Pivot - Apple’s Buy-Now-Pay-Later, Texas’ Twitter Investigation, and Buzzfeed’s Stock Drop

Episode Date: June 10, 2022

Kara and Scott discuss Apple getting into the Buy-Now-Pay-Later game, and Texas announcing an investigation into the number of bots on Twitter. Also, Buzzfeed shares took a major tumble. Then, a listener question on whether ethical billionaires exist. Send us your Listener Mail questions by calling us at 855-51-PIVOT, or via Yappa at 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 you've done it again. Everyone thinks we're getting divorced. I emceed the Jed Foundation fundraiser last night. And literally everyone came up to me and said, I'm so sorry to hear about the news. And I'm like, what are you talking about? And I'm like, Kara, she's doing her own thing. Do you guys not?

Everyone assumes you've left me. No. No, I have not. Everyone assumes you've left me. No. No. I have not. But the thing that bothers me. It says, I am binding myself further to you, which is a massive mistake. Hello. I'm in a Titanic situation.

Squeeze a little harder. Squeeze a little harder. I am binding myself harder to Scott Galloway, if you can believe that. The thing that pisses me off is a lot of people misunderstand because it shows their affection for us in the program. But they immediately assume before getting a divorce that it's you leaving me. Everyone's like, what did you do? Oh, exactly. But that would be the way it is, right?

I mean, let's be honest. Yeah. So, okay, just clarify what's going on here. I'm not sure I understand. I'm going to. But can I just say, speaking of that, I was coming back from something. I went to visit Brian Koppelman, who does Billions, on something. And I was standing on, I don't know, I was standing down in the village.

And a guy went around the block in his car and then double parked and ran over and said, I love you and Scott. His name was Johnny. And he wanted to take a selfie. And he asked me all kinds of questions about us. And he goes, I'm you and Scott. His name was Johnny. And he wanted to take a selfie. And he asked me all kinds of questions about us. And he goes, I'm shaking. I'm shaking. I can't believe I met you. It was lovely.

So just people still like our marriage. So just be aware of that. Be aware. It was lovely. It's lovely. It's very nice. I mean, literally, he jumped out of a car. It was a little frightening at first.

I felt like I was in an episode of Taken. But nonetheless, he asked me if I was creeped out by people doing this. Where's Liam Neeson when you need him? I know, right? Liam Neeson. Anyway, so here's the thing. Okay, here's the deal. I started off, I don't know the whole history, but I created Recode after all things D, but that's another story. It was sold to Vox Media. And then I did, I started Recode Decode at, which was an interview show at Vox. And it was me and an intern many, many, many years ago. And then I got lots of offers. And one of them was from the New York Times to write for

them, which I did. And then they offered to start a new podcast, which I did. I still continue to create this with you, which has been a huge hit. We're thrilled with this thing. And I had done the Times thing for writing for about four years, the podcast two and a half. And I just think things are changing in the media space. And I can't go into a whole lot of detail about it, but I have a lot of interest in being slightly more entrepreneurial. And again, nothing about the Times. It's a wonderful place, great people, but they're a traditional media company. And I'm a little more entrepreneurial. I want to do different things.

You'll see a lot more stuff coming out for me that I can't do when I'm affiliated with them. I was never an employee, but, you know, Vox Media is open to that, has been long open to things like that and has a different approach toward talent in a different way. And by the way, neither is better or worse. They both work. And I just felt like I was more free to do some things like that here that I'm thinking of that I couldn't have done if I was continuing to do Sway. I think Sway is amazing. We've done some astonishing interviews, including with Matthew McConaughey, who was in the news this week around guns, and all kinds of people. And so I feel really great about that.

But you know me. I like to move around. Scott, I'm a move-around kind of gal. I don't know. Why do you hate The New York Times? Sorry. I am not one of those. But I just want to clarify. Are you do you hate the New York Times? Sorry. I am not one of those. But I just want to clarify,

are you still writing for the New York Times? No, no. You're no longer doing a column for the New York Times. Look, I did a lot of things. I quit several contracts

I had this year because I don't want to be, I'm a free bird. I'm a free bird. That's what I told Mark Cuban. He asked me. Don't get too close to your flame.

You might get burned. I know, That's true. I feel like I want to be a free bird. I don't want to sign exclusive contracts at this moment, or maybe I will if the money's big enough. But I just felt like I wanted to control. What I said was right. I want to do what I want to do, and I want to do it when I want to do it.

And I'm at the point in my career where I can do that. So therefore, therefore I am. And I'm interested. I didn't want to start a sub stack or things like that. I just, they're fine. They're fine. But I feel like I want to own what I make a little. I've made thousands of interviews, none of which I own, you know? And so I felt that was important. I want to be part of the business part of it. You know how much I love doing business. And I've learned so much from you, by the way. And so I just, I get into these startup mentalities

and points in my life and this is the one I'm at. And I want to make pivot bigger. I hear you, sister. I've never been able to work for organizations and really what Vox is and kind of the genius of Jim Bancroft is he sees himself, I think, as a platform for other people and doesn't come to it with expectations

or sort of this traditional organization-employee relationship. I mean, he's kind of there like, how can I help? How can I make you successful? Right. So, and it's going to be called Pivot Conversations? No, no. We don't have a name.

We can have a naming contest if you like. I have something in mind. But is it going to be an extension of the Pivot brand? If it sounds like I don't know what's going on, I don't. You don't. You really don't. It to be an extension of the Pivot brand? If it sounds like I don't know what's going on, I don't. You don't. You really don't. It's not an extension. Yes, it's an extension of the Pivot brand.

Yes, in a way. But it's a little bit. It's going to be. Pivoted? What do you mean in a way? In a way. Does it have the term pivoted? No.

Not at this moment. It might, but probably not. Okay. It's going to be called Scott. That's what it's going to be called. You know, but probably not. It's going to be called Scott. That's what it's going to be called. You know, I think that- You sound like my 11-year-old when I ask him if he studied for his math test. I'm getting a lot of blah, blah here. Well, I can't, I don't know yet. What is going on? I wasn't suspicious until you started talking. It's unclear. It's unclear. There might be a video element to it. There's all kinds of things.

And when did your relationship with your assistant begin? I mean. No, no, no. No, listen, I'm not part of that grifty group of people that have this trashed New York Times going on. I've been a wonderful run there. And I love Vox, too. So, I just feel like I want to do what I said in the article. I want to do what I want to do.

And I don't want to ask permission. I don't feel like I have to. I'm 100 years old. Why should I ask anybody? You're like that, too. 100%. I ask any? But you're like that too. 100%. I've been that way my whole life. Yeah.

Anyways. And let me see. I'm as free as a bird and this bird you cannot change. That song. That's what I'm feeling like. I think it's wonderful and whatever it is you,

we, and us are doing, I'm all for it. Yeah. Pivot's going to get bigger. Pivot is so popular. Just that guy stopping. I mean,

people, like, even people that don't like us, like us. Do you know what I mean? They like to trash on us and this and that. And I kind of like it. The worst thing, like, not, it feels like a half, but a third of the people come up to me and say, I like Pivot mostly because of Kara. And they look at me and wait for a response. I'm like, okay, I don't care. The advertisers can't tell. Yeah, that's right. Yeah. So I'm really interested in the Pivot. I like our freewheeling. I'm just, I'm rethinking the interview process and we'll see how it goes. But, you know, there'll be code. I'm really interested in the pivot. I like our freewheeling. I'm just, I'm rethinking the interview process, and we'll see how it goes.

But, you know, there'll be code. I'm doing that with Vox, too. And I may do other things. So we'll see. We'll see. So you know I'm the best business partner ever? You are. Yes.

Well, I am. One, because I make us a shit ton of money. I understand business. But more than anything, anything you want to do, anything, it's fine with me. Scott's a yes. Yeah. Whatever. Scott's a yes. Scott is always a yes. Scott's a yes. Whatever. Scott's a yes.

Scott is always a yes. Whatever makes you happy. Whatever makes you happy. I like a yes. That is correct. Anyway, it'll be fine. We'll be great. There'll be lots of cross stuff, and it's going to be great.

And by the way, Naima Raza, who I worked on Sway with, is coming over to work with me on this. Naima. That's the new announcement. She's coming over. She's amazing. She's a fantastic producer and one of the only people I literally let tell me what to do.

Very few people. And she's often, I argue with her about something and then she's always right. And I'm like, oh, you're right. And I never do that. I have to say.

I don't know. Maybe I listen to Lara a lot too. I'm pretty good listening. But Lara runs Pivot and she's amazing. And so is the whole staff, Evan and Taylor and many, and Drew and others. But it's just— Don't forget Ernie and Jatad, who engineered this episode, who I've never met.

I literally was going, who have I fucking forgotten and not getting in trouble for? Anyway, we'll see. We'll see. A lot more Kirsten on my new interview show. Anyway, today we'll talk about Apple's entry into the buy now, pay later area, also mounting political problems for Twitter. We'll also hear from a listener about ethical billionaires. I didn't know they existed. Anyway, but first, you don't have to go to the movies to watch Tom Cruise fly planes. The actor's four private jets are now being tracked via Twitter

bot. The account called CelebJets also publishes movements of planes carrying Jay-Z, Kim Kardashian, and Taylor Swift. The bot creator is the same team behind ElonJet, which tracks you-know-who. I kind of hate to say this. I follow these things that I shouldn't. Does that make sense? They are kind of weird and tracky. At the same time, I do use it, so I don't know how I feel. I don't know how I feel about it. What do you think? I have mixed emotions here. My colleague at NYU, David Yermack, who is the head of the finance department, and just this, I think one of the most thoughtful people on Web3, and he's more bullish on it than I am. But whenever I speak to him, he articulately and politely disagrees with me and kind of evolves my thinking, so to speak. And he did some great research about a decade and a half ago

where he tracked the tail numbers of CEOs. And what he found is if they were planning to go on vacation after the earnings call, it meant the earnings call was going to be positive because they had the confidence to go on vacation. And everyone found, you know, so immediately that information goes into the ecosystem. CEOs and investors freak out and start trading on it. Right, so where there were files that fly. And I kind of – anything that chafes Elon, I kind of get, you know, it tickles my sensors. I think that one of the – I think there's value to a society that gives you a certain amount of anonymity. And I'm not sure I'm comfortable with people believing they have a right to understand people's movements. I don't know if that – You know, okay, fine.

They're billionaires. And then you might want to say, all right, maybe at some point you should track their climate footprint. I get it. But people have somewhat of a right, I don't want to say to be anonymous, but should you know, should you, is it a public right to know where someone is

when they're there? I don't know. So I think I kind of come down on, I'm not sure I'm down with this, Kara. What do you know? Should you? Is it a public right to know where someone is when they're there? I don't know. So I think I kind of come down on I'm not sure I'm down with this, Cara. What do you think? I agree. I'm not down with it. But I use it. So I feel like I have mixed emotions.

I have mixed emotions. In any case, we'll see where it goes. But it's going to continue. There's just no way around it. But because information is so everywhere now. One thing that's not soaring, to use a plain metaphor, shares of BuzzFeed dropped more than 40% on Monday when a ban expired allowing trades by executives and institutional investors. That's the stock's

worst percentage drop yet. What do you think? I'm bummed out. I mean, keep in mind, BuzzFeed is now, so what happened was insiders, the lockup expired. And the lockup means the insiders can sell. And the day that new enterprise associates and Hearst, who are investors who have been in this thing for a long time, longer than they wanted to be in it, the day they could sell, and they're probably selling at a price, they're probably taking a loss on this thing. They're like, you know what? We are so exhausted.

Just get me out. And unfortunately, when everyone's thinking the same thing, and it doesn't look like the company has tremendously strong prospects, you see a 40% decline in the one-day price of the stock. It was up at 10 when it went public, obviously, around high nines, and now it's $2.16, giving a market cap of $293,000, essentially. $290 million. But numbers are hard. We understand numbers in terms of relativity until the proportions get so crazy. So just some numbers, one you can understand and one that's harder to understand. And that is when AOL bought Huffington Post, which BuzzFeed now owns, AOL paid more for the Huffington Post than BuzzFeed is worth now who owns Huffington Post. And Huffington Post is just a part of BuzzFeed. And the thing

that's discouraging about this, and here's another number. So as of today, Meta, despite its massive decline in shareholder value, is worth approximately 2,000 times more than BuzzFeed. Google is worth 6,000 times more than BuzzFeed. And it all comes back to the same thing. Unless you're a media company that has incredible scale and focuses on using or leveraging creator content, which is Latin for free content, and creates addictive attributes and has great technology and can scale to billions of people and get unbelievable advertising at low cost of content to produce. The oxygen is being sucked out of the room every day. And it's very difficult for any sort of, you know, I don't love BuzzFeed, but I would have

liked to have seen it do better than this. I mean, it just literally feels as if every day it's getting closer to just going away. And it's sort of sad to see because it was considered one of the bigger ones. It certainly had a lot more relevance in terms of stories. You don't see a lot of, I don't see them as much as I used to. I don't know why. Maybe I'm not going to places. You don't see them as Twitter as much. But this price of $300 million is very low. Do you see a buyer out there? Well, I don't see a buyer. I see consolidation. And that probably at some point includes us at Vox. And Vox, fortunately, has higher margins and is considered sort of, I don't know, the Tiffany of the digital content space. But there's

just no getting around it. Everyone's going to have to bulk up and find efficiencies or synergies, which is Latin for, okay, we have two CFOs and in 30 days we're going to have one. But there just doesn't appear to be a big market for digital media unless you're TikTok, Facebook, or Google. These deep, deep brands that are owned by billionaires that do a fantastic job, such as The Washington Post or The Wall Street Journal. I think it's strange. I think what the BBC does or the British government does where actually everyone pays a tax to subsidize. That's not happening in this country. Are you kidding? How politicized would that get? It already is. PBS, if you remember, every couple of years that happens.

That's a fair point. Anyway, we'll see. We like the BuzzFeed people, but yes, it's not a good day for them. Okay, let's get on to our first big story. Apple's getting in on the buy now, pay later game. The company announced a raft of new features in iOS 16 this week, including ability to edit and unsend iMessages, which I kind of like. 16 this week, including ability to edit and unsend iMessages, which is kind of like. But the most eyebrow-raising feature is Apple Pay Later, which lets users split purchases into four payments.

The program will operate anywhere that Apple Pay is accepted. I mean, Scott, this is your area. I want to hear you pontificate on this. Affirmed stock price dropped 6% on Monday after Apple's announcement, though it's recovered. Clarinet is already hurting. It was laying off staff. So what's going to happen with these smaller players? Looks like Apple's not buying them or whatever. So what do you think?

Well, there's two things. There's the business dynamics, and then there's the larger societal impact that buy now, pay later has. So let's talk about the competitive dynamics. Apple coming into this with great technology and vertical control or control of the device where they can put on the home screen. I mean, I've been using Apple Pay. I went out with my 11-year-old and we went to get one of those little batch of little cupcakes they have. And I said, I don't have any cash. He said, dad, they can take Apple Pay. And I said, do they take Apple Pay? And he looked at me like an idiot and he goes, everyone takes Apple Pay. That's not true, son. That's not actually, I use it all the time. I don't have cash anymore. And

sometimes they don't, but go ahead. Well, it is pretty powerful. It is. I use it all the time. I don't have cash anymore, and sometimes they don't. But go ahead. Well, it is pretty powerful. It is. I use it all. I only use it. And Apple, controlling a billion devices of the billion wealthiest people in the world, or several billion devices of the billion wealthiest people in the world, is just such an incredible advantage over any other provider. So this is just bad news for Affirm or Klarna. There's just no getting

around it now. What about regulators? Because, you know, buy now, pay later is being regulated. As you talked about quite eloquently last week, there's all these issues around it. Consumer debt levels on these platforms. What do you imagine the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, for example, is going to do? It expands your basket size by like 45%. I mean, it's just, it goes back to what Crystal Todd said last week. We should probably be teaching less calculus in high school and more financial literacy. Because when you offer a 19-year-old on his or her way to Coachella the chance to have $500 in instant credit, and my colleague Aswath Damodaran would

say the best regulation is life lessons, and maybe these people learn these life lessons. But this instant credit, and now Klarna is reporting that the majority of their losses come from people with late payments. The financial literacy and young people getting into a hole, now some of that is you don't want to infantilize them. They have to learn on their own. They have to get their hands burned or whatever the term is. But I also think there's a role here for society to either educate people. And also, we regulate or we sort of regulate payday loans. We put a maximum interest rate on them because we realize there's a lot of people who are not financially literate. And these organizations prey on that illiteracy. And I feel like this has been, if you will, positioned as innovation. It's not. It's putting young people in debt. I really don't like this. I hope Apple takes a more responsible approach to it. They may turn people down more, right? Well, that would be a more responsible approach. Yeah. I suspect they're going to tread very carefully into this area. They're going further and further into financial services. I have their

credit card tapped to pay. Supposedly, they're working on fraud detection, credit checks, and other consumer financial. It makes sense because I literally use this phone for all of that. Payments, whether I'm using an app like a Venmo kind of thing. I would use Apple to pay for it if I, rather than Venmo or PayPal in a second, I would. I would. Yeah, it's just some stats here. So BNPL spending among Gen Z users has increased 925%. Wow. Among Gen Z users, one in three have been charged a late fee for getting behind on BNPL payments, a firm increased average order value. I was wrong. I said 35% by more than three and a half X. So you think, okay, that's great for the retailer, but it's terrible for the, you know,

at the end of the day, if somebody can all of a sudden is buying three and a half times what they were going to buy before they had this cheap credit, you know, we do the same thing with kids around student loans. We say, oh, get student loans. And then what do you know? The school isn't on the hook for this. In this case, the retailer is on the hook. And what you had is companies that had infinitely cheap capital decided to take that credit risk. And now a lot of that credit risk is coming back to them. Supposedly 65% of Klarna's losses, which were dramatic, was bad credit or basically missed payments. So I hope Apple comes in. This is a situation where I'm not rooting for the innovators here, if you will.

And I hope that they take a more responsible approach. There's probably going to be some regulatory issues. They'll probably complain. But it's not in Apple's best interest to have these articles coming out, showing, to have these TikToks showing all the stuff that people bought on Apple Pay later that they can't pay for. That's not a good look for Apple, especially as Tim Cook has tried to position him and the brand as being a little bit more civic-minded. That is a good look for them, and they should maintain that posture. Yeah, I would agree. Speaking of Apple charges, the EU is killing Apple's lightning port.

I'm thrilled with this, actually. I mean, they do this themselves sometimes. The new EU agreement could unify gadgets like phones, tablets, cameras, and eventually laptops around the USB-C port. EU agreement could unify gadgets like phones, tablets, cameras, and eventually laptops around the USB-C port. Interestingly, my new MacBook Pro has both. Tech companies will have until 2024 to comply with slightly longer time for laptops. The agreement still needs approval of the European Parliament in 27 EU countries, but they pushed back at first, but now they're developing an iPhone with a USB 3. I hate having different stuff. It's always been, you know, I don't know how many chargers and dongles to fix the chargers I've bought over the years. But, you know, it'll be interesting the government's trying to regulate

it. It would be nice to have just one regulation. You know, there's USB-A that people use and it's all over the place. And I have so many gadgets that do different things, the old Apple stuff. But, you know, and I have converters. So what do you think about this? I remember being at the Hoxton Hotel in Paris on business. Ah, the Hoxton. The Hoxton. I just want to say it like that.

I looked into my bag and I realized I'd forgotten my Apple charger. And so I called the concierge and I said, is there an Apple store here? And he said, yes. And I said, we'll run out and get you an Apple charger. And I came back and it was $260. And I mean, for a charger that probably costs $3 to produce. And a lot of this, they'll come up with reasons for why they need to do this. This is simple. I don't know what they, this is the mother of all planned product obsolescence. It's basically making consumers' lives harder. of all planned product obsolescence. It's basically making consumers' lives harder. They don't hold the brand responsible and they can charge so much money for what I think is probably

the most profitable segment. And that is quote unquote- They can be, yes. Accessories. I mean, it's just nuts how much this shit costs. Yeah, they've been doing this. Not just Apple, everybody is. You know, you have the Android ones.

Years ago at one of our conferences, when it was an All Things D conference, not a code conference, Martha Stewart, she was talking to the CEO of Sony, Howard Stringer. And she got a bag and she pulled out a bag of all these wires for everything that she had and dongles and wires. And she started to try to take them apart and ask this great question, like, what is going on? Can't you fix this? And this was 10, 15 years ago.

And it was hysterical because it was Martha Stewart and I've never seen it with something that wasn't organized. But she was totally on, she's like, what are you doing to consumers? What are you doing? Why are you doing this, Sony? Why are you doing this, Apple? Why are you doing this? And it was really kind of a fascinating moment. She was 100% right, but we'll see where they go. They're going to have to make these things simpler or have something very unified. I've always thought the two biggest opportunities in sort of what you call personal technology are, one, passwords, whether it's biometrics. Passwords. I spend a lot of time every day trying to figure out how to log into Netflix on a different TV or how to – I just got locked out of my Stern email for some reason, and I've got to call some nice kid at Stern and figure out how to get my email back unlocked, whatever it might be.

And also, where I think there's an enormous opportunity for innovation is charging. I just, I feel like I'm constantly the first, the last 10, my first 10 minutes of every day, and mostly the more stressful part is just as I'm winding down and thinking about sleep, I start thinking about what things do I need to plug in before I go to sleep. And it feels like nothing is ever charged. It feels like my kids are always stealing my chargers. It's just— Oh, Alex is a total charger thief.

Yeah. And there's got to be some sort of—somebody is going to rightfully become— Well, it's got to be Apple. It's got to be Apple or someone. You'd think, but it hasn't happened. I don't know. Yeah, they've definitely been foisting all kinds of dongles on us. Speaking of Huffington Post, one time Arianna Huffington gave me a little charging bed that you put your phone in at night.

Oh, you're supposed to pretend it's going to sleep and not check it? I still have that bed. No one wants to take that. Anyway, you're supposed to put it outside your room. In any case, this is interesting. We'll see if legislators can legislate this. But I think one way to charge would be great. Or no charging at all.

It just would be on all the time. All right, Scott, let's go on a quick break. When we come back, we'll talk about Twitter's political troubles and take a listener mail question about billionaires. Fox Creative. This is advertiser content from Zelle. When you picture an online scammer, what do you see? 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. 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. lie on. Alex Partners is dedicated to making sure your company knows what really matters when it comes to AI. As part of their 2024 Tech Sector Report, Alex Partners spoke with nearly 350 tech

executives from across North America and Europe to dig deeper into how tech companies are responding to these changing headwinds. And in their 2024 Digital Disruption Report, Alex Partners found that 88% of executives report seeing potential for growth from digital disruption, with 37% seeing significant or even extremely high positive impact on revenue growth. You can read both reports and learn how to convert digital disruption into revenue growth at www.alexpartners.com slash box. That's www.alexpartners.com slash V-O-X. In the face of disruption, businesses trust Alex Partners to get straight to the point and deliver results when it really matters. Scott, we're back with our second big story. Twitter is getting it from all sides of the

political aisle. On Monday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, whom I like to call the dumb one, announced that his office is investigating the number of bots on Twitter. How interesting. Just Twitter? Huh. I wonder why. Who lives in Texas? Paxton says he wants to know if the company is reporting on real versus fake. He's deceptive.

Of course, Elon Musk has been complaining about this, trying to get out of his deal. Meanwhile, the January 6th committee wants Twitter to turn over internal communications about content moderation. Earlier this year, the committee said it was looking at, quote, what steps social media companies took to prevent their platform from breeding gowns for radicalizing people to violence. Twitter has pushed back on the request, saying it violates First Amendment rights. So let's talk about Texas first, because this, I don't think they are any risk here.

This guy is such a, he's investigating the pet issue of the world's richest man, who is newly texted, Elon Musk. I just feel like he's—it's ridiculous. Yeah, this is just stupid and gross on several levels. And that is, you have the attorney general of, what, the second or third largest state. I'm trying to think what— Who's under investigation. Position himself as the friend of someone who's increasingly positioning himself as a conservative and waste taxpayer money. Because if he just got through constitutional law or any classes at law school, which I imagine he did, he knows this case is going nowhere. It's just – but instead, he wants to pose for the camera and say, I'm on board and I'm going to be the harassment tool with the government-elected harassment tool.

And I'm going to use political public office as a weapon for an individual for political purposes. That is exactly what you're not supposed to do. And he's the one behind the other one that we talked about last week, that social medias should be forced to leave up conservative things and everything, which also got slapped back by the Supreme Court. We'll see where that goes. He's a stuntmeister, honestly. He's also, just for people to know, he was indicted on two counts of first-degree securities fraud and lesser charges of failing to register with the state security regulators around a company he had, Misled investors. And it hasn't been tried, but he was indicted. In any case, this is just, he's just such a ridiculous, you know, he was behind a lot of these election law, a lot of stuff, a lot of stuff he does. And he's up for reelection. He beat George, the other Bush, George P. Bush, for the job.

Probably very popular in Texas. But nonetheless, this is a waste. I said, you know, you might want to investigate the police behavior in Uvalde. Spend some time on actual things that could help people. And instead, he's doing this nonsense. My governor is investigating. It's not good for Elon. My governor is investigating Disney or trying to revoke their tax status.

He's now trying to revoke the tax status of the Tampa Bay. Oh, yeah, the Rays because they wrote. It's like, come on. These people, they're just like, their corruption in plain sight is really quite astonishing. People don't realize, I think, not only does this not make any sense, not only is it a waste of scarce government resources, not as it just nakedly like posing for the whack jobs in Iowa. Both of these people think that they have a future in politics, and maybe they do because the only people to turn out for Republican primaries are whack jobs. The services, this is in the agency of something more threatening, and that is when governments are totally overrun and weaponized by the private sector, it's a key step to tyranny because corporations don't have, corporations aren't here to prevent a tragedy of the commons. The very notion of being elected to office is that you are supposed to think long term and be somewhat, somewhat immune from corporate interests. And when you are doing nothing but pandering to the CEO of a company because you see this person as being famous and you want to get some of that sunshine,

in a case that will absolutely be laughed out of even the most conservative court, you're doing a disservice to government. You shouldn't be in government. Why not this? Why not that? I was asked like a bunch of questions. And one of the things that he did that I think is really problematic is he does this a lot, this particular attorney general, and he's always like, I'm fighting big tech again. And someone who likes him wrote me like, you should like him. He's fighting big tech. I said, give me a fucking break. There's real issues that we have to deal with with tech. And this clown is wrecking it for everybody else. He's doing such ridiculous... I have no interest in what he's doing. It's not going to work, and he's doing it stupidly,

and it's all political. And there's serious issues we need around regulation of tech, and this guy's making a joke of it. It's a joke. It's a joke. But the January 6th meeting, I don't think is. I think that'll be... obviously, it's going to be broadcast last night. It will actually, once we- Get your timing straight. Future timing straight. But the committee is going to, this is going to be part of social media's debt. I think the real aim of this committee will be Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump. And the important part, by the way, for the January 6th committee, which I've talked about, I did a really good podcast today for Sway, is on how they communicate on social media. This is important. They're doing

it live, primetime broadcast. Nobody watches television that they need to really convince, and they've got to have a big game on social media, I think, as we've discussed. Yeah, they've got to orchestrate it well. And Hollywood or the role that production plays here, unfortunately, is really important because they just need to show, show how brazen, how planned. I mean, it just, it's worse than, it's worse than we think, folks. When you really dig in, I really, we're all exhausted from this, but when you really look at what happened and who said what to whom and what they were trying to do, it's even worse than you'd imagined. And I hope that they do a good job bringing that to light.

Anyways, I'm excited to see it. I'm going to try and use my platforms to bring some sunlight to it because I think people are fatigued. Well, you know, I think Liz Cheney needs to do TikTok. That's all I have to say. Liz? Yeah. Liz, she should get help from Crystal. Anyway, we'll see where it goes.

But let's listen to, let's pivot to a listener question. You've got, you've got. I can't believe I'm going to be a mailman. You've got mail. The question comes from Molly D. Email, so I'll read it. Hi, Karen Scott, longtime listener and fan of you both. My question is, is it possible to become a billionaire or part of an ultra-rich elite without cheating the system and or exploiting others? Are ethically made billionaires a thing? Oh, you know, there's a famous Balzac quote that

says, the simplified version is behind every great fortune lies a great crime. I don't know, Molly. I think there, you know, the one billionaire I met who I thought was super interesting was a guy who created Kind Bars. Daniel Lubetsky? Yeah. Yeah, I know Daniel well. He's got to be a billionaire, right? Probably.

Daniel's a wonderful guy. That's the nicest ethical billionaire I've met. I think Piero Midiar tries very hard. The eBay founder, he gives to a lot of causes. I don't know. I don't think so. Scott, you do this one. No. A hundred percent, yes. And you're falling into the trope that on the far left, they want to, this cartoon that they want to create that billionaires, by virtue of the fact that they have been so successful, that they've aggregated a lot of wealth, that that inherently makes them bad people. That's not true at all.

I don't think bad people, can they get there without exploiting others or cheating the system? Brian Chesky, did he exploit other people? No, people say he exploited that people don't have housing. Every one of them has done something that is deleterious to society. I just don't buy that. Warren Hellman, this wonderful man in private equity, who was enormously important to Planned Parenthood. And I've known, okay, let me go really out on a limb here. I know a lot of billionaires. On an average, they're better than most people because they have to make allies along the way. And they traditionally are very civic-minded people. And some are bad. Some got there by exploiting our worst instincts, i.e. Rupert Murdoch.

The majority of them got there with an incredible business mind and by creating a lot of allies. And they generally are high character, high, you know, patriotic, strong citizens. So I just don't, I think the worst you could say about billionaires is on average, they're no better or no worse than anyone else. And what I have found is that on average, they are really good people. It is very hard to ascend to a position of power and influence and economic security, if you make enemies along the way, you want to be the person that people are rooting for. And the majority of billionaires, I think Mark Benioff is a really good man. I don't... But I'm talking about getting there. Can you, look, the fact that someone gets that much money all by themselves when there's poverty all over the world is a

disconnect that everyone's just not going to ever get used to, right? And the money, the world is a disconnect that everyone's just not going to ever get used to, right? And the money, the differences are so vast now that getting there gives a lot to a lot of people. I get what you're saying. Scott Galloway, comma, billionaires are nice people too. But I think the concept of this- I feel shamed. I feel shamed.

This wealth gap is so profound, which you talk about. That's a different issue, Cara. Okay. All right. Explain to me. That means you and I are failing to elect people who have the backbone to create and maintain a progressive tax system. You're right. We shouldn't have people worth $220 billion.

I'm finally at the point where I'm like, does an individual need to have a quarter of a trillion dollars? Probably not. What that means is that we need to elect people that enforce what has been a stalwart of our democracy, and capitalism is a progressive tax structure. And yeah, we probably shouldn't have—when you have someone that can aggregate a quarter of a trillion dollars in wealth, that probably means the tax system is screwed up. Does it mean they're a bad person? No. Fair. Fair. Fair. Let me just say, billionaires,

we like some of them. How's that? Who's your favorite billionaire? You said Mark Benioff? I think there's a lot of wonderful. I think Brian Chesky is a wonderful young man. Brian Chesky, yeah.

So I think there's a lot of really talented. I think Beyonce is like an impressive woman. Beyonce. Oprah. Is Oprah a billionaire? She's got to be, right? She's a billionaire, yeah. Okay, Oprah's my favorite billionaire. I don't think she cheated the system or exploited others, did she? I don't begrudge any of

them. And something I don't like about the far left, when Senator Warren goes on and says, and they're money-grubbing investors, and starts calling them the billionaire class. You know what? It's called politics. Welcome to politics. But that doesn't help us. How would you mention that? How would you get, we need to tax these people because they have

a lot of money. That's not going to work as much as, look, it's Simon Legree. Let's grab his money. Demonizing them doesn't work either. It's we need a progressive tax structure to pay for everything from parks to our police to our amazing army Rangers. All right, just so you know. When Bernie Sanders says they need to pay their fair share, I think that's a legitimate argument. But when he calls them the billionaire class and calls them money grub, you know, it just isn't true. It just isn't true.

What happens? Does that mean at $990 million in wealth you're an okay person? If I'm worth $100 million, does that mean I'm 10th as bad? It's a trope? It's a bull, it's a trope, it's a cartoon, judge people on their character and their actions. And the thing about billionaires is everything they've done gets greater scrutiny as it should be. But the guy running three car washes has also done some shit in his day. In other words, let me just say, the Sacklers are different than Benioff. That's how you can see. You have to have a little more sophistication.

Pivot, colon, a safe place for billionaires. Billionaires safe. Come visit us. We'll just hit you a little bit. We'll take your money and hit you a little bit. Anyhow, it is an interesting thing. I think I would agree. But Molly, thank you for the question.

I think in some cases, a lot of ultra-rich elite did cheat the system and exploited others. And others— What I will agree with Molly on, we absolutely need—and this is where we've spoken. We need less billionaires and more millionaires. And that is, we need a system— What do you think? How about we need enough people who are getting a working wage? That's careful.

I'm going down. Here's the American dream and what is possible in America. And unfortunately, it's less possible. $30 an hour. $25. If you're a good citizen, you work hard, you save some money. There is absolutely no reason why in this America, by the time you are ready to retire, you can't be a millionaire.

That is the American dream. And when you let people aggregate so much wealth without reinvesting in the same infrastructure and the same freedoms that got them there, you reduce the number of millionaires. It becomes a lottery economy where we all incorrectly assume, well, my son is going to figure out a way to be a billionaire. No, she's not. And she's less likely to become a millionaire and economically secure unless we reinvest by taxing these people at the rates they were supposed to be taxed. It does create a very unstable society, I think, when you have people at the very tippy top with obscene fortunes. Income inequality throughout economic history.

You have the middle cut out and you have very poor people on the bottom. And I did say this to a billionaire. You need to do something about this or you can armor plate your Tesla. Yeah, but here's the thing. Cool. They were like, literally, they were like, cool, armor plate my Tesla. There's some common tropes in there. But here's the thing.

Cool. They were like, literally, they were like, cool, armor plate. There's some common tropes in there. Actually, the poor, and this isn't anything to be proud of, but as a percentage of GDP, they've held their own. It's the middle class that's got kicked in the nuts. That's correct. The middle. And here's the thing.

We've got to stop this myth that rich people who give money to elected representatives who then turn around and say, oh, well, there's this trope that the middle class will restore itself. No, it's not organic. It has to be supported. And the only way you support it is with taxes. And the only way you have an effective democracy is through a progressive tax system. And also, income inequality, here's the good news. When we get to these levels of income inequality, it always self-corrects. That's the good news. The bad news is the mechanisms of self-correction are war, famine, and revolution. And what we have in this country, in my view, is we have famine, we have pestilence, and because of income inequality and politicization, it killed more people than it should have. We have, in my view, revolution. People get so upset about so many things because there's no connective tissue, there's no

common narrative. In other words, billionaires are good, billionaires are bad, Molly. And that's the situation. All right, if you've got a question on your own you'd like answered, send it our way. Go to nymag.com slash pivot to submit a question for the show

or call 855-51-PIVOT. All right, Scott, one more quick break. We'll be back for wins and fails. 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, 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. 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, I can get to your one, but I'm going to go first, if you don't mind. Please. Okay. You're the one with a new podcast. Everyone is totally fucking confused. I can get to your one, but I'm going to go first if you don't mind. Please. Okay. You're the one with a new podcast. Everyone is totally fucking confused. Everyone is confused. We're not getting a divorce, for fuck's sake.

We are not. I will tell everyone. We are not. Not at all. I'm doubling down on Pivot. Doubling down. My 14-year-old asked me, he's like, so you're going to have your own podcast? I'm like, I already have my own podcast.

I mean, do you know nothing about me? Have we met? Yeah. He listens to mine probably. That's probably what happens. Anyway, I give the win to Matthew McConaughey. I did a great interview with him on Sway, which he didn't do very well on because he didn't know things that were happening in Texas. But he appeared at the White House on gun reform.

Let's listen to it. Look, this should be a nonpartisan issue. This should not be a partisan issue. There is not a Democratic or Republican value in one single act of these shooters. It's not. But people in power have failed to act. So we're asking you, and I'm asking you, will you please ask yourselves, can both sides rise above? Can both sides see beyond the political problem at hand and admit that we have a life preservation problem on our hands? Wow, he went full McConaughey.

There you go. He McConaughey-ed, I have to say. I thought it was very effective for the White House to bring in, I don't always love celebrities, but he's from this town, Uvalde. I think he was thinking of running. He decided he wasn't in Texas for governor. I think it was important to bring someone like him in.

I don't think it was a good stunt. So that was a win for me. Scott, your win? Well, first off, I think that is a great win. And you're right, it was smart. He's not seen as political. He's really likable. And it's important, I think, and effective to use celebrity.

I like it when they have celebrities address the UN General Assembly. Effective use of celebrities. Yeah, I think it's fine. People admire them and people listen to them and it gets attention to the issue. And, you know, I like Matthew McConaughey. I like him. A lot of people really like Matthew McConaughey. And so anyways, I agree with you. That's a great, that's a great win. Yeah, well done.

So my fail is, so there's been, it looks like really important gun legislation is going to pass that bans pistols. The majority of gun death, despite the headlines, which are understandably tragic and crazy, but the majority of gun deaths are people who feel as if they have no way out. And everything around them is just so black. And then the first thought they have is, I know we have a gun. And they take their own lives. And that's the good news is there is – it looks like gun legislation around banning pistol sales and assault weapons is going to happen. The bad news is it's going to happen in Canada. And if you look at democracies that look strikingly similar to ours on a lot of levels, whether it's Australia, whether it's the United Kingdom, whether it's Canada, none of them are immune from mass shootings.

They have all had them. The difference is literally within days of them happening, the political parties get together. And granted, it's usually a parliamentary system, which is much easier to govern in. And if you look at US and European diplomats, we usually encourage a parliamentary system for emerging democracies to set up because rather than having three checks and balances, which just creates total gridlock and minority rule, which is what we have here, they get together and say, all right, kids have been shot up. Why don't we do the following three things? And everyone says, well, that's reasonable, and they do it. And so my fail is that it is just so obvious our system needs real serious reform because every other nation like us, again, we don't live in some fantasy, you know, middle earth

society. Our society is not totally unique here. It's not exceptional on most levels. What's exceptional about us is we can't get anything done. So it just struck me that almost right away, we have a mass shooting and Canada responds with gun legislation because they are reasonable people who get along and who decide to pass. New Zealand, everyone else, immediately. 100%. That testimony was wrenching from the survivors. Oh, God. Of course,

they've had so much wrenching testimony. Yes,'t, it's, yes, you're correct. Okay. My win is there's an artist named Marina Amaral. I just reached out to her and asked her to commission a piece of work. She does this amazing colorization of historical photos. There's a lot of cool colorized. If you ever go on Google, look up colorized photos, and like the Lincoln ones are particularly gripping, I think. Occasionally you find an image that really moves you or stills you.

And on the 78th anniversary of D-Day on, I think it was June 6th, there's this incredible image of them getting off a landing craft. And it just struck me that, imagine all of these individuals wading into cold water, knowing there's a really decent chance they're not going to make it off out of that water. Imagine all the women in factories trying to provide

armaments. Imagine all the fathers and mothers that lost people. Do you think any of them, any of them would look at our problems and think that, oh, you can't solve teen depression? Oh, And think that, oh, you can't solve teen depression. Oh, you can't solve polarization. And it was just such a striking reminder that if America can push back fascism, if we can bring AIDS to its knees, if we can reduce the number of drunk driving deaths, if we can absolutely push back on this pandemic. To believe that we can't address gun violence, to believe or fall into the ridiculous notion we can't address teen depression is such an insult to people who have turned back things much more menacing, much more dangerous. And so this photo was so moving and she put out a bunch of them. I was really, I was just so, anyways, the power of images in this woman, she's done a great job colorizing all of this, but it just brings forward in my view that there is absolutely, you know, the issues we face, it's not the issues that are intractable. What's disappointing is the notion that we believe they're intractable.

I mean, we have faced down much, much scarier shit than this. Yeah. And the anniversary of D-Day really brought home to me that, okay, I think what people would be disappointed in is that we are letting this shit tear apart our country. Yeah. Agreed. Agreed. And in that regard, I think my fail has to be the defensive coordinator for the Washington commanders, Jack Del Rio. He called the January storming of the U.S. Capitol building a dust-up in comparison to the racial justice protests that followed George Floyd's death in 2020. He apologized for it, but so many people think this. And you don't have to like looking at one of the worst times in our history, and there's

been many, but you can't minimize it. Like, stop it. It's not a dust-up. Jack, honestly, just keep it to your fucking self. In this case, I usually don't say celebrities should keep their mouth shut, but focus on football at this moment. At this moment in time, you know, you don't have to call it a dust-up. Don't use diminishing words. Or people died there. The police tried to hold it back. Stop it.

Just stop it. And it's the Capitol. It's the Capitol. I get your issues around Black Lives Matter is destroying some businesses, but this is a very different situation. Trying to stop an election by violence is just, if I have to stack rank these things, Jack, you better believe I stack rank this much higher up. And most people do if they're being sensible. Anyway, Scott, that's the show. We'll be back on Tuesday with more Pivot because I am doubling down on Scott Galloway. That is why I'll be back on Tuesday with more Pivot because I am doubling down on Scott Galloway.

That is why I'll be back more. That's a good bet. As Peter Drucker said, invest in your opportunities, not your problems. Yeah. Well, you're both. That's really good. I'm giving you both. Okay.

Scott, read us out. Today's show was produced by Lara Naim and Evan Engel and Taylor Griffin. Ernie Injertot engineered this episode. Thanks also to Drew Burrows and Neil Severo. 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 next week for another breakdown

of all things tech and business. We turn back fascism, HIV, drunk driving, the pandemic, gun control, gun violence. Come on. We can absolutely, absolutely fix this. We have the will. We will do this.