oh, where's he going? He's going to Argentina. Oh, he's going to be a? Don't cry for me. Wow.

Yeah, he's going to Argentina. That'll be good. I know, exactly. It's good to be Louis Swisher, huh? Louis had his friends. He danced in Benihana. He wore the hat. He wore a crown. Wow. Clara and he traded tattoos. It was quite an evening. That's nice. That sounds nice. And thanks for the wishing me a happy Mother's Day. What'd you do for your wife? First home, first love, first boss. Okay.

Mother's Day. That's good. What did you do for your wife for Mother's Day since you are not there? She is in Tel Aviv with a good friend. Actually, she was in Petra. So her Mother's Day gift is time away from her husband. Oh, okay. Funny. We had a brunch and hung out together.

Did you? Yeah. I love Mother's Day. The nicest thing in my life is raising boys with someone I care about. It's generally the nicest thing in my life. Yeah. And so I do a bunch of stuff, but I'm sure I'm being confidential. Okay. Oh, wow. But it's an important day for me. Okay, good. Well, good. That's really nice. I had a lovely day, too. It was really nice. Got nice cards, nice brunch. Lucky is here, too.

She went to Benihana also. Lucky, just to bring everybody down a little bit. Just to keep it real. Keep it real. Lucky in Benihana. Happy 21. Lucky, lucky. Do you know what you're doing with your life?

No. No, we had a good time. We had a good time, I have to say. It was a big old family get-together all weekend. And it was Amanda's birthday, too. So it was just a crazy weekend of family activities. Technically, it's like, oh, my God. You've got, wait, hold on.

What? A Mother's Day and a lesbian. That's like 11 fucking people to worship. Who makes breakfast? Everyone's getting breakfast in bed. And my ex-wife came, too, to the brunch. I know. Because it's her Mother's Day, too.

Yes, exactly. This is a lot. Now, to the brunch. I know. Because it's her Mother's Day, too. Yes, exactly. This is a lot. Now, Amanda's mother was also there. So there were five mothers at this brunch. Five mothers. Oh, my God. Hallmark love. I know.

There should never be a company that gives more money to LGBTQ rights than Hallmark. Three lesbians, two straight ladies, five mothers. That was what the day was like. Anyway. Wow. We should run the fucking country, lesbians, two straight ladies, five mothers. That was what the day was like. Anyway. Wow. We should run the fucking country, lesbians, I got to tell you. Yeah. That'll solve everything.

Yeah. We're going to talk about Twitter's new CEO. Also, the struggles at CNN after last week's Trump event. And we'll speak with Senator Mark Warner about TikTok AI and the controversial bill about kids online. I think we have to ask him a thing or two about Turkey because of the Twitter thing, but we'll see what he has to say. But first, Taylor Swift has more pull than most politicians. Cities have been planning elaborate welcome gestures for tour visits. It started when Glendale, Arizona decided to rename the city Swift City for two days in March. Other gestures have included a street being temporarily renamed Taylor Swift Way in

Arlington, Texas, and the Gateway Arches in Las Vegas being lighted Swiss signature colors. Tampa even attempted to make Swift mayor for a few days. This Taylor Swift tour helped Las Vegas reach near total pre-pandemic levels of tourism. According to local tourism authorities, over three and a half million people visited in March, up almost 10 percent from 2022. I think this is fantastic. I think she deserves every bit of it. What do you think about this? What a phenomena she is from every point of view, actually. Yeah, there's a few things that have more cultural significance that I know less about. Like if you held a gun to my head and said- Oh, no, don't say this. The Swifties will come for

you. Say a Swift song. I wouldn't know. So, but everything I've understood, understand about her is that she's a great artist and a good person. And most importantly, just because I know you want to bring this back to me. Okay. I went on ChatGPT. Yeah. I'm obsessed with this. I know you are.

I'm literally obsessed with this one. I know you are. And I said, write a song about Taylor Swift falling in love with Scott Galloway. Oh, no. And it came back with this ballad. And the ballad was kind of vanilla. So I decided to spice it up. And I added the element that makes every story better, specifically my erectile dysfunction.

So I said, in reference to his erectile dysfunction, let me read you just a few ballads. Okay. He's an NYU professor, silver-tongued and smart. In the sea of suits and ties, he's a work of art. Okay. Oh, Scott Galloway, your courage brings me down. Or she could fall in love with me, go on two dates, and then write ballads about me. Isn't that what she does? She goes on dates like she has lunch and then writes a ballad about it? Let me try to compare you that with Jake Tapper, who's doing very funny tweets about Taylor Swift. He wrote, my very dear wife, having conquered Philadelphia,

the Swifties have now prepared to cross the river. Indications are very strong in a few days. Perhaps tomorrow I shall not write you again. I wish to warn you of their good cheer and sick beats. Lovingly, Jacob. He should start a show on the books he reads. I got it. Shut up.

Stop it. Well, okay. There's a reason he's still on CNN. Okay. Listen. This is the deal. He's a much better. Jake should run the country.

He should run the country. Anyway, I think she is. Jake and Taylor. I like it. Tapper Swift. Listen to her. She runs her. She's such a great business person.

She runs her own shit. She gets shit done. She puts on a great show. She's like the all. She's like a multi- omniprimonor. I like, like she runs everything. Super impressive woman. She also didn't take the money from the FTXs of the world.

She just looked at it and said, no. I'm just saying she's a very sharp cookie. Anyway, I'm not, I don't have tickets. I should get tickets. I love Taylor Swift. It'd be more interesting if Jake Tapper fell in love with me. That'd be bigger news. That's an image.

We've got an announcement to make. I'll be honest, Scott. He's a little too handsome for you. He is very handsome. He's very handsome. He's on a much higher shelf. No, he's very attractive. You're an attractive man, but not like Jake Tapper. Go on! I'll take it. I am thinking of the hair.

I am thinking of the hair. I am thinking of the hair. Anyway, speaking of good hair, some fresh setbacks for Bob 1. Disney shares are down almost 10% in the last five days after the company reported losing 4 million Disney Plus subscribers. This was inevitable. The loss was offset by price increases, which was the reason. But Wall Street had expected a gain of 1 million subscribers. Last week, the company announced it will add Hulu continent to the Disney Plus app. And Netflix plans to cut $300 million in spending this year for context of streamers operating expenses were around $26 billion last year. So $300 million feels kind of small.

The decision is reportedly due to delays and plans to crack down on password sharing in the U.S. What do you think about this? Is this inevitable? Most losses come from India, where they lost rights to the Premier.S. What do you think about this? Is this inevitable? Most losses come from India, where they lost rights to the Premier League cricket. So this brings together a lot of trends, or is really indicative of what's going on in the broader media ecosystem. The first is that, I mean, the premier strategy is cutting costs and laying off people. And they reduced its streaming costs by almost half a billion dollars.

They've cut 7,000 jobs, about 6 billion in annual savings. They beat revenue expectations because post-COVID, people don't want to be in their homes watching Disney Plus or Hulu. They want to be doing things. I mean, I do think one of the wonderful things about this crisis post-crisis is that people have a newfound appreciation for what it means to be together in the finite nature of life.

And when you add in when you combine those two things, you end up with a dad and a mom or a dad and a dad and a mom and a mom who say, let's take the kids to Disneyland. You know, if not now, when? Clara just asked to go. Here's the following thing. People are waking up to the fact that going to Disneyland is about a billion times more rewarding than watching fucking Disney Plus all day long. And your job as a father right now, this is, I think, my job is to get my kids out of the house and off their phone, whatever it is.

Does it involve leaving the house? Does it involve the company of our dogs? Does it involve you not being on your phone? If it hits any of those three things, the answer is yes. And if you look at their numbers, Kara, they lost 4 million subscribers. They reduced cost 400 million around streaming. They're buying Hulu, which is basically consolidation, which needs to happen. And what's

saving their ass right now? Right. An in-person wonderful experience with others called the parks. Yep. I get it. So now he's, and he's also still caught in the, in the DeSantis fight that keeps going on. And DeSantis is not backing down. Neither is, they keep passing legislation, et cetera, et cetera. So he's So he's got a lot on his plate. He's got a lot on his plate. But the prices, you're right. He's going to – these things are – all of them are going to slow down, correct? We've been saying this forever.

I mean, $26 billion in operating expenses, 120 million households in America. And so they are consolidating. You know, they're taking Hulu. Cutting prices, yeah. They're cutting price, cutting cost, cutting – not cutting price, cutting cost, cutting investment massively. And you know what was the biggest gift for them? What's that? The biggest gift?

The Rider Strike. Yeah. You know what the Rider Strike is? It'll suck up all the content. It's the equivalent – Of stop. Well, how all of these experts who invented ai now now that they're rich have decided that what they created is a monster and they're asking for a pause this is the perfect

thing for the studios and the writers i was saying that to someone the costs are they're going to do the costs um you know it's interesting he's got a lot in his place and you're right he just he's going to suffer because these numbers are going to go down with price increases they'll probably do better with price increases seeing So you get prices. One thing he said about the DeSantis Florida thing, which I thought was he's still escalating that though, does the state want us to invest more, employ more people and pay more taxes or not, which I thought was a pretty strong statement. And then he said, I think the case in the case is that we filed last month made our position in facts very clear. There's really about one thing

and one thing only and that is retaliating against us for taking a position about pending legislation. Where's your prediction of where it goes? Oh, I immediately, when I saw that it was down 10%, and I immediately went and looked at the stock and I'm thinking about buying it because this is, this company has as much, you want defensible IP. That's at the end of the day, that's kind of the gangster for enduring stock market value is defensible IP. And this company has more defensible IP. And Bob's coming in. It's like Honey Badger just don't give a shit. Bob Iger doesn't give a shit. He's on the back nine. He can do whatever he wants. He has a ton of credibility. He just acquired Hulu. They'll make that kind of the adult part of their streaming platform. He got it for not a terrible price. He didn't have to overpay for it. He's cutting costs like crazy. This is the kind of stock you give to your kid.

Well, that's interesting. Speaking of a kid, Forbes has a new owner, 28-year-old Austin Russell, the CEO of an autonomous driving tech company. I've met him once or twice. He's acquiring 82% of the business publication. The deal will report a value of Forbes at $800 million. Forbes attempted to go public last year via SPAC, a blank check merger, didn't go through with the process over financing concerns and market slowdowns. Axios has reported that Russell is in talks to receive funding from Indian investment firm Sun Group, a previous potential buyer whose deal did not materialize due to

criticisms Forbes faced because of the firm's ties to Russia. Okay, another rich guy buying something. He likes Forbes, apparently. Again, Vice finally filed for bankruptcy last week. BuzzFeed News is shut down. Forbes worth $800 million. What do you think? Well, something is only worth what someone's willing to pay for it. So the fact that it is worth $800 million, I would argue its value is more like $100 million. Yeah. It's got a brand. It's got nothing else. Yeah.

And I also think the Forbes brand has lost a lot of credibility because they have this kind of weird stringer network. You probably know more about this than I know. The contributor network. Although they've been doing some great journals. We had that reporter you loved who was writing about TikTok, Emily Baker White, and my friend John Pachkowski is an editor there. So you think they're doing good work? Some of the work is great, and I think they are. And you have that contributor program, which when you click a Forbes link, you never know if you're going to land on journalism. Yes, they've had that. Why would someone like this want to own these? It's another billionaire that wants to own media. would someone like this want to own these it's another billionaire that wants to own media it's it's pure and simple it's a form of night narcissism and fear of death and that is if you're

if you're a billionaire republican you buy sports teams if you're a billionaire democrat you buy a media company yeah i mean it's just what would you would you think having it would be worthwhile i mean it's a global brand. We're talking about the rich people thing. If he has, but to do a good job of it. Yeah. He's going to have to pour. I mean, this is worse than a sports teams. Most sports teams, they break even, they lose some money, and then the terminal value goes up in 10 years. You sell it for a lot more to the, you know, Qataris or something. Yeah. With a media company, I mean, it's like buying a plane. You think, oh, great, I own a plane.

Buddy, you just bought a ton of expense to do anything with the Forbes brand. Investigative journalism, long-form journalism, good business journalism competing against the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times. It just takes a shit ton of money, and it's a terrible business. So unless he's willing to sign up for another $50 million a year in investment, his newsroom is going to get angry. They're going to get upset with him. They're going to say he's not dedicated to journalism. Leak, leak, leak. Yep. Yeah. So I don't, I think this is a tough one, Kara. What do you think? I wouldn't buy it. I don't know. It's their documents. Businesses aren't good businesses. They just aren't. A hundred percent. They just, they're fine. Terrible fine. Again, the New York Times,

what do they make? Just look, go peruse the numbers. It's a great company. It's the best at what it does. It's still a small business, no matter, you know, it's a very good business, but it's a small business. And they're the best of a sorry lot. They've done better than anybody. Yeah, they're the best, 100%. But it's still not, just go compare it to other businesses. Anyway, speaking of that, speaking of advertising advertising let's get to our first big story twitter will have a new chief twit last week elon musk teased that he had found a new ceo to take over parts of the company on friday he confirmed what kara swisher had long another prediction It wasn't really a prediction. Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding.

Ding, ding, ding, that the job was going to Linda Iaccarino. By the way, Wall Street Journal, I did know it. Stop it. Stop pretending you're an exclusive. Until last week, Iaccarino ran global sales and advertising at NBCUniversal. I know her very well. We'll talk about that in a minute. But some of Musk's biggest fans aren't happy with the pic.

Influential right-wing accounts like Cat Turd, he weighed in, says she's too woke, citing her role at the World Economic Forum where she chairs a committee. She has to go for advertising, you stupid cat poop. It's ridiculous. Others on the right have leapt to her defense, pointing out that Yacarino follows and likes tweets from right-wing accounts. She also served two terms on President Trump's Council on Sports, Fitness, and Nutrition. OK, whatever. Whatever, Linda. I know Linda very well. I don't know. I assume you do, Scott. I don't know her at all. She's a big there's a number of big advertising people at a lot of these places. She's one of the more high profile ones, you know, like Michael Kass and Linda Iaccarino. There's a whole bunch of them that are well-known, Lou Pescalis. Anyway, she is conservative, 100%. If you talk to her, I wouldn't say

she's not conservative in the new sense, meaning let's attack the gays kind of thing. That's not what she's like. But she certainly was a fan of President Trump. She was known in-house as the House conservative at NBC. Most people there are sort of middling Democrats, middling Republicans, essentially middle centrist. She's definitively conservative. She is a very good ad salesperson. She's really aggressive. I did a lot of work with her when NBC had an investment in Recode. I think she's an excellent ad executive.

She's always wanted to be CEO. We've talked about that several times. They never really, as someone said, they didn't treat her more. At NBC, there's a lot of people, and when the Jeff Schell debacle happened, she didn't, her name was not brought up, even though she brings in the dough. But they sort of treat her, like someone told me, like the ad lady from Long Island, that kind of thing. And they do that with a lot of sort of high-profile women in these kind of jobs. And she wanted to go to the big time. There's a lot of upside for her. If it works, makes a lot of money.

If it doesn't work, he's crazy. She's well-liked among the ad community, very well-liked, and really is prominent, I would say. Now he's sort of admitting his subscription play is a failure, I guess. Her negatives, she never runs something like this. Crazy Elon and this stuff that he's running the really important parts of the business. So I don't know. And the ad people will come back because they like her, but then if it doesn't work, they'll abandon her in two seconds. What do you think?

I thought it was a really good pick. Yeah. She's well-respected, well-liked, runs a big business as an adult. I don't, you know, I don't think her politics are either here nor there. Well, she has. You can't have a liberal go there and talk with him all day because he's really red-pilled himself. So that's what I mean. But we do probably.

She agrees with him. I know, but she's comfortable with his politics. There you go. And he's gone red-pilled. But anyways, what was interesting, it sort of indicates that they're going to focus – her focus will be on advertising. Although it's a bit, quite frankly, the way they described the position, he said, I'm going to continue to focus on technology and products. Product software systems operations. She's business operations. Yeah. At the end of the day, she's the COO. I mean, they gave her the title. He's going to

get to make all the major decisions. And I think that the over-under on her being there in 12 months is 50-50. I agree. And I would imagine that she's a smart woman. She said to her lawyer, there's only one thing that's important in this contract, and it's my severance agreement. Because this guy is undependable, unreliable. And when it comes to this thing that he's very emotional about, I could easily get thrown under the bus. So she has built in a, I'm sure, I'd love to see her unemployment agreement that says, if I am terminated for pretty much any reason other than killing a child, I vest everything for

four years. And I bet she hasn't even taken that many options. If I were her, she's a smart woman. Take some cash, yeah. All cash, because he's trying to pretend this company's still worth 20 billion, and it isn't. Right, right. But it's an opportunity for her, because you meet her at a cocktail party and women and men have big egos at this level. And you go, what do you do? I run all of advertising for NBC. Oh, great. I'm going to head to the bar. Do you want anything? I run Twitter. Really? Really? So it's just a much more interesting day.

Yeah, she wanted this. You could feel that more interesting day. You could feel that from her. She's so, and I don't mean this, just ambition was bristling off of her. And that's not a negative thing in my thing. Would you say that about a man? I would. Would you say that about a man? I would. I'd call him feral, probably. I mean, we'll see what he behaves like.

She sort of got him over. I was thinking about it. You know, I talked to her before she did that Elon Musk interview at that event down in Florida, Possible or whatever you call it. Again, she also, by the way, she likes attention. She likes being on stage. We often did stage things together. She likes the stage. So that's one of the things. So do you and me, Cara. I get it. But that's going to be a problem with Elon because he likes the stage, right? So if she starts doing interviews, will he like that? I think that's one of the things. But she wants

prominence. And so that'll be, I think,'s one of the things. But she wants prominence. And so that'll be, I think, a push-pull between them. And another thing is she's— That'll be an issue. I can't name another person. The only person I've ever heard that works at any of his companies is the woman you keep referencing at SpaceX. Yeah, but you never see her. One time she told—I wanted to do an interview with her, and she said, Elon does the interviews with you.

Yeah, no, he's—no one's allowed. You don't even want to be at a party. Like, don't let anyone take a picture of you. I mean, it's all about him. Let's be honest. But she's got, she's very charming and everything. We talked briefly before she didn't talk. We emailed before he did that interview with her. I just said, good luck.

Like, okay, good luck with that. And then when I saw it. It went really well, right? I thought it was quite a kissy, kissy, kissy one. It was sort of like, whoa, you didn't do anything I mentioned. But, you know, I thought one of the reasons. She was interviewing for a job. That's correct.

That's what I, when I looked at that, I'm like, oh, like that. And that's how I figured it out. That's how I figured it was her. Because I saw that and I was like, I got the first person who came to mind because of that interview she did. She's got a big thing to tackle from the start, government censorship. Last week, Twitter announced that it was limiting access to some content in Turkey. It hasn't said which comment, but Turkish news sites report tweets come from a Kurdish businessman and investigative journalist who investigates the current government, which, by the way, looks like they're going to a runoff. Critics accused the company of caving to government censorship in the lead up to presidential election. Turkey held the election on Sunday. Musk fired back at one of those critics, tweeting that the choice was to have Twitter throttled in its entirety or limit access to some tweets, which is not the choice. But by the way, before the takeover, Twitter fully complied with half of government demands it receives. It was one of the most aggressive pushback of government requests in tech at the time. Since the takeover,

the number has gone up to 80%. Tudor said that he'll post what the government in Turkey sent us, but as of the recording, he hasn't. Tudor used to be great about fighting government censorship, even going as far to sue the government of India before he took over. But now he's removing content at Indian government's request, including a BBC documentary. I find it's difficult to think of someone who is more full of shit than Elon Musk. And the latest thing he is pitching, promising, being sanctimonious about, trying to attach to his brand, pretending he gives a flying fuck about it is free speech. This is the absolute worst thing he could have done for democracy in a fair election. Because when you keep the platform up, first off, you're right.

This has sent a message to every autocrat that if you tell Twitter to bastardize their content in my favor, they will back down. Because the absolute worst thing that could have happened has happened, and that is he left the network up. If he'd taken the network down, the day after the election, they would have said, fine, put it back up. They probably would have said, keep it up, as you referenced they did before. Instead, the majority of Turkish citizens who had to make a decision going to the polls, and most people are really busy and don't make that decision, or oftentimes the swing voters who swing an election don't make that decision, or oftentimes the swing voters who swing an election don't make that decision, had a source of news media that all of a sudden, all the anti-Erdogan

contact wasn't there. And there wasn't a disclosure saying we were forced to take it down. This was the absolute worst message to send to every autocrat around the world. This was worse, much worse than taking the platform down. And it did everything an autocrat wants. Give me the impression I have free speech. Give me the impression the pro Erdogan content has veracity because the platform is still up.

But all the things questioning my corruption, talking positively about my opponent, that just disappeared. So just whenever Elon Musk says free speech, just keep in mind, A, he doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about. And B, if he did, he has no fidelity to it. No, he also has business interest in Turkey. No problem. But he has huge business interest in Turkey, let's be clear, for both SpaceX and for Tesla. And so this is just, honestly, if he says I'm a free speech, I'll pollute us again.

I'm going to, I don't know what I'm going to do. I think free speech is important for humanity. Have you heard that rap? Yeah. Except when it comes to free elections in Turkey. Just typical. Typical. And by the way, Twitter did the exact opposite before. They should do it everywhere they are. Just we're not going to do it if they want to be free speech.

And you have governments back down. They won't any longer. They're all going to say the same thing now. Yep. 100%. Especially because these companies are under such pressure by these governments. They really are. And it's not their biggest business. It's not like he's losing anything by doing it. It's like just advertising. It's not, it's except for Elon Musk businesses. Yes, it's grotesque. It's good luck, Linda. Good luck, Linda. Have a good time. Have at it. Make sure that severance payment is big. I was told by an ad person, which I think is 100% true. I was at a thing and they're like, I'm like, are you going to go back to Twitter? And they were like, well, it sucked before. And now there's penis pictures and white supremacists all over the place. Probably not very much, right?

Unless it works. So she's got to convince him. She'll stabilize it. She probably has. She probably insulted it to them before. Yeah. But my guess is someone like that has such deep relationships. She's going to throw a bunch of great parties at Cannes.

She is. And say, hey. Let's go. Let's show up. Hey, E. Hey, CMO of P&G Ford, just give me 10 or 20 million. It's me, Linda. Yeah.

There'll be a Yaccarino bump in their advertising. Yeah. They're still going to have to deliver. But what you said is it's always been a subscale platform that's never really shown the ROI of the other stuff. No, but let's go to the party. What do you said is it's always been a subscale platform that's never really shown the ROI of the other stuff. No, but let's go to the party. What do you say? I'm in. Anyway, Linda, again, good luck. You're a very nice person, although I don't agree with you on your Trump nonsense, but whatever.

All right, Scott, let's go on a quick break. When we come back, CNN's brass clamps down on internal dissent and we'll speak with Senator Mark Warner about TikTok and more. For the longest time, we have these images of somebody sitting crouched over their computer with a hoodie on, just kind of typing away in the middle of the night. And honestly, that's not what it is anymore. That's Ian Mitchell, a banker turned fraud fighter. These days, online scams look more like crime syndicates than individual con artists. And they're making bank. Last year, scammers made off with more than $10 billion. It's mind-blowing to see the kind of infrastructure that's been built to facilitate scamming at scale. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of scam centers all around the world.

These are very savvy business people. These are organized criminal rings. And so once we understand the magnitude of this problem, we can protect people better. And so once we understand the magnitude of this problem, we can protect people better. One challenge that fraud fighters like Ian face is that scam victims sometimes feel too ashamed to discuss what happened to them. But Ian says one of our best defenses is simple. We need to talk to each other. We need to have those awkward conversations around what do you do if you have text messages you don't recognize?

What do you do if you start getting asked to send information that's more sensitive? Even my own father fell victim to a, thank goodness, a smaller dollar scam, but he fell victim. And we have these conversations all the time. So we are all at risk and we all need to work together to protect each other. Learn more about how to protect yourself at vox.com slash Zelle. And when using digital payment platforms, remember to only send money to people you know and trust. Thumbtack presents the ins and outs of caring for your home. Out. Uncertainty. Self-doubt.

Stressing about not knowing where to start. In. Plans and guides that make it easy to get home projects done. Out, word art. Sorry, live laugh lovers. In, knowing what to do, when to do it, and who to hire. Start caring for your home with confidence. Download Thumbtack today. Start caring for your home with confidence. Download Thumbtack today. from inside the house. In CNN's Reliable Sources newsletter, reporter Oliver Darcy labeled the event a spectacle of lies. That got him called into a meeting with boss Chris Licht and the

network's top brass. Licht told Darcy he was too emotional in his writing and to keep it dispassionate according to Puck's Dylan Byers. Let me just say that piece was not emotional. Chris Licht is a little emotional. Anderson Cooper was emotional. Oliver Darcy was not emotional in that piece. But here we are, eight years in, people cannot cover Trump right. What is going on here, Scott? What do you think about this? what Disney's doing to dissent or governor DeSantis and they're, they're right. But I actually think the thing that hurt DeSantis, what if CNN had decided to do a town hall with governor DeSantis and not Trump? I think this, I mean, these decisions matter, right? If they said, look, this is a new face up and coming in the polls was the front runner. We're going to do a town hall with them. Like it would have been, I just, I think that I feel for CNN. I don't, I think this, I think that they, I can understand why they made the decision.

They made the call. They took a risk. It blew up in their face, quite frankly. Well, a lot of people, I don't disagree they should have had him. I think a lot of, that's one of their false arguments. Like, we have to do it. And all the people are like, yeah, we know, but you did it badly. Like nobody. There was a bunch of screamy people on Twitter saying they shouldn't do it. But most news organizations like, yeah, they should do it. What are you going to do? Like they have them. I think it's the issue. And, and then to clamp down on their own reporter, media reporter for covering it is and I get the you shouldn't be writing about your own organization. But that happens. sometimes in this case, it rose to the occasion, right? You don't pee inside the tent, but you do in this case, because it was such a big news story. And to clamp down on a piece that was

literally completely fair, I mean, I think has irritated a lot of people. They just keep stumbling. And the only advantage goes to someone like Trump, although I don't think he did as well as people think. I don't know. I kind of come from, I understand the code of journalism and covering, but it sucks to be a grownup. You don't shitpost the people who are signing the front of your chest. It wasn't a shitpost. You didn't read it. It was not a shitpost. You're right, I didn't read it. It was not a shitpost. It was basically saying there's a lot of controversy here. And Trump lied a lot. Fact, fact. It was so dispassionate.

They just didn't want them to write about it at all. And in this case, it was such a big news story. They wrote about it because the media is obsessed with themselves. America has moved on. The media wants to hammering and stare at their own, gaze at their own navel because they think they're more important than they are. They shouldn't bring in their media reporter and chastise them for doing his job. I'm sorry.

I'm sure they bring them in every fucking week and chastise them for other reasons. It's called work. They didn't. They don't. They should focus. If this guy has all these problems within CNN, this is not what he should be doing with his leadership. I'm sorry. I've interviewed him.

This was someone on background taking the situation out of context. Who the fuck cares? It's a private company. No, it did happen. I know what happened. It happened. I know. I know.

And Louie's 21. Let's get back to that. I'm just telling you, I'm very, it absolutely happened. And I've talked to all sides. I will defer to your judgment on this one. I just, it's a waste of fucking time to like, in this case, the media reporter should write about it because it was such a big story. And it was a big story, especially in media.

Now, you may not be interested in media, although you spend an awful lot of time writing about media, just saying. I do. So I think you should think about that. I think it creates a morale problem at that company. I think you should think about it. Okay, I'll get right on that thinking part. No, I think it's a morale problem. Taylor Swift likes me.

She wrote a ballot about me. Oh, my God. As usual, you try to diminish things. It's a morale problem that they have wrote a ballot about oh my god as usually you try to diminish thing it's a morale problem that they already had they've made it worse i've got a hot lesbian for us to say okay all right let me just say in the last episode we're running presidential debates that only work if participants have integrity and fidelity the truth that's what someone named scott galloway said what did i say you said regarding presidential debates that the only work if participants have integrity and fidelity to the truth. Does that extend the logic of news covers generally? Just

curious. Oh, good one. Good one. Oh, my. I have absolutely no respect. Excuse me. Excuse me. She's not my type. She's not my type. She's not my type. Come on. What do you think? Look, I'm standing by it. I think that they made, I understand the call to have the former president and the front runner in a town hall. I think where they absolutely screwed up was acquiescing to his team's request to fill

the place. I'll give you an example. When I go on Bill Maher, part of the reason that we're successful on Bill Maher is I think there are people in the audience that have a guttural, uproarious laugh at anything you say. And I think basically they didn't have a town hall.

They had a red pill fan boy. Senunu said that. Governor Senunu said that. Look, it's easy to play Monday morning quarterback. If we can play magic one go back in history, I would have liked her to just say, this is a fucking nightmare. I don't care. I'm going off script and say, turn on the lights and say, can someone who laughed tell

me why they just laughed? That's what I said for them to do. Thank you. Thank you. But how do you cover Trump? Tell me, mister. Pretend you, this passion dispassion is not the right metric. I would use technology. Okay, again, do it again. You know what I would have? Let me see how you is not the right metric. I would use technology.

Okay, again, do it again. Let me see how you're going to cover it. I would do the town hall. I would have a bipartisan group of people, not red pill weirdos. I would leverage technology, and I'm going to say, we're going to fact check you real time, and I'd have a chyron, and every time he said something, I would also, I would leverage technology and I'm going to say, we're going to fact check you real time. And I'd have a chyron. And every time he said something, I would fact check it. And it would have been blinking red all.

It would have said, he just said he sent this tweet. Time delay. He never sent it. Time delay is another thing. Just be like, this is not true. This is not true. He just said this. This is true.

Yes, this is true. I would fact check him real time. What if they had done the same thing with Governor DeSantis instead of Trump? Yeah. That would have changed the dynamic, at least for a short term. I'm not saying that's the right thing. They solidified his position as the front runner. They did. President Trump, people know you. They have heard from you. The frontrunner and the number two and the person whose name is most often mentioned as their likely contender for the GOP nomination and is also a rising star in the Republican Party, we're going to do a town hall with him. That would have been the right call, in my opinion. It didn't do very well.

Only 3.3 million viewers. It's a lot more than CNN usually gets, but it's actually below the Biden. We're all talking about it. I understand. We're all talking about it. I understand. We're all pouring over it. I get it, but it wasn't that good a TV situation, just so you know. I think The Onion had a good take with the headline, Trump condemned forgiving platform to CNN. I love that Onion.

Anyway. They do a great job. We'll see. All the other networks will take Trump, by the way. He's there and talks with all the major networks. He's the best guest in television. He makes news. Yeah, same thing with Elon.

He's going on CNBC tomorrow night. But, you know, there's no way the media can't be a booster to candidates. That's just the way. We're not neutral. And we like to think of ourselves as neutral arbiters. But as depicted on Succession this week, we are active players who make intentional editorial choices with consequences. That's from Evan Engel.

The relationship between Tom and Shiv is just too much for me. They're just not nice to each other. I just can't handle it. I don't think people should treat each other that way. Keep handling it. Let's just say. He's got to be the bigger man. She's got to.

Yeah. She's. They're just. They're just. Relationships are supposed to enhance each other's lives and build each other up. Not be mean to each other. I just. I'm traumatized by succession. Are you? All right. Well, get ready. Get ready. Oh, by the way, I read a tweet. I read a tweet that someone said they couldn't follow it,

and the best part of Succession was your podcast. It's pretty good. I'm sure you're not listening to it, but it's very good. This week, I had Jesse Armstrong, the creator, this week about this show. This was a really good show. Let's get back to Tom. He's a classic Shakespearean actor, isn't he? Yes. McFadden. Matthew McFadden.

What's he like? He's wonderful. You should listen to my podcast with him. It's quite good. Yeah, that's not going to happen. And then I just interviewed Jeremy Strong for a full hour. He plays Kendall Roy. He was great.

Anyway, CNN, just get it together and stop acting like Stop picking on CNN. Stop picking on. Oh, stop it, please. Anyway, let's bring in our friend of Pivot, speaking of nice guys. Senator Mark Warner represents Virginia in the United States Senate. He also chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee and is the sponsor of the Restrict Act, which it passed could ban TikTok. Welcome, Senator Warner. Thanks for having me. So I want to start with just something we just were talking about. Elon Musk appears to be censoring tweets at the request of the Turkish government. We've seen him take similar actions

in India. The last owners pushed back on the Turkish government when they tried to do this. Do you have any thoughts about the free speech implications? And should this be a congressional priority? Well, Elon Musk is brilliant. I think we all know that. I worry about his tendency to be supportive of authoritarian regimes. I often point out that if you ask any random group what American citizen is more obliged and potentially under the thumb of the Communist Party of China, it's Elon Musk, because he is totally dependent upon Chinese largesse for the batteries that go in all his Teslas, the fact that he's got a major manufacturing facility there, and the fact that he's always willing to say good things about the regulatory environment in China when he trashes the regulatory environment in the

United States and Europe. So the fact that he is kowtowing to the Erdogan government doesn't surprise me at all. Doesn't surprise you at all. There's nothing Congress should be doing about this? Because that's how Twitter fought. I worry overall about Musk's kind of hands-off approach to Twitter and his willingness again to go further and further to the right. I'm not sure there's, you know, I can tell you our committee is not doing anything on this subject. And I don't know whether others are.

Yeah, that's a fair point. Okay, so let's get into the Restrict Act. It doesn't mention TikTok by name, but it seems pretty well targeted. Talk about the Restrict Act overall, because many are worried that it's the Patriot Act of data. Well, let me step back and take a minute or two on this. You know, we don't have any organized approach on how we deal with technology that comes from nation states that our country's defined as adversarial. That's China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, you know, Venezuela, Cuba. Not my choices. That's been in law for some time. Yet we've seen this over the last five or six years. It was Kaspersky, the Russian software company, a few years back. Then we've had huge issues with Huawei and CTE. Now it's TikTok. Tomorrow it could

be some other entity. And I think we need a rules-based approach rather than the whack-a-mole approach we've got now, which we kind of say, this company's bad and let's go after it. We need a rules-based approach that would stand up to constitutional muster, that would recognize particularly communications-based technologies do have First Amendment rights, whether they're controlled by another entity or not, and that would give the Secretary of Commerce the tools that would allow them to restrict, potentially sell off, or in the ultimate case, ban an application if, and remember, the burden would be on the government to prove its case that this was a national

security concern, and there would be an obligation, I think a lot of our critics have missed this, actually for the intelligence community to declassify as much information as possible. Sure, so we can see the proof. Yeah, that's one of the issues. And let me go quickly, because I'm sure there'll be follow-up questions. The basic premise of why I think TikTok's a national security issue is 150 million Americans use TikTok. TikTok says they use it for an average of 90 minutes a day. The two concerns I have with TikTok are, one, the data harvesting that's going on, and people

will say, well, what about, you know, that? Yes, I was just going to say, Facebook, Instagram. Videos my kids like, how is that, you know, how is that important or not important? Well, I mean, if a foreign government knows what your kids like, that could be used at some point in the future for blackmail. And the other portion, which is, I think, a huge concern, is the propaganda tools. And I think it would be naive to assume that the Communist Party, if they wanted ByteDance to slightly shade what kind of videos, that is a concern. And let me quickly add, and you know this, Carolyn, Scott knows this, my background's technology. I'm not a complete troglodyte on these issues.

And I absolutely believe that there are problems with Facebook and Google and Twitter and others. And I'm in favor of everything from kids' online safety to privacy legislation to Section 230 reform. I've got data portability, interoperability legislation. I'm for all of that. None of which, let me point out, has passed, but this one looks like it will. Matter of fact, if there was a place where we get big old goose eggs, it is on any guardrails on social media. But I think the discussion about TikTok or national security concerns is a different one.

Final point is that we were moving merrily along, picking up Republicans and Democrats two by two, almost Noah-esque. You know, we had 13 Democrats, 13 Republicans. The Biden administration supported us. And it looked like because it was rules-based, we were making huge progress. After Mr. Show, the TikTok CEO testified, it was like TikTok did flip the switch and they're lobbying, suddenly came to bear, and you couldn't turn on TV without seeing a TikTok ad and all the little cheat sheets that the politicians read in Washington. And where the criticism has come, three areas, all of which I think are not valid, but all of which we are prepared to amend the legislation to make explicitly clear. One is that somehow if TikTok were banned and an American

citizen said, I still want to get on TikTok, I'm going to use a VPN to get on, that somehow we could go after that American citizen. No, no, no. But we will put additional language in if necessary. Two, that this is somehow the Patriot Act refreshed. The actual language that we used is exactly the language the Secretary of Commerce already has on trade adjustment legislation. But, again, we will clarify further there is no expansion of government powers. And then three, the criticism that somehow an innocent American company could somehow get sanctioned by this by having to do business in China. No, you have to demonstrate that the Chinese, the company is controlled by Chinese interest. And because Chinese law back as of 2017 says that any Chinese company at the end of the day has to be first and foremost loyal, not to customers or shareholders, but to the Communist Party of China,

that control criteria is there. But again, we to the Communist Party of China, that control criteria is there. But again, we are working with some of our critics to make some legislative changes to make explicitly clear that those criticisms are not valid. Senator Warner, really good to be with you, and thanks for your good work. The, you know, Senator Klobuchar, whenever I speak to a senator on tech issues And I'm trying to figure out why there's an FDA for food, there's an SEC for the financial markets. Is it just pure money? Is it these folks have more money? Is it that we worship them so you don't get the public support? Why,

if like every other legislation as it comes to big tech, if this goes the way of all of it, we'll all nod our head and then nothing will happen. You have a front row seat here. Why can't we get anything done here? Well, Scott, I think it's a couple of factors. One is I think we were all for the first 10 or 15 years of this century, way too techno-optimists. We said all these great things tend to come with tech. And there have been great things. Great things have come from social media.

There's great creativity on TikTok. I'm all for some other platform providing that same outlet for social influencers to make money. But we kind of were unwilling to acknowledge there was a deep, dark underbelly from all of this. And the Democrats, especially during Obama, were hugely techno-optimists, enthralled with the Silicon Valley. The Republicans were traditionally more pro-business. So you didn't start with any kind of traditional adversary for these players. Then when we had even the lowest hanging fruit, something called

the Honest Ads Act that I think everybody supported that said, if you advertise on Facebook, a political ad, there ought to be the same disclosure requirements that you would have if you were on TV or radio. And a little bit, the social media companies are good at rope-a-dope. You know, oh, I'm for that, or I'm for that in concept until you actually see it written on a piece of paper is part of the problem. And then your point, Scott, that these are hugely, hugely profitable companies. And they are more than willing to spend their resources. I supported Amy's approach on antitrust because I think some of the self-dealing needed to be dealt with. But it's, you know, she can say more articulately than I, but, you know, she got

just overwhelmed with the amount of money being spent. I'm seeing this real time. I don't think there is a lobbyist in D.C. that I know that's not on TikTok's payroll at this point. Now, again, that's part of the process, but I don't think we should underestimate. Is it having an effect? Because it worked against Amy or Senator Klobuchar. I tell you, our moving along literally with folks lined up to get on our restrict bill since the opposition has kind of blossomed all at once. And it was almost like a light switch went off. blossomed all at once, and it was almost like a light switch went off. But we are working with some of the folks who've got concerns,

because if they've got legitimate concerns about individuals following prey or, you know, expansion of government powers or some company being inadvertently hit, I think we can address those concerns. And I think there also was, on TikTok in particular, the notion, well, gosh, this is really popular with young people. It is. And I've had a bunch of folks who are, you know, are social influencers and make their money off of TikTok. I haven't heard any of them. They want to maintain that ability to have that income stream, but none of them said it needs to

be a company that is indirectly controlled by the Communist Party of China. Right, which is not going to change, correct? Last quick point. This is not just Americans. Canada has banned TikTok, EU, the Brits, the Australians. The Indians have banned it outright. The other governments have banned it just in terms of their governmental use. And the BBC, not exactly some, you know, not progressive-leaning group, has basically told all the journalists, get off TikTok because chances are you're getting monitored. Yeah. So, the proof.

You're the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee. I'm guessing you've seen the proof. I can tell you this. There is a reason why every law enforcement entity, it's a reason why the armed forces, the reasons why every one of our 17 intelligence agencies think that TikTok is a national security risk. What's the reason? Can we see it? I'm not going to go in. Let's pass the bill and then they still got to make the case. So the intel community would have to then declassify.

I can't magically declassify right now. But you feel there's ample proof. Let me not act like you've got the absolute smoking gun. Most of this is the potential abuse, not current abuse. That's the TikTok calling. But the thing was with Huawei, on the back door, what finally convinced people we needed to move on this was the fact that Huawei had sold their systems, subsidized by the Chinese government, with almost 100% match of where our intercontinental ballistic missile systems were. So some of this on TikTok is the potential abuse, not actual abuse. But why would you have to take that risk, particularly when you're

thinking about the propaganda tool? All right, I'm going to move us to the Kids Online Safety Act. This bill failed last year after advocacy groups said it was too broad. Now it's been reintroduced. And of course, there's a version in California. What's different this time around and why should it pass? The ACLU and Fight for Refuge will still oppose the rework bill. The ACLU says the bill would let companies collect more information about who is and isn't a minor than it should be seeking to curb data abuses. Well, Karen, there's not much difference in the subs. I don't think there's anything different. I'm a co-sponsor of it.

But it should have been a no-brainer. I mean, this does put a, quote-unquote, duty of care on the tech companies to make sure for folks under 17 they take some steps. duty of care on the tech companies to make sure for folks under 17 they take some steps. Again, that's a bit amorphous, but as we've seen in the UK, they're actually implementing similar, tougher type legislation to protect their kids. It would give parents some more control. And when we see the level of mental health issues, particularly coming out of COVID, and again, not all due to social media, but in many cases exacerbated by social media. I mean, the epidemic of body shaming issues, the epidemic of eating disorders, oftentimes accelerated by some of these social media platforms. This should be a no-brainer. And I do think this session, it will get done. I think it will get marked up shortly. And again, it goes back to your earlier point. If we can't protect our kids or if we can't take on something that is a national security risk within this domain, and to Scott's point, what in the heck are we doing?

Why can't we move the ball on any of this when, frankly, when we don't, at the congressional level, we cede to a quilt work of state laws, or as we've seen time and again, we basically cede American leadership to the EU or to our friends in the UK who are willing to take action. So, some studies came out this week, I think, validating what a lot of us, you know, felt, and that is that mental wellness among teens is inversely correlated to their phone usage, full stop. That if a kid uses a lot, it's on his phone all the time, he's just much more prone to mental health issues. We age-gate the military. We age-gate driving. We age-gate pornography.

We age-gate alcohol. Wouldn't a fairly simple driving. We age-gate pornography. We age-gate alcohol. Wouldn't a fairly simple solution, and I know you've talked about this, be to age-gate all social media? Because if you don't age-gate it for everybody, the kid that's not on it is also depressed because he's isolated from the rest of his community. What's your view on age-gating and how do we get it done? What's your view on age gating and how do we get it done? You know, I have – first of all, I don't know any family post-COVID that doesn't have mental health issues, including my own family. And so – and the tools of social media, which has been, again, scientifically proven now to exacerbate some of these issues. I mean, this is not speculation.

This is real. On the age gating, Scott, I've thought about it. I probably don't, you know, I've not taken a position yet because I've not thought it all the way through. So, at some level, I don't know what that age gate necessarily should be, but the ability to at least limit what type of access and can you use it for a learning purpose, but not the device for a learning purpose or an educational, but not a social media platform. I think reasonable people can get to a yes

on some of this. And our failure to do so, I think goes back to that enormous, enormous power. And these are great companies. I don't want to underestimate the fact that, you know, the Googles, the Amazons, the Facebooks, the Apples, they are great American icon companies.

But their unwillingness to acknowledge that there is a deep, dark underbelly in some of their production is deeply disturbing. And I applaud you guys because you guys have been fairly lonely voices for a long time in a tech sector that is mostly obsequious to these companies. And what is the opposition now? What is the – I mean, people are worried. I'm worried about the data collected on who is in a minor, too. We're given the opportunity to have more data, but where is the actual opposition right now? The actual opposition right now has morphed into, and this is a bit of an overstatement,

but still more on the Republican side, unwilling to do anything that's viewed as anti-business. Now, let me be clear, there are plenty of my Republican friends- Except for Disney. They do like attacking Disney, but go ahead. But there are a lot of folks, a lot of Republican members who are strong advocates of some of this. What we've not done, and I'm willing to amend my or change my restrict bills, make it frame. We got a lot of different paths that we're working on. Prioritization, whether it's antitrust, whether it's Section 230,

whether it's privacy, whether it's kids. I would hope, and as much as I want to try to do the actions on the national security issues, if we could take a giant step forward on kids' online safety, that would be a huge win for our society. And I met with the British regulators recently, and they are now, because some of these issues, it's easy to say on four kids, where the devil in the details on how you get this right, particularly on some of these burdens of what is inappropriate behavior. I don't want to dismiss, it's tough, but the Brits are doing it. Yeah. All right. Topic of AI, we're moving to that. You asked test companies, including OpenAI,

are doing it. Yeah. All right. Topic of AI. We're moving to that. You asked test companies, including OpenAI, to open up on how they assess

and mitigate risks from AI models. You requested they respond by May 26. Have any companies responded? And what do you want to learn? We have, one,

we have heard from virtually all the companies that they want to, they intend to respond. Two, what I tried to do here, and I say this as somebody who's trying to learn as quickly as possible, and I say this as somebody who's trying to learn

as quickly as possible, and I'm actually bringing in some of the, Sam Altman and Alexander Wyman, some folks from NVIDIA tomorrow to both talk to the intelligence community, but also to help educate a dozen plus bipartisan senators.

What I tried to do with my letter was, let me claim a spot from a policy standpoint where I think there is no disagreement that we need to have basic security requirements. We need to make sure that these platforms, these large language learning models, have basic cybersecurity built in, for example,

rather than bolted on the way we do in many systems. It becomes an afterthought rather than, you know, kind of the part of the sauce that is built from the beginning. And I think folks get that, and I'll be anxious to see what kind of response they give us. I, again, most of the brand name CEOs, and I've met most all of them, and many of them are obviously brilliant, they all say they want, you know, some regulations, some rules of the road. Sure, regulate me, please. I worry, though, maybe being like now an old guy, that I've heard this line before from the social media companies. You have heard this line before. And then, you know, it's going to be fine until you actually say, okay, let's look at your internal biases.

Let's look at, you know, what kind of— You need a global body. Yeah, what kind of publishing rights? What about all the folks who may suddenly decide there's no need to create content anymore because you're not going to get paid for it? So, yeah, a global body would be—you know, one of the things that I don't think most folks know, and I didn't really know this until recently, was in the 90s, there was a real effort to create a global set of standards around cybersecurity. that pulled out of the kind of UN-driven efforts to try to create some cyber set of standards that might say, you know, you blow up a healthcare system,

it's the same as in war blowing up a hospital. And I think we got out of it because we thought we were so far ahead. I hope any nation state at this point, particularly when it comes to AI, doesn't have the hubris to think, even if we're ahead today, that we're going to be ahead forever.

This is a global issue. And it's one that needs some set of standards. Amen. You chair the Senate Intelligence Committee. You have access to the most insight from the greatest intelligence apparatus in the world. What, in your view, would it mean for the world and for America if we don't repel Russia from Ukraine? What's at stake here? What's at stake is much more than Ukraine's territorial integrity. What's at stake is whether an authoritarian regime that stifles virtually any dissent is able to violate every component of international law and roll over a free and democratic country. And it goes well beyond what would happen with Ukraine. It suddenly makes all those frontline states, particularly the Baltic nations and Poland,

potentially up for grabs next. The hypocrisy of some of these guys that I work with who want to give Putin a free pass in Ukraine, but at the same time say, I'm concerned about President Xi taking on Taiwan. Well, you give Putin a win in Ukraine, and that is nothing but a full green light for Xi's expansionist opportunities vis-a-vis Taiwan and, frankly, in all of Southeast Asia. So I think they are linked. I do think it is—I think our intelligence community on this one has really stepped up. The fact that they were willing to declassify, and for any spy to give up information is always kind of tough, but declassify, particularly in advance of the invasion, what Putin's plans were going to be, and that got Putin off guard.

So I think this is, you this is the issue of our time. I think the issue of our time is not just Putin and the Ukrainian circumstance, which is kind of conventional warfare. I think the issue of our time even greater is this technology competition with China and their almost Orwellian surveillance state that they've created and how that permeates both the intellectual property theft they do and the kind of level of investment they're making in technology domain after technology domain. Agreed. The Russians are the sidelight, but you can't lose this war.

You can't because it's about China. Everything is about China going forward, it would seem. And I think it's really important, though, to make clear, as a policymaker at least, that my beef is with the Communist Party in China and Xi Jinping. It is not with the Chinese people. It is not with the Chinese diaspora. And that's, I think, important not just to sound appropriate, but the Chinese diaspora still communicates a lot on WeChat. And if you don't make that point, the Communist Party is going to make the case of, hey, you see all these Western nations, all these other nations, they're just anti-Chinese. And that is not my problem. Communist Party is going to make the case of, hey, you see all these Western nations, all these other nations, they're just anti-Chinese.

And that is not my problem. It's interesting. A couple of years ago when I did that piece saying I love TikTok, I'm using a burner phone. This was about four years ago. Great product. It's going to be huge. I got attacked for being anti-Chinese. I said I'm anti-Chinese party. I know you've got to go.

Last very quick question. No, no, come on. Let's go a couple more. This is much more fun than what I got to go back to, and much more interesting. Well, I'd love to see your TikTok proof, if you could send it to me right away. I'd love that. But we can't go without asking about the Supreme Court. Should the court adopt a binding code of ethics? And if it doesn't, what can Congress do? It should absolutely adopt a binding code of ethics. Everybody else has to operate in public life. Congress does. Other judges do.

You know, the presidential office is supposed to. The Supreme Court, I don't understand, even from a Judge Roberts who I think has tried to, you know, pretty much play down the middle, why there's not a little more self-reflection there and a willingness to move forward on this. So if it doesn't, should Congress take action? Yeah, I went to law school, but I never practiced a day of law, so I don't have the foggiest notion of who would win that legal battle. But I think, yeah, I think Congress should. I think it would be hard-pressed to have a court say, we're going to reject Congress's notion of what the ethics are,

whether that meets constitutional muster or not, leave it to others. So they might do that. But Senators Markey and Blumenthal have called for Clarence Thomas to resign over this. He didn't recuse himself from a case involving Harlan Crowe, who seems to be rather generous with him. Do you have anything to add? What I would add is I think Supreme Court needs a code of ethics. And I think Judge Thomas, if he wants to maintain any level of credibility, needs to give his fellow justices and more importantly, the American public some explanation of how and why this happened. You think he's going to do that? Shamelessness seems to be a disease in Washington these days. I'm not holding my breath.

Not holding your breath. But should he resign? I'm not there at this point. I do think he needs to give some better explanation or description of how this came about. And I also think there needs to be completely on a going forward basis, a set of ethics so that if there was any doubt in any of these justices' minds about what is appropriate or not, that you've got a code of ethics that you could refer to.

I'm going to glom all over you right now. You were the first person to graduate, my understanding is from college, on either side of your family. You were a valedictorian. You started a business. You made a shit ton of money, and I say that in the best possible

way, elected to the Senate, you head the Senate Intelligence Committee. I mean, relative to your peers, you're still a young man, but you're not a young man. What box is left for you to check when you think, when you're sitting there at night alone or talking to the people that matter to you, what do you want your crowning achievement to be? Is it around a certain issue? Is it around, like, what do you want to accomplish over the next 10 years? One, you're generous, what you said. And two, I get to do this on terms, this job.

And I didn't think I fully appreciated it when I first got it, on terms that very few people do. I was lucky enough to do well in business before I came into this. I was governor before I was senator, so I got a little bit of executive experience. And frankly, the first couple of years of being senator, I didn't like at all. And I kind of stunk at the job, because I wasn't used to being told, you know, go to the end of the line, wait your turn. And the whole notion of what I thought was my skill set, which is how do you get people that might disagree to yes, didn't seem to be valued very much. But the fact that I've got financial resources, the fact that I have the 535 members of Congress live closer,

my main house is in Alexandria, in Old Town, and quote Sarah Palin, I can see the Capitol from the third floor of my house. So I only got a 20-minute commute as opposed to the men and women who got literally a full day commute. It gives me an ability. And I think I've been governor-centered enough that I hope I'm doing this for the right reasons. And where I think my value add now is helping sort through these technology issues, recognizing, as Kara said, the challenge of our time is this technology competition with China.

And if we can continue to be the innovative nation that we've always been, but recognize that there was a very different authoritarian mindset out there that could use technology for ways that could be really bad for the very nature of how humans exist.

If I can help navigate that and do it in a bipartisan way, I like to joke I work in the only place in America where being a gang member is a good thing. I got my gang taps up and down both my arms all the time from all the gangs I've been in, you know, on infrastructure and chips and you name it. So I like this job, and I hope I do it pretty well. And it's the honor of my lifetime to represent the people of Virginia. Scott referenced your age, which is young for the Senate. I'm the only place in America at 68 years old, I'm one of the young guys.

But I'm very immature. I'm very immature. Still old. So last week, you and I have talked a lot about misinformation over the years, and we're both very familiar with it. Last week, an altered video of Dianne Feinstein returning to the Senate showed her getting dropped off by a hearse, which was terrible. But she has age issues, and that is happening within, Scott talks about it quite a bit, is the age of Congress versus the age of the country and the ability to deal with important issues like tech, et cetera, et cetera. How do you look at that?

How does that change, especially when we're in such a partisan state? Joe Manchin might shift over to the Republicans. He might not. He might run for president, et cetera, et cetera. This is a 50-50 country at this point. Yeah, and I'm not going to comment on Diane. I'm glad she's back. I hope she's doing better. I actually don't know if I fully agree that we're as divided as everybody says. I mean, the last two years in the Senate, as productive as any time I've been here, even as productive as the first couple years of Obama when Democrats had ran the whole show, if you look at virtually everything we did in the last couple years of Obama when Democrats had, you know, ran the whole show. If you look at virtually everything we did

in the last two years, from the infrastructure bill to the chips bill to the small step on guns to making sure we never have another January 6th, the so-called Electoral Count Act, it was all done bipartisan. And frankly, most of the stuff in the Inflation Reduction Act on the energy stuff,

we could have gotten lots of Republican votes for. So I think there are a lot more rational people in both parties than the loud voices say. My appeal to people all the time is, you know, I'm proud to be a Democrat, but I don't care if you vote for a Democrat or Republican, vote for somebody who knows how to get the yes. The number of guys and gals that I work with who, you know, can tell you what they're against and have this view that they are absolutely right on every issue blows my mind. And it's like, you know, the fact is people say, well, don't you get sick of working with XYZ? Yeah, but I don't have a choice.

It's like a high school you never graduate from. You know, I got the same. If I get pissed at somebody, I still got to deal with them. So figuring out a way to deal with that person and at the same time encouraging more people that can then find a way to get to yes, I think is important. And I don't lose faith because the last couple years was as productive as any time since I've been here. Let's get to yes, Scott. What do you say? Maybe. Maybe. We like to get to maybe. That's where we get to. Maybe. Probably not. Yes, but. I don't know. I don't know. Anyway, Senator Warner, you're one of my favorite senators. Thank you so much. And I'm super excited for you to send me all that TikTok classified information. Super excited.

Thank you, Senator. Gary Scott, thanks so much. All right, Scott, isn't he an impressive senator? Aren't we impressed by the elected officials we bring here? Yep. 100%. I have to say. Anyway, one more quick break. We'll be back for wins and fails. As a Fizz member, you can look forward to free data, big savings on plans, and having your unused data roll over to the following month. Every month at Fizz, you always get more for your money. Terms and conditions for our different programs and policies apply. Details at Fizz.ca.

Okay, Scott, let's hear some wins and fails. Gosh, there's so many to pick from, I guess. I think here's what I, a fail was this story about the new details are coming out with a very complicated portrait around the Bob Lee's death. And this Wall Street Journal story was really quite something. You should read it. It's about he lived in this thing called the lifestyle, which sounds like just a lot of sex and drugs. And I thought it was a really well done piece.

And I feel sad for all those people. I'm aware of that group of people. And there's a lot more people in it than you think. And I feel sad for those really rich people who are sort of floating around from Cabo San Lucas to this place to that place and on a perpetual, I don't know, these smart people should spend more time doing smart things. And it seems, I get they want to explore and be themselves, but a 24-7, 365 burning man seems a waste of your life, in my opinion. But that's just me. So that was kind of sad. It made me sad. That piece made me sad. I wouldn't. I mean, if you're Tony Hsieh and you surround yourself with sycophants and you're

abusing drugs and getting fascinated with fire and end up dying of smoke inhalation in the fire you started. I mean, I feel sorry for that guy. But you know why this group of tech elite engage in designer drugs and sex? Because they can. Yeah, I know. Because it's a lot of fun. I wouldn't feel sorry for them. I don't feel sorry. I just thought I felt sad after listening to it. But you know what? It's not the thing. The thing I find, we have such a kind of conservative society. A lot of the articles I saw were, ooh, it ends up that he not. Reading it. The thing I find, we have such a kind of conservative society.

A lot of the articles I saw were, ooh, it ends up that he was part of it. They call it underground. Underground sex and drug culture. I'm aware of it. It's not. And it's like, okay, it's kind of, it felt to me sort of judgmental as if it somehow rationalized the murder. And that's not true at all. And that's not true at all. It's people engage in sex and drugs and rich people do it in disproportionate amounts in different our country a conservative bent that somehow if they find, you know, they found ketamine in his blood. They found a lot of stuff in his blood.

Yeah, they said his blood read like a pharmacy. And it's like, you know what? A lot of people are doing a lot of drugs. It doesn't mean it makes it any less tragic when they get stabbed three times. I get it. I get it. I found that. I've met those people at their drifty little parties and.

Ayahuasca parties? Whatever. I'm like, oh my God, do something else. I just, I got to tell, the blame the homeless people are quiet. They're taking drugs. Oh, that was, that was, that was the worst part of this. Yeah. That they go to the demonization of, of homeless people and talk about incarceration who, and the disproportionate number of the homeless and people incarcerated tend to be lower income and people of color. It's nothing but, in my opinion, non-empathetic, thinly-veiled racism.

It is. 100. Anyway, that just made me sad. That made me sad. I get it. And my win? Louis Swisher! Happy birthday!

Sorry. Good for him. Good for him. And good for you. Good for you. I have good kids. I like my kids. Yeah, we've heard that several million times. They're so good. to Ukraine. Germany is the largest economy in Europe. Europe cannot win a land war in its Europe, let's be clear, it's Europe and it's NATO, and repel the Russians without the full throat and support of Germany. And Germany, I think if you were to pick a place and say,

this is a great role model for how a democratic capitalist society should run. They're incredibly, an incredible culture. I mean, this country was leveled. And within 30 years, they were making the best cars and some of the best manufactured equipment in the world. And also the best beer, quite frankly. But this is an impressive culture, highly productive, highly capitalist, very mindful of their past. I would argue in many ways more

mindful than we are of our past, really attempted to come to grips with what has gone on there, put in place a lot of democratic rule. It is a progressive, wonderful country, but if it does not stand toe-to-toe with its other European allies in America on this, Europe's going to lose this war. And as Senator Warner said, that gives China and every other autocracy a green light that if they have a bigger army than their neighbors, it pays to just invade. So I'm really happy that the German government has decided to stop, I don't know, wringing their hands and they're sending, including these incredible drone technology, hands and they're sending me, including these incredible drone technology you can launch just with just handheld drones.

Anyways, that's my win. My fail is a little deeper. So earlier this week, I think it was the FDA recommended loosening the restrictions on who can give blood. And because largely because of the AIDS crisis, there was a series of restrictions around whether gay men could give blood, a series of questionnaires that a lot of people found kind of correctly discriminatory. And finally, all of that has been removed. And there's questions that are applied to everybody now, I believe, around your recent sexual activity and whether you're the right person to give blood.

But I met a couple of gay guys in their early 30s, and they were talking about, and they had sort of a little bit of a, I don't want to call it a conservative view on vaccines, but they were talking about vaccines. Well, I didn't get it. I remember just thinking, like, these kids, I'm like, you just have no fucking idea. If you had been born 20 years earlier, like, your friends everywhere would be dying. Friends everywhere would be dying. And D.C. and the press had this sort of conditional sympathy for them. It was like, oh, they're victims, but they kind of deserve what happened to them. I came of kind of age or professional age in 1992, and I hope that COVID is the worst thing that this generation has to face. But people forget.

Yeah. They just forget what happened. And the wonderful thing. I'm a conservative gay guy. They're always my favorite. But go ahead. The wonderful thing. I'm like, Jesus Christ, boss.

You just have no fucking idea what your brothers went through who had the misfortune of being born in 1962, not 1982. And anyways, but there was this wonderful thing called science. And now your mortality rate for someone with HIV in many, most communities, your life expectancy is about the same as someone without HIV. your life expectancy is about the same as someone without HIV. And it was all through one thing. It was through science. And it was through bipartisan support of science. The closest thing we have to a truth is science. And now we do stupid things.

And another one of the reasons I can't stand Elon Musk, prosecute Fauci, people questioning the vaccine. Vaccines are a gift from God. This is the best vaccine. The best most innovative thing in history is not your iPhone. It's not chips. It's vaccines. Millions of lives saved every year suffering death, disease, and disability. And so I worry that for some reason we have somehow decided that your political stripes somehow should dictate whether you are pro or anti or skeptic of science. The Godfather of my son, and he's open about his HIV status, you know, he's my age, much healthier than

me because of science. Anyway, We love science here on this show. We love science. We love science. And my loss is people who don't, for whatever reason, have decided that some view on science somehow indicates their political, you know, it's got nothing to do with politics. Stick with hot lesbians and do not go around conservative gay men. That would be my advice to you. All right.

We want to hear from you. Send us your questions about business, tech, or whatever's on your mind. Go to nymag.com slash pivot to submit a question for the show or call 855-51-PITIT. We're going to do a special show soon. People want a parenting show from us. We'll give it to you. We'll give you a dating show. We'll give you a pickup line show. Not. Okay, Scott, that's the show. We'll be back on Friday for more. Please read us out. Today's show was produced by Lara Naiman, Evan Engel, and Taylor Griffin. Ernie and Jatad engineered this episode. Thanks also to Drew Burrows and Emil Severio.

Make sure you subscribe to the show wherever you listen to podcasts. Thanks for listening to Pivot from New York Magazine and Vox Media. We'll be back later this week for another breakdown of all things tech and business. Being anti-science doesn't say anything about your politics. down of all things tech and business. Being anti-science doesn't say anything about your politics. It says that you're not closer to the truth. You do not walk hand in hand with the truth.