Pivot - Billionaire Campaign Spending, Apple's Budget Gamble, and Hegseth vs. CNN

Episode Date: March 17, 2026

Kara and Scott are live at SXSW! They discuss billionaires' unprecedented influence in recent elections, and the reality of wealth taxes. Then, Apple introduces a budget MacBook — smart market expansion or a risky move for a luxury brand? Plus, Pete Hegseth calls CNN "fake news" and cheers on the Paramount-Warner Bros. deal, and Polymarket's AI deal. Watch this episode on the ⁠⁠Pivot YouTube channel⁠⁠.Follow us on Instagram and Threads at ⁠⁠@pivotpodcastofficial⁠⁠.Follow us on Bluesky at ⁠⁠@pivotpod.bsky.social⁠⁠Follow us on TikTok at ⁠⁠@pivotpodcast⁠⁠.Send us your questions by calling us at 855-51-PIVOT, or email [e-mail] Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support for this show comes from O-DU. Running a business takes everything you've got, and a lot of the tools out there that are supposed to make your life easier just aren't great at talking to each other, and that means you end up having to toggle between a dozen different apps and services just to keep the lights on. Enough of that. Now there's O-D-O-D-O-D-W-W-W-T platform that actually might help you get it all done.

Thousands of businesses have made the switch, so why not you? Try O-D-D-4-4-4-com. That's O-D-O-O-O-com. Support for this show comes from MongoDB. If you're a developer stuck fixing bottlenecks instead of building the next big thing, then you need MongoDB. Mongo is the flexible, unified platform

that gets out of your way. It's acid-compliant, enterprise-ready, and built-to-ship AI apps fast, and it's trusted by so many of the Fortune 500 with their most critical workloads. Developers have a word for that kind of reliability. Actually, five words. It's a great fucking database.

Start building at MongoDB.com slash build. Support for the show comes from BMC. Before you trust AI to make your business decisions, before you can reliably scale automation across every workflow, before all your data pipelines are connected with intelligence, your business faces some complex challenges ahead. Namely, tackling things like orchestration as a competitive advantage, unifying your modern and legacy systems,

or transforming your mainframe. Before you take them on, make sure you do one thing. BMC first. BMC is the automation engine for the AI era. Over the years, they've helped customers worldwide run and modernize their businesses by automating, managing, and optimizing complex IT environments. They've partnered with 80% of the Forbes Global 100. Before automation, before scale, before transformation, before you begin, BMC first.

What can you do when you partner with BMC? Get started today. Learn more at BMC.com. I'm curious what you think, because you have sons. I have sons. They don't gamble. Yeah, but you're a better parent than me. Yes.

Yeah. 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 we are live from South by Southwest in Texas. So before we get to it,

again, we're excited to be here this live episode. We want to thank our presenting sponsors. sponsor Odoo. They've sponsored our pivot tour last year, so they're really into us. Anyway, we've got a lot to get. First of all, you having a good time here? Are you enjoying it? I'm having a great time. Lo-in-out last night. I'm so sick at rolling up to the. The parties now kind of suck because you meet some guy and you're like, I'm eight years sober and now I'm a Peloton influencer.

Fuck yo. I want to find the guy who's in a custody battle so he can never see his kids. That dude, I'll roll. Okay. No, I'm having a nice time. You're having a nice time? Everyone is working on their sleep. Well, good for you. So you're leaving. You're going to the Vanity Fair Oscar party.

That should be fun. Hello. Yeah, that should be good. I'm not going with you. I'm staying here. I was the plus one, and the plus one RSVD, yes. And Kara said, no. So you'll have a good time.

Try not to bother the celebrities. That's my only advice. Just be cool. Okay. Can you do that? Thank you for that. That's hugely helpful. Thank you.

Just be cool from Kare Swish. Is there anyone you want to meet? Is there like, Sean, he probably won't be there. He's cool. I want to meet, simple. I want to meet the, I was going to say the gay hockey guys. What's it called? He did rivalry.

He did rivalry. I'm sorry. I'm just announcing now. Executive producer, season two, he did rivalry. Swedish women's team. Biggest show of next season. Biggest show of next season. Oh, God.

I'm like O'clock for two here. I'm going to alert security at the Vanity Fair Oscar party for this. But anyway, just be cool. Say nice things. You'll probably get recognized by some of them. It'll be nice. I'll be at the bar. Okay.

All right, excellent. All right, we've got a lot to get to today. We've got a lot to talk about. There's so much, it's crazy amounts of news all the time and every moment. But first thing, surprise, surprise, wealthy people are swaying elections with their money. Billionaires made up about 19% of all reported campaign donations of 2024 federal elections. This is a, it's a quantum leap in numbers. Within the 19% for every dollar that went to Democrats, five dollars went to Republicans. The billionaire families gave an average total of

$10 million each, roughly equal to the amount 100,000 typical donors give combined. Scott, before Citizens United, the share billionaire spending was under 1%. This is 19%. That's an enormous amount of people, enormous number for a small amount of people. Let's talk a little bit. about that because obviously billionaires taxes are being discussed. There's all manner of things happening here, but their influence is absolutely clear. Yeah, I mean, if you think about 19% from 900 people, it's the boring stuff that kind of moves the needle that's not that interesting to talk about, but we're going to wash, rinse, and repeat a cycle of autocrats. I actually believe there's, if you look at history, there's as much danger of an autocrat coming

from the far left is from the far right. I believe the far left is as dangerous as the far right. It's the extremes to present a threat to society. And the two things that are probably most important to avoiding a strong man or a strong woman from either side of the party are very boring things. But until we have them, we're going to have the weaponization of a decline in the structural and economic standing,

in my opinion, of middle class, especially middle class males, who tend to be unfortunately more violent and upset, when they don't have economic or romantic prospect. But the two major reforms that need to happen, or we're going to have a cycle of strong men and strong women for the next 50 years, is one, we need to gerrymander the U.S. Because the general election no longer matters.

It's the primary. And who turns out in the primary? The crazies. So every district now is hard blue or hard left, and we keep sending 535 very far left. are very far-right people who share no comity, no collective values, don't want to work together, and nothing happens, and they genuinely don't like each other.

And the narrative from our leadership is not how do we work together and get something done. It's that the other guys are wrong. And so it creates a level of division and stasis that's really unproductive. And then the other thing is Citizens United. We can't have a small group of people who aren't evil, but incrementally will say, hey, Charles Schumer,

and I'll use a Democrat as an example, because we always talk about Republicans. Democrats take a lot of money, too. It's Republican, it's Republican donors typically, but also Democrats do do bask in a lot of the PAC money. And what happens is Republicans are much more overt about trying to get tax cuts for who they think of the most productive people and corporations in the world.

What Democrats do is just wring their hands and kill stuff in committee and say they have concerns about things. But if you have, until we have Citizens United overturned and de-Gerrymander, we're just going to ping from the far left to the far right for the foreseeable future. I do think that Republicans are sort of doing things in plain sight in an effective way by channeling all this money, right? But the number from going from 1% to 19% means a very, and you're right, it's a very small amount of people. And actually, it's a small amount of people from Silicon Valley. So it's a very particular, I mean, there's the Eulanes, the box people, there's a bunch of other rich people you don't know as well.

And by the way, look on your bottom ear boxes. That's what you're getting from Amazon is from this very far right family. But one of the things that's the problem here is that this stuff is done in plain sight. And they're not going to overturn Citizens United from what I understand. I interviewed Larry Lessig recently, who has another case that could hollow out Citizens United in terms of, of super PACs and dark money. But what is the solution until then? Because I don't think they're letting up.

I think they won't let up in this presidential election. It doesn't seem like all of a sudden Elon Musk is going to start calling himself they them. It's not happening for us. So what could be done in the interim? Because he will continue to spend. He's sort of the poster child for this. But then you quietly have a whole bunch of them doing the same thing.

The honest answers, I don't know. I don't know if there's a way to prohibit. certain political spending across certain more targeted media. So I have a movement called Resistant Unsubscribe, and neither alphabet nor meta would take my dollars to drive traffic. But if you want to, you know, promote coal and get in the way of the earned child tax credit, spend away. So I also, I think there might be some workarounds that people have talked about by going state by

state. But until I think until unless it's overturned, which I agree with you, He doesn't like, is this all a word salad of saying, I don't know. Yeah. So when you think about, we've talked a lot about the billionaire tax, you have proposed other things like an AMT tax. And there's some things in committee right now, speaking of Democrats, which seem much more effective, which is giving tax relief to people under a certain number.

And then at the same time, making the group of people taxed larger. Well, there's three different tax approvals. So the Democrats, to our credit, have finally wise to us. and realize that they need to move from their objective of redistributing virtue, telling other people that are not as worthy, constantly talking through identity politics about what's right and what's wrong with the world.

And if you tell billionaires they're evil and white people that are racist and young men that they're predators, they'll leave the party. I'm like, okay, this party's not for me. And if you look at those three groups, they have largely abandoned the Democratic Party. So what they realize is that the key to 26 and 28 is to talk less about redistributing virtue and redistributing income.

And also that the best narrative for redistributing income is tax cuts, not handouts. Now, the three, there's the Kana proposal, there's the Booker proposal, and then there's the Warren proposal. Warren is basically class warfare. It's a 5% tax, well tax every year. That may not sound like a lot, but the majority of people don't have 5% liquid taxes sitting around. I can't imagine the hundreds of thousands of people who would be hired to try and diminish or decrease or lower the value, assess value of billionaire's wealth.

It goes after basically 900 people. Actually, that's not true. People over a billion, it's 5%. But to tell billionaires, they have to come up with 5% of their wealth every year. I do think that that's the tipping point where you would lose somewhere between a quarter, at least from a residency standpoint, to a third of billionaires in the U.S. The example is the non-DOM tax in the United Kingdom. It was theoretically, it made all the sense in the world. It's like you've been here for a while.

You should pay UK taxes. The tax receipts this year are going to be lower because 10,000 millionaires have moved away in the last year. And people have this populist bullshit of let them go. Well, okay, who's going to pay for the NHS? So the wealth tax doesn't work. The wealthy are the most mobile people in the world. They have homes all over the world.

They can have really nice lives in Milan. or in London. So if you're looking to actually be effective, not just right, the wealth tax doesn't work. Rose is more about social services and corporate taxes, expanded child tax credit. The one I like the most is Bookers. He's saying, okay, it's the first $75,000 it's tax-free. Right now, what people don't realize is that, first off, the myth that wealth that you don't pay their taxes, The top 1% paid 19% in 1980.

Now they pay 42%. It's the 0.1% that are getting away, quite frankly with murder. They can use all sorts of tricks to lower their tax rate into the high teens. But the 1%, the workhorses, mom's a baller at a law firm. She's a partner making a million and a half, two million bucks.

Dad owns three chiropractic clinics. He's making $800 grand. They make $2.3, $2.8 million. They probably live in a blue state and a blue city. They're paying 48 or 52% marginal tax rates. So the whole notion of tax the rich doesn't go very far. What I think what Booker's saying is essentially if you go the first 70, the first 29,000 pay no federal taxes right now. He's saying be it the first 75,000. Now the devil in the details is that even though it sounds like, oh, that benefits people who make up to

75,000 the most, it actually benefits people who make 150,000 the most because they get to apply that free 79 in the lower tax rate on a larger base. It's a good idea. It's time that we level up the middle class, so I like that, and it's a little bit more elegant. Whenever you send money to Washington, as opposed to lowering taxes, there's some inefficiency and friction in Washington. So I think it's a good idea, but I think there are more elegant ways to raise tax revenue, lower, basically do away with, or lower the estate tax, the exemption on money that's inherited from 30 million to one million. We're creating dynastic wealth. And the key is to have taxes that are least taxing.

If your kids inherit 11 million instead of 14 million, you're obviously knows less happier because you're not around to see it. And the kid isn't any less happier if he gets 11 million or she gets 11 million versus 14 million. The other thing we need is AMT. And that is if you make over, say, a million bucks or you're a corporation that makes over $10 million, use the 4,000 pages of loopholes to skirt it down, skirt it down, 1202 depreciation. But if you're not paying at least 40%, there's an AMT. So an alternative minimum tax, and then triple the budget of the IRS,

because the biggest tax cut in history that we're going to talk about, is that the Trump administration has essentially neutered the IRS. So crime's going to go up when there's no cops on the beat. Supposedly $750 billion a year is called the tax gap, which is uncollected taxes that are owed. So get rid of the estate tax exemption, alternative minimum tax of 40%. Support the IRS.

And support the IRS, as opposed to what feels a little bit like class warfare. Yeah, it's an interesting thing. I don't think it works very well because people are aspirational. That said, the tech people, especially who are the wealthiest, have not really slathered themselves in glory in terms of people. I mean, the brand has gone down.

And so I think people don't, when Jeff Bezos rents Venice or Alex Karp talks about disenfranchising white Democratic women, I think that's what he was sort of saying in his statements the other day, it feels like let's get them. Like they're sort of, they're creating an anger toward them that I think is unnecessary and unproductive. And at the same time, you sort of want to take all. or leave them naked without clothes. Well, I don't want to see them naked.

That's not true. But it's a real conundrum. And I do think one of the things has to happen is there's got to be some neutering of Citizens United in that regard because I think it's very clear what the trends have been. On a middle metal level, the biggest tax cut would be having the stones to go after entitlements

because we spent $7 trillion and $5 trillion in receipts. And every time we do that, in order to keep the government, government pumps up and going and the asset prices, the assets which you and I own, keep them elevated, we issue more debt. So the biggest tax cut in history would be fiscal responsibility. And it's a tax cut on your kids in the future who are going to have absolutely no money in the government to invest in education or technology. And if you really want to get serious about, quote unquote, taxing future generations, some Democrat is going to have to be the adult in the room and say that if you make over a

million dollars a year as a senior citizen, you're not getting Social Security. And we need to move back the age and we need to means test it. And we need to distribute GLP1 and bring down health care costs. But if we're serious about lowering taxes on future generations, we can have populist ideas. But what we need to do, quite frankly, is just have more fiscal responsibility because the deficit every day is a $2 trillion tax on future generations because someone's going to have to pay this shit back. Well, that may be true, but it's the Trump administration who's brought up the deficit more than any other of any of the we've it that's been a bipartisan thing certainly but trump is seven trillion george bush george washington to george bush 30 trillion since george bush but

trump's been the worst so um we're going to move on to march madness kicks off this week the the and sports books are expecting to take in four point five billion dollars in bets on the nca college basketball tournaments now only 11 percent of that will come from the prediction markets this year which is a large amount but that's a perfect time for polymarket to announce that it's a perfect time for polymarket to announce that is bringing in Palantir and a TWG AI to monitor sports contracts and flag anything suspicious. Reminder, Polymarket is backed by Peter Thiel and 1789 Capital, which is Donald Trump Jr.'s fund. In AI system monitoring predictions markets, it seems like that's the Fox guarding the henhouse. But is it meant to, is it meant to, in the Mamdani race, what was strange, when you see billboards everywhere saying,

that Mom Dami chance of winning 91%. If you're voting for Cuomo or another candidate, I supported a guy named Whitney Tilson, I'm not a New York resident, but my friend Whitney Rand. Anyways, you don't show up. Or you think, oh, great, you get excited. So these prediction markets, actually, the polls have an influence on the actual voting.

I think AI in terms of monitoring, I like the idea. I've always felt that AI could be used for defensive measures as much as offensive measures, Whether or not Peter Thiel has other objectives, that's a little bit scarier. You think maybe he does? So you're right. It's not AI as a defense mechanism or for compliance. It's the fact that Peter Thiel, who believes in an...

No democracy, I believe, is his thing. Yeah, feels like democracy is an outdated mode. So, but just in terms of gambling, huge threat to young men. And what people don't know about gambling is an addiction, is that it's got the highest suicide rate of any addiction. Because if you have a meth addiction, people notice it and they weigh in. You can spend your kids college fund, mortgage your house, spend everything, and people have no idea.

And oftentimes people feel like it's just too late. And in states where they legalize gambling, bankruptcies skyrocket 35% in that same year. I was just in Vegas. Vegas is dying because why be in Vegas when Vegas is in your pocket? And I'm curious what you think, because you have some. I have sons. They don't gamble. Yeah, but you're a better parent than me.

Yes. But the question is, speaking theoretically as a parent. I don't think they gamble. For young men, do we infantilize them? Do we have more regulation? Is it a life lesson? No, I think young men do have a higher risk profile. I mean, just between my daughter, he's more comparable,

my daughter who's six and my son who's four, he's so risk to, I mean, penis out every year. moment of the day. And you're always like, wow, that's going to hurt when you get to the bottom of those stairs on your head. And my daughter is very careful. So it's a really, I hate to say that because I don't like the playing to gender tropes, but it's true. It just is. Trope away.

We're different and that's okay. She happens to be. I was very risk-taking when I was a kid. I'm with you, Arna. Hello. And someone's like, what's your biggest risk? I go that any moment it will be over with Scott, which it never happens. It's like a really exciting series that ends on a cliffhanger every episode.

But one of the things that I think about with gambling is my sons don't gamble, which is interesting. And I kind of like gambling better than they do, which is interesting. But I think the fact that it's, you're right, AI should be used in positive ways and we should mitigate the negative ways. But again, a lot of this is controlled by people with self-interest that you never understand. And so what are they, and earlier today I did an interview with the cast of the audacity, which talks about these issues. It's a new Silicon Valley show. And the idea of the manipulation of our information for in all manner of way, I think we do not understand where it's about to go. And so who owns it and who's running it. Same thing with

media where are the interests is going to be a huge problem going forward. But your point is the right one in what you just said, and that is AI should be applied to monitoring and compliance. It should just be an AI that reports to a federal agency that's trying to prevent a tragedy that comments, not to Peter Till. But keep, I mean, this is a difficult one because I think a lot about young men. And between 24 by 7 porn and gambling and an economy that's basically linked to dopa hits that's trying to evolve a new species of asocial,

asexual males. I believe that our economy now is essentially tied to evolving this new species of male. That is basically a shitty citizen who starts blaming immigrants, prone to conspiracy theory, prone to misogyny, prone to obesity, depression, anxiety, never develops the skills outside of their house. Males, age 20 to 30 are now spending less time outdoors than prison inmates. And unfortunately, they're up against this indomitable foe of an AI-driven platforms that at the exact right moment will convince you, hey, don't go to class, bet on the Jets game. Or, hey, you know, you can get rich in screenshots of people trading crypto. And why go through the effort, perseverance, cost, showering, resilience, developing a ramp.

You know what movement? Then I'm going to go off the script here. You know what movement I fucking hate? I think the worst movement in America right now, the sense of the far right, crazy shit is the in-cell movement. And involuntarily celibate. And I speak to a lot of young men, and some of them identify as being in-cells, and they say it as a point of pride.

Like they have found their community, and that it's not their fault, and they just come out and say, I'm an in-cell, and they give up. 62% of men under the age of 30 aren't even trying to date. 42% of men, 18 to 22, have never asked a woman out in person. And this movement infuriates me, because just, Just a heads up, a spoiler alert. For 99% of history, 99% of men have been involuntarily celibate. I was involuntarily celibate the first 19 years of my life.

I absolutely wanted to be insolibate, but I couldn't find anyone to participate in my program. I'm so surprised by that. I know, shockers. 6-2-140 with bad acne. Not a great rap. I totally got a lot. But this is the basis. Just Scott.

I got a lot. You've told me that over and over. The basis of evolution and the basis of mating and civilization is the following. Women, if we were at the Alanis-Morset concert last night and there was alcohol involved, the majority of the men in this hall would have sex with the majority of the women. The majority of the women in this room would have sex with none of the men. That is the basis of evolutionary progress. us. Men are exceptionally promiscuous and feel their job is to spread their seed to the four corners of the earth.

Women feel their job is to put up a much finer screen and select the smartest, fastest, and strongest seed. So what do you know? The majority of us are insolid. And this is what we do. We level up. We get certification. We get a plan. We get a sense of humor. We start making girl friends that teach us how to behave around girls and maybe find we're a decent guy. We start thinking about dress, we develop a sense of humor, a plan, a kindness practice, such that over time we can be voluntarily insolibate. And the notion that somehow this is a movement, well, welcome to the fucking work week. Level up, bitch. It's been hard for all of us. You know what? I feel like there's a book in there. Anyway, speaking of someone I wish was insolibate, in case anyone was

wondering where the defense secretary Pete Hegsess stood, oh my God, stood on the Paramount Warner deal, we know now, at a briefing on Friday, Hegseth, who's a moron, called, that's just, I mean, it's factual, called a CNN report on the war in Iran fake news and said the sooner David Ellison takes over the network, the better. Also, Brandon Carr, more and number two, oddly enough, not even as smart as Pete Hedg test, which is an awfully low bar, is threatening networks because he doesn't like their coverage of the war and is calling it fake news. It's astonishing that the head of the FCC says these things. It's actually illegal, what he's saying, and he's threatening the broadcast licenses of networks who do not comply

with the correct news. Teamsters are also, by the way, urging the DOJ to block the deal unless Paramount agrees to protect jobs and increase U.S. production. Talk about this because you'd think they'd be on their back foot at this point, but they're doubling down on lack of constant, well, just everything terrible. But this was sort of astonishing to hear from him and then followed by the FCC chairman around a deal where obviously the Ellison's licked Trump up and down. Like it wasn't even, I mean, they did. They didn't even pretend this is not what they were doing.

They made promise they're making, they apparently made promises well reported about CNN and what they're going to do there. Talk a little bit about this and where you, him saying the loud part out loud, I guess. Well, it's not only wrong, but it's stupid because it creates, but it creates legal, it's Exhibit A in a case trying to block this to say it's an unfair merger and that it's not based on market dynamics is based on government interference, which it's not supposed to. I'm not as worried. And I mean, you're the journalist here, but I am not as worried about suppression of speech

because what I see is alternative media, niche media thriving despite these threats. And it only brings oxygen, you know, bulwark and, you know, puck. They'll have their biggest days today being outraged about this on YouTube. So I don't think that as much as these folks are like, I still think, the courts will hold around First Amendment. But what it indicates, in my opinion, is something more dangerous, and that is we generally decide we have regulated competition, and if we have regulation, it applies to everybody, and that everybody gets to play by the same rules. And when the president starts deciding, I know how to run a steel company, which microchip companies we should invest in,

and who's saying the right speech and who isn't, it reflects, I just think, I think we're just going to get, and I've said this before, we're going to get poorer. Our earnings trade are the highest price earning multiple because of systemic laws where you don't get on the wrong list and get the wrong call. I'm not as worried about, I mean, it's just so nakedly anti-First Amendment, but I think it'll be slapped down in court. Yeah, but the tactics they use is they create a problem and they get slapped down in court like they just did with Jerome Powell with box a, you know, prosecutor box of wine, jeanine, whatever, box a wine lady. Watch Cessley Strong on her. Perfect. You know, they do the thing, create the damage, cause a chilling effect, and then move on when they lose in court, right?

Or they get pushed back, and then they're outraged about losing in court and then attack the courts. I mean, it just goes, it does cause actual damage to people. And not just outrage. It's not just, I can't believe they said it. I totally believe they said it. I don't find it outrageous. I just find it astonishing that they. they do it in order to create the kind of crisis that will occupy people until they're slapped back.

And by the time they're slapped back, it's too late. The tension, the fear is that it creates a chill and people think twice before writing an article about the Trump administration and are more promiscuous writing articles truth telling about Democrats. And Republicans, we start having a chill around speaking openly, Brown Republicans. My sense is that if you look at Kimmel, Colbert, is that quite frankly, it's only emboldened journalists and institutions to write. And also, I don't know if the chill is working. And I think it's giving rise to a new set of media players who can honestly say we're about truth to power and we're unafraid and that there's a market for it.

Well, why not just remove the broadcast networks from those rules? Why are they, I, I, They shouldn't be applicable. They shouldn't be bound by that moron, Brandon Carrar. Who's clearly looking for his next job, which will be dancing with the Nazis. But anyway. It's wrong. I guess the question is, we always talk about the difference between being right and being effective. They're wrong.

In my sense, is so far they've been ineffective. I think the best thing to happen to Colbert and Kimmel, the ratings exploded when the FCC threatened them. So my sense is the autoimmune response of the. Americans who value free speech is kicking in here and it's working really well. Perhaps, but at the end of the day, the Ellison's own will own this and then we'll have say over it and we'll quietly do, you know, smother people possibly. I don't even know if they will. Honestly, I don't. I don't care to stick around and find out. But one of the things is that you create a situation where where you don't trust your, your owners, right? you don't. I mean, when I worked at the Washington Post, I mean, it was a different environment

for media and everything else, but I completely trusted the grams. I got, you know, I didn't feel like they would toss me over under a Bezos thing. And I know he was just there this week talking to some of the reporters and was answering questions, which he should. I, I have no idea what they do. And in fact, probably opt to go to Mara Lago over protecting something he bought. Look, you're going to forget more about journalism than I'm going to know. So I'm going to defer to you, but what I see happening is the following. They make these ridiculous, onerous, fascist, autocratic statements trying to control the press and trying to put a chill around free speech.

I feel like that attempt to chill free speech is backfiring. I also don't have any nostalgia or think that we've talked about this. I don't think the CNN, I think CNN in the Washington Post. can go away and it's not going to mean anything. I just don't, I think that these folks, quite frankly, many of them, I think Fried Zakaria starts a podcast and a newsletter and has the same reach with a lower cost of production. I think these incredible journalists go to different places, start alternative media that quite frankly is maybe more effective. So I think that you're going to see a dispersion of truth of power and journalism. The key is as long as the courts at the end

of the day support those people and fall in the light of First Amendment. But, I think what happens a lot of times when we talk about this is that journalists and these organizations see themselves as iconic and very precious. What's precious is First Amendment protection to speak truth to power. And what I see is that every person who's laid off from the Washington Post or CNN who has any talent now finds incredible platforms and outlets and subscribers. I just launched on Substack. And it's so much fun. You see subscribers and you can make good money. you know a lot of people who've left big institutions and are doing well now.

So I feel like the attempt to chill is like when they hit CNN, it breaks into a hundred different alternative niche media companies. The only issue with that is covering a war costs money. You have to have a larger thing. And so one of the things, instead of reforming the costs of something like a CNN or whoever, fill in the blank NBC, instead of reforming that economy, they're doing damage to it so it can't revive itself in a way that's cost, that those things cost, like that kind of thing.

So you're not going to have a logger go over to Iran and do the correct coverage. Anyway, we'll see what happens. Okay, we need to take a quick break, and when we come back, we'll get to more of the latest headlines. Support for the show comes from Odu. Running a business is hard enough, so why make it harder with a dozen different apps that don't speak to each other, one for sales, another for, for inventory, a separate one for accounting. Before you know it, you are drowning in software

instead of growing your business. This is where Odu comes in. Odu is the only business software you'll ever need. It's an all-in-one fully integrated platform that handles everything. CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, HR, and more. No more app overload. No more juggling logins, just one seamless system that makes work easier. And the best part, O-Doo replaces multiple expensive platforms for a fraction of the cost. It's built to grow with your business, whether you are just starting out or already scaling up. Plus, it's easy to use, customizable, and designed to streamline every process so you can focus on what really matters running your business. Thousands of businesses have made the switch, so why not you? Try O-D-for-free at

OD-O-D-com. That's O-D-O-O-O-O-D-com. Support for this show comes from MongoDB. If you're tired of database limitations and architectures that break when you scale, it's time to think outside the rows and columns, because let's be honest, you didn't get to detect to babysit a broken database. You got into it to actually build something. MongoDB lets you do that. It's flexible, developer first, acid compliant, enterprise ready, and built for the AI era. Say goodbye to bottlenecks and legacy code. Start innovating with MongoDB. There's a reason it's trusted by so many of the Fortune 500, and that's because it's a platform built by developers for developers. They swear by it, literally. They call it a great fucking database. Start building at MongoDB.com.

If you're tired of database limitations and architectures that break when you scale, it's time to think outside rows and columns. MongoDB is the database built for developers by developers. It's acid compliant, enterprise ready, and fluent with AI. That's why so many of the Fortune 500 trust MongoDB with their most critical workloads. And the best part is developers swear by it, literally. We can't use the actual words they said in this ad, so let's just call it, oh, but we're just call it, a really great database. Ready to think outside rows and columns,

start building faster at MongoDB.com slash build. Scott, we're back recording live from South by Southwest. So Apple is entering its affordable era. Affordability counts. The company just introduced the MacBook Neo, a laptop priced at $599,

just roughly half the price of a MacBook Air and powered by an iPhone chip. Well, some analysts are saying, This is a smart way of getting new markets here. Others online are wondering if the budget Apple laptop is a, quote, recession indicator. Talk about this about Apple, what's happening over there and where it goes as they start to figure out their next leadership group,

which has been in there since forever, actually, since its revival back 25, 30 years ago. It's the same executives. So I think the strongest luxury brand in the world is not Chanel or, or Vitton, I think it's Apple. And essentially, Apple says, Apple is the most, the perfect luxury brand is one that says, you're wealthy, you're part of the creative class,

but you're not trying to exhibit your wealth. When you roll around with a Birken bag, you're saying, I'm rich and I want you to know it. And I, or I have such an incredible sense and passion for this type of design willing to sacrifice a great deal of resources for it. The iPhone, basically, the iPhone is become so dominant in identifying the billion wealthiest people in the world.

There are billion iPhone iOS contracts. And the other six billion, when you pull out an Android, it's like sending a date, a request for a Venmo. You're not getting laid. It's sort of, when you, when you, when you have an Android, you're essentially saying to the world, life hasn't really panned out the weight I'd hoped, and I should be starch from the gene pool.

And the pricing, people don't recognize, I'll go back to my soapsack. I'm waiting. Most subsacks are $8 a month or $12 a month, $100 a year. We purposely did $20 a month and $200 a year, because pricing is a signal. And one of the case studies I love that we talk about in my brand strategy course, The most successful or fastest zero to billion alcohol brand in history was Grey Goose. And I do a taste test in class.

And everyone thinks, oh, yeah, you know, all these young douchebags, I can tell the difference. And none of them can tell the difference between Smyranoff, Sky, Absolute, and Grey Goose. None of them. Like, 9 out of 10, not even that, can tell the difference. But the owners of Grey Goose said, all right, the fifth of Vock or whatever cost about 35 bucks. Charge 55. Because think about it, when you walk into a store and you're looking at anything, you're immediately sort of want to check out the most expensive thing. Pricing is a really strong signal.

And I think that Apple's genius is its self-expressive benefit. The strongest self-expressive benefits in the world are the country you come from? I'm proud to say I'm from the U.S. As much as head up our ass as we are right now, I still like telling people when I'm overseas and I'm American. It makes me feel good. The second strongest self-expressive benefit is where he went to college. If you have two people in a mating environment and the dude went to a good school and doesn't have much else going on, he's like, well, at Cornell, that's the second strongest self-expressive benefit. The third strongest self-expressive benefit is your phone, because it's immediately apparent. And Apple has really become... So you think this Neo is a mistake?

I would always be premium priced if I were Apple. I'd always be unattainable for 78, 85% of the world's population. What do you think is an indicator of that? I don't know. More market share. They see a market for the near luxury or they want to expand their market. And by the way, these are some of the smartest marketers in the world, second most valuable company in the world. So if it's like the strategy team at Apple or Scott Callow, you go with the strategy team at Apple. But I think this is this is a luxury brand. I mean, keep in mind what Apple's been able to pull off. margin is Latin for irrational

when you pay a lot of margin for something it's either because you think it'll make you feel closer to God it's a monopoly or it thinks you makes you more attractive to potential mates margin means irrational and the irrational margins that Apple has been able to garner I was on the board of gayway computer remember them which I realize is the weakest flex in the world

but our margins or 8%. If we sold a computer for a thousand bucks, it cost us 920 to assemble the thing. Meanwhile, Apple was getting 30 and 40 points of margin because people wanted to... I remember when the

seatbelt light goes off, do you grab a Dell computer that says you work for a corporation? Do you grab an ACES, which means you work for a bad corporation? Or do you pull out your Apple and say, I'm in the creative community? I'm interesting. I think different. Right? And so what you have with Apple, they have pulled off the impossible, the impossible.

And that is they have- I want you to say why they're doing it then. Okay. You're in that meeting. We're going to sell a $575-95 computer. Just let me finish my last sentence here. Apple has the margins of Ferrari with the production volumes of Toyota. No company has ever pulled that off before. They think they're going to expand share and clear out a bunch of their competition is why they're doing this. And good, bad, you think it's a brand time? I think it works in the short run. I think in the long run, if Chanel came out with a $400 bag, they would sell a shit ton of them.

And then over time, it erodes their margins. And the truly aspirational people stop, start buying, you know, more Hermes or what have you. So I think it's a tradeoff of market share in the short run for what is the core asset, and that is a rational margin as the premier luxury brand and consumer products. And very briefly, how are you feeling about their stock right now as they transition away from Tim Cook? Well, I've been selling down my Apple stock because I think Tim Cook is a duplicative motherfucker who's benefited from the American society and is not giving back. Okay.

But that's why you did? I would hold on. I would hold on to Apple stock. I think Apple is, I think these are incredible companies. it hurts to sell the stock. I'm just trying to walk the walk in virtue signal. Resist and unsubscribe.

You know it. Anyway, we need to take a quick break and we come back. We'll get to wins and fails. Support for the show comes from Odu. There's an endless supply of software out there that promises to streamline your workflow. That may be true for a specific aspect of your business,

but if you need one app for accounting, one for inventory management, and another for sales, how streamlined can your workflow actually be if you have to be the middlemen between them. Odu says they're the answer you're looking for, the only business software you'll ever need. Badoo can be your one-stop shop for CRM, accounting, inventory, e-commerce, HR, and more. Plus, it's super customizable and easy to use out of the box. And the best part, they say not only can they replace multiple applications, but they say they'll do it for a fraction of the cost.

Whether you're just starting out or already well on your way to scaling, O-Doo wants to help you put the clutter aside such that you can do what you set out to do when you started your company. Thousands of businesses have made the switch, so why not you? Try O-D-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-com. That's O-D-O-O-O-O-O-com.

When you think about wealth inequality in America, there's probably one man whose name comes to mind. And yes, he did compare America's billionaire era to the Gilded Age. We're living in a moment where the top 1% owns more wealth than the bottom 93%, where one man, Elon Musk, owns more wealth than the bottom 53% of American households,

where, while 60% of our people are living paycheck to paycheck, the billionaire class has seen its wealth increase by a trillion and a half dollars since Trump was elected. How's that? They're doing pretty well? I talked to Senator Bernie Sanders about his latest bill for a wealth tax and his call for a moratorium on AI data centers. Plus, how much he uses AI himself. Today explained every weekday and now on Saturdays two. Scott, we're back recording live from South by Southwest.

All right, we're going to do one win and one fail each. I think I am going to start. I think the win this week. for me was the impression, I don't know the guy's name of Tucker Carlson on S&L last night. If you watched it, it was fucking superb. And oddly enough, in some cases,

in some of the things he's, Tucker Carlson is a terrible person. I'm not going to agree with him, but I thought it was a beautiful rendition of a lot of these sort of noisy, right-wing people who are parodies of themselves, and I thought it just got to the heart of the problem with him.

that I thought was just beautiful. And it was highly entertaining. It made me laugh. And by the way, Harry Styles was terrific. And I love Harry Styles so much. I don't know why, but I do. I find him incredibly appealing. The negative this week was Elon Musk saying GROC didn't quite work as planned at the same time.

And everybody leaving GROC, even though it has these incredible valuations, nine of the 11 original founders have left. Obviously, you have Mecca Hitler, you have all manner of things that is doing. you have non-consensual sexual images, child pornography. It's not doing great as an AI product, and again, a low bar. But I thought it was interesting that he admitted what a mess it was. It still will not have any effect on the valuation, because anything Elon does they will invest in no matter what.

But I thought it was a moment where he sort of admitted what a disaster, Grock is. And I think you're going to see more of that going forward. And at the same time, in continuing disasters by Elon Musk, the two, do yourself a favor and watch the testimonies, the interviews on video of two of the Doge bros, they're worse than you thought. Like, I couldn't believe they were worse than you thought. But these were, speaking of in-cells, like an in-cell mode.

I don't know if they're in-cells or not, but they should be. Any women thinking of dating them should watch these. I thought they were just sort of this banality of evil kind of thing where you just watch these ignorant, stupid young men telling you why they were cutting and essentially in many cases murdering people across the globe by using chat GPT and search to decide and make decisions. And someone, I couldn't believe this kid asked, I mean, maybe I could.

I kept thinking who raised, I want to find this parent and go have a discussion with them. But one of the things, they said is why did you cut it? And he's like, do you think you're qualified to make the decision on something that was very complex around expertise and everything else? And he said, yeah, I'm qualified. And he goes, why? And he goes, well, you don't have to read all the books to know things. I was like, actually, you need to read all the books to know things. And if you do yourself any favor, it was such a failure of these obviously probably very good coders in technology and that had

talents in a certain area being unleashed upon things that took a lot more. And I don't think you can't cut government programs. I'm not one of those people. But the fact that they made these decisions in such a haphazard, ridiculous, stupid way is something, it's a real sight to see. And one of the things, many years ago, I found a column I did that I wrote about the need for ethics, history, and philosophy courses with technology people. And vice versa, by the way. liberal studies people should understand AI and everything else. And one of the things that I thought I, one of the better things I think I did as a parent, and Megan, my ex-wife is here too, is, our son, Alex, for example, is in technology, but he takes design, he's really interested in history.

He's got, like, a wider range of interests around politics and everything else. And I, that's not our fault, but I think we encouraged him to have a wider range of, Louis could learn more about AI. Our older son could probably learn more about AI than he does. But it was really a moment where I thought, what are we making? What kind of children are we making here that they think this is right? And so I thought it was a real, it's an eye-opener to watch these testimonies. And they sit there with these very fresh young faces. And it was so disturbing to me on every level. So I encourage you to watch it and be disturbed yourself. Go ahead. Win and fail. I like that. My fail as a the SAVE Act, the one that's trying to, it looks like it's going to be dead on arrival,

but the act would force people to show up with either a passport or a burst ticket. Only 50% of Americans have a passport. They cost $160 to get. A lot of people have to change their birth certificate because they get married or they hyphenate their name. This is just such a naked attempt to suppress voter turnout. It's just, it's difficult, and I do, it does feel like it's dead on arrival, but it's difficult to imagine anything more anti-American.

Yeah. You're doing everything to pass it. Yeah, I'm hoping. Including your senator, John Cornyn, who is just literally the worst. I mean, Ken Paxon is already sort of criminal-adjacent, but this guy used to have values and now has anything to be in office. And to the other side, my win is we interviewed state representative James Tala rica yesterday. And he had the most moving description.

of, and he wasn't framing it this way, of masculinity. And he said that his father, every weekend, would mow his lawn, and then without asking, without talking about it, would go next door and mow there a lawn. And he said that was masculinity. I thought that was just so perfect. You know, I struggle with trying to identify it through a series of adjectives, and it just, it's just without asking, mowing your neighbor's lawn. I just love that.

You can mow my lawn. I have several lawns. I'm not going to go there. I'm... I did walk into... That is just too easy and too wrong. I'm just... Season two Swedish U.S. women's hockey team.

All right. I got to meet him. He's the baby Jesus is very attractive. Oh my gosh. Yeah, I really... I was planning to ask all these zingers like, dude, we follow same people on Instagram. You'll get it.

He's thought, supposedly follows all these hot women on Instagram. I wanted to ask him if he dates, and I just couldn't do anything. He's so earnest. That's right. He's so real and so earnest, and you're just looking. I'm literally like, take my money. Yeah, yeah. Anyway, it's going to be an interesting race.

Anyway. Okay, we need to take a quick break, and we come back. We'll take some questions from the audience. Getting ready for a game means being ready for anything. Like packing a spare stick. I like to be prepared. That's why I remember, 988, Canada's suicide crisis helpline. It's good to know, just in case.

Anyone can call or text for free confidential support from a train responder anytime. 988 suicide crisis helpline is funded by the government in Canada. All right. Scott, we're back recording live from South by Southwest. All right, we're ready to take some questions from the audience. We only have time for just a few. So keep them short that we can answer quickly and easy for Scott, please. Hey, guys, Melissa Richards-Person, and I'm from Louisville, Kentucky.

Wow. My dad is turning 103 months. And the reason I offer that, thank you, is that he was a civil engineer, and he was engineering things built to last. Got it. And I think about us, have we lost the ability? to think long term as opposed to short term? That's a great question.

That's a great question. Scott? Well, technically, we're focused on shareholder value and the markets reverse engineer earnings way out in the future. So technically, these big CAPEX investments that are driving the economy, you would argue, are actually long-term investments. So I think the financial markets would say no. We are actually still the second largest manufacturer in the world.

I think people have a fondness and a nostalgia for quote unquote building stuff, but the reality is 80% of Americans think we should have more manufacturing, but only 20% of Americans want to work in manufacturing. You can't bring your dog to the factory floor. So I would argue that Americans still do have more risk capital to invest long term, but quite frankly, just like we were talking about CNN and Washington Post, we have this romanticism for manufacturing, but very few young people, other than Carason,

when you ask them what they want to do, say I want to go into manufacturing. So I still think we're thinking long-term and make great things. I think our products are still some of the best in the world. I do think we go through cycles of that, and I think we're probably headed into a more long, I think especially if anyone who's a young person,

they're moving away from a lot of this quick, fast. I've noticed just a little more community. There's a lot more of a need and a desperation for community connection, long-termness. I picked it up and that's just anecdotal. Next one. Hey, Kara and Scott, thanks for taking questions. Eve Grant. Scott, you talked about the attempt to chill free speech is backfiring. Alternative media will fill the gap. As long as courts protect them, I like your optimism. What about the Gocker Media lawsuit

that demonstrated the courts didn't protect them and money wins. It's a fair point. I'll turn to my journalist's just. I think you're right. I am much more concerned. I think they can chill people. I worry my I like you think about it you know I don't do it I of course immediately run right into the breach but I do think it does create a situation when I always like to see the enemy right like back in the day when everyone's like how dare these anti-gay people I'm like I can see them it's the ones I can't see I'm worried about and so I like to I see what their move is and so it's an easier person to fight when you see who they are and what they're up to and what they're up to is very typical of autotocracies. It's is try to slowly bring it down. I do think there's a lashback because we do have so many tools available to us, and power has shifted from the typical broadcast networks to people like us, to others. And so it does tend to unintended consequences of being such incredible morons is what's going to happen.

And again, I think Brennan Carr is an embarrassment and it will end badly for him eventually. Just because you don't know the end. Just because you don't know the end of the story doesn't mean that's how it's going to end. That's how I look at things. All right. Thank you. All right. That's all the time we have for today.

We really appreciate South by Southwest and we do appreciate all our fans. Thanks for listening to Pivot. And be sure to like and subscribe to our YouTube channel because we have a face for radio. We'll be back later this week. Thank you so much South by Southwest. Today's show was produced by Lara Amund,

and Zillian, Markis Taylor-Griven, with ground support from Trish, Arnott-Media Experiential Team. Running or Todd, engineering this episode. Rich Tibley edited the video. Thanks also to Drew Bros. Burs, Borg, Mr. Veri, on Dan Ceylon, Nchalon, NCHOLAS, Vox Media, is an executive producer of podcast.

Make sure to follow Pivot on your favorite podcast platform. Thanks for listening to Bivot from New York Magazine and Box Media. You can subscribe to the magazine, NOMAC.com. We'll be back later this week for another breakdown

of all things, tech and business. Thank you to the great state of Texas. Thank you. Thanks again to O-DU for supporting this show. O-DU wants to be your ultimate, all-in-one, fully integrated platform to handle everything. Seriously, everything, inventory, CRM, accounting, HR, and much more. No more shopping around or settling for expensive services that can only handle a fraction of your business. Thousands of businesses have made the switch, so why not you?

Try O-Doo for free at O-D-O-O-O-D-com.