Pivot - Chief Twit, Apple’s Earnings, and Guest Margaret Sullivan

Episode Date: November 1, 2022

From a misinformation scandal to a so-called trolling campaign, Kara and Scott discuss the first few days of Elon Musk's Twitter. Also, Apple beat earnings expectations, but how long can it depend on iPhone sales? Mark Zuckerberg will testify in a case brought by the FTC, and Lula da Silva takes back the Brazilian presidency. Friend of Pivot Margaret Sullivan talks about the state of journalism and her new book, Newsroom Confidential. You can find Margaret on Twitter at @Sulliview and Newsroom Confidential here. Kara’s interview with John Legend will be up soon on On with Kara Swisher - click here to follow the show feed and hear that interview when it’s released. Send us your questions! Call 855-51-PIVOT or go to nymag.com/pivot. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support for Pivot comes from Virgin Atlantic. Too many of us are so focused on getting to our destination that we forgot to embrace the journey. Well, when you fly Virgin Atlantic, that memorable trip begins right from the moment you check in. On board, you'll find everything you need to relax, recharge, or carry on working. Buy flat, private suites, fast Wi-Fi, hours of entertainment, delicious dining, and warm, welcoming service that's designed around you. delicious dining, and warm, welcoming service that's designed around you. Check out virginatlantic.com for your next trip to London and beyond, and see for yourself how traveling for business can always be a pleasure.

Hi, everyone. This is Pivot from New York Magazine. I'm doing the opening. Oh, God, go ahead. Did you hear nothing our producer said? I don't listen to you all. I'm not sick. Anyways, listeners, hi, everyone. This is Pivot from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. I'm Scott Galloway.

I'm Kara Swisher. Happy Halloween, Kara. What do Jeffrey Epstein and Halloween decorations have in common? I don't even want to know. They don't hang themselves, Kara. They don't hang themselves, Kara. They don't hang themselves. Oh, my God. That's good Halloween humor.

Where did you come up with that ridiculous joke? Where did you find it? I find all my stuff on TikTok. You know, here's a Halloween joke. What are kids' favorite two letters? What are kids' favorite two letters? C and Y. Get it?

C and Y. What it? C and Y. What does it spell? I don't get it. Does this mean I have early stage dementia? C-A-N-D-Y. Oh, C and Y. Oh, that's really cute. Not really. You know where I learned that one? That is a great joke, and it's smart. That's like smart kids' prep school humor. No, I learned it on Wonderama. I was on Wonderama many years ago when I was a young person.

Do you remember Wonderama? It's on Channel 5 in New York. What are you? You're wearing a World Cup outfit. I am. Do you know what I'm wearing? What are you wearing? Future ex-Twitter user.

Future ex-Twitter user? Yeah, that's what I'm calling it. Is that a good segue? Wait, am I supposed to do that? I'm running the show. Wait, you need to run it now. I don't know where. I'm already lost. You don't know what to do. Don't worry about it. Yeah, that's what I'm coming at. Is that a good segue? Wait, am I supposed to do that? I'm running the show. Wait, you need to run it now. I don't know where. I'm already lost.

You don't know what to do. Don't worry about it. Yeah, help me. All right. Today, Elon's off to a great start as the new owner of Twitter. Not at all. Also, Apple earnings are bucking tech trends, and we'll speak with Margaret Sullivan about her new memoir and how the news media can win back trust.

So Brazil has elected a new president, Cara. Yes, they have. Lula da Silva won a very close election over the weekend with just over 50% of the vote. But as we record, we still haven't heard from his opponent, Bolsonaro. That's prompting fears that he may challenge the results. Do you think there's any deeper meaning here? I think there's some knock-on effects. What do you think?

I think he's Trump. You know, he's Trump, too. And this guy's, well, he's not quite Joe Biden, but he's something like it. He's someone who's doing things like increasing the budget to protect the Amazon, etc. He had several former presidents of Brazil's central bank backed him. You know, this guy, Bolsonaro, is not done with being an asshole just the way Trump's not done with being an asshole with this country. He's going to stick in power. He's going to try to foment trouble. He's going to lie up a storm,

probably election lies would be a thing. And then he's going to try to return to power. That's pretty much the playbook. Yeah, but I do think, though, I mean, I'm beginning to wonder if some democracies, at least what I've seen so far, is that they were pretty definitive about the win. And I'm hoping and I'm trying to be an optimist here that the institution around the electoral process in Brazil is stronger than, you know, how it's stronger than ours, quite frankly, or is more resilient or the Brazilian people aren't prone to the same level of conspiracy theory because their their guy didn't win. But on a macro level, it's really interesting.

There was definitely a nationalist Trump-like movement around the world as embodied or most typified by Bolsonaro in Brazil. And I think he got COVID like 45 times and said it was a hoax and that powerful men shouldn't be afraid. Just all this kind of weird macho. He's Trump. He's Trump too. 100%. Trump too. And that playbook didn't work. I shouldn't be afraid. You know, just all this kind of weird macho. He's Trump, too. 100%. Trump, too. And that playbook didn't work.

Well, it did work. He's got half the vote. He got half the vote. It's the same thing with Trump. He got a lot of, yes, but he almost won. Like, I'm sorry, the numbers. In every election, they almost win. The elections are getting very close all the time.

Yes, but it wasn't a definitive loss. It has to be. These have to be definitive. Oh, come on. We'll take the W. No, I won't take the W. Take the W here. I shall not because I think it's way too close and Bolsonaro is going to be actively undermining this government. So it's just like Trump is done with Biden and the Trump people and leading to this Paul Pelosi attack. It's the same playbook.

And until we're absolutely rid of them, I will not take the win. Well, this is a step in the right direction. He lost. Presumably. Yeah, okay. He lost. Good. Mark Zuckerberg will testify in a case brought by the FTC. Last July, the agency sued Meta to stop the company from acquiring VR games producer called Within Unlimited. As part of that case, Zuckerberg will take the stand. He'll answer questions about the deal as well as larger questions about his metaverse strategy. What would you ask Mark

Zuckerberg if you had him under oath, Scott? What points of light and evidence did he know about that there was a problem with depression among teen girls, that their interaction on Instagram was actually showing signals that Instagram was in fact a key input or a key driver of teen depression among young girls. That's not the topic here. Well, you asked me what I'd ask. All right. Okay.

All right. Okay. All right. If you want to talk about business, what I would ask them is, do you realize Meta right now is spending more on R&D than the rest of big tech combined? Yeah. If you include, if you include reality. We love R&D.

I'm sorry, it's not R&D, it's CapEx. Yeah, CapEx. But it's, it's just insane how much money they're spending on, actually read Brad Gerstner, is that his name, from Altimeter's letter. Yeah, Altimeter. It was, it was an outstanding letter. I just want to give that to him. That'll have absolutely no impact. Yeah.

But he really does lay out, it was a really well-written letter. But he really does lay out, it was a really well-written letter, just about the level of spending here on these kind of moonshots is just, you know, it's kind of the moonshot to end all moonshots. Indeed. What would you ask him? In this case, look, it's down to $251 billion, P-E ratio of nine. I don't, I think the markets have taken care of this one. I don't know. I think the markets have taken care of this one. I don't know.

I would ask him about his responsibilities, a broader question about what he thinks his responsibilities are and what does he regret and what would he change. But that's not a legal question. That's a moral one. I think I would get him to honestly talk about competition and innovation. Well, it's interesting because the spout of earnings that came out last week, it's big tech is really no longer big tech. There's biggest tech, which is Apple. Apple now has a market capitalization 10 times. Yeah. When Metas is. It is. Yeah. And these ad supported platforms are for the first time really having trouble. And the subscription slash services slash hardware company is running away with it.

Their revenues were up 8%. And if it hadn't been for the strong dollar, the company with, you know, the company with the biggest revenue by far in tech would have been up double digits. Yeah. And everyone else is, you know, trying to come up with new metrics to explain what's happening. Yeah. Selling stuff is a lot better than advertising right now. And it's also not the place people are. More Americans are getting their news from TikTok, according to a new study from Pew Research. 10% of Americans say they regularly get news from TikTok. And that number goes up to 25% when looking at people under 30. You know, my kids use that. I don't know if they should be getting their news there. You know,

we have the concerns about the Chinese government. That said, it's a great product. I can see why they're using it. There's some great stuff on there. Some people think it's too reductive. I've talked to a lot of people about that, about the reductive nature of it. I just interviewed John Legend. He was talking about he doesn't find a lot of the music on TikTok creative, but it's popular.

So I don't know. I don't know. I mean, it's just what it is. It's what it is, right? Yeah. But the reason here is because all of you loves all of me. Oh, my God. John Legend. John Legend.

John Legend. His name is not Legend. It's Stevens. Did you know that? You know who helped name him? Kanye West. Kanye helped name John Legend? Yeah, he was part of a group.

Anyway, you listen to the interview. It's very interesting. Okay, let's get to our big story. Elon Musk is wasting no time digging into his role as chief twit and emphasis on twit at Twitter. After firing four executives, like we said, Musk's team met with remaining executives over the weekend for conversations about staffing and content moderation. The Washington Post reports there are plans to lay off initially 25% of Twitter's workforce

to start. Also, David Sachs and Jason Gallaghanis appeared in the company's directory with titles, staff, software engineer, and have official company emails. There's also someone I like. It saves them. Oh, my gosh. Thank God they're here, Kara. There's a guy named Shriram who I like a lot.

That's not true. That guy's title on his card is General Consulate of Little Dick Energy. Come on. I want to say something. I've noticed your tweet storm, your thread on Twitter, by the way, which I thought was really intelligent. Thanks. But I sense some anger. How are you doing?

I've never heard you drop F-bombs like that. Well, because here's why. Because I've decided to test the system. I'm doing a lot of stuff like the assholes, the knucklehead assholes that are on there. You know, let me say the N-word. I can say it now. Men are men. I can say it now.

Whatever. Those jackasses. You know, free speech is not about being a jackass. It just isn't. And so that's what's happening here is making a mockery of free speech. One. Two, the tweet he tweeted is anti-gay. Like, that's enough.

I don't even know what you're talking about. The tweet about Paul Pelosi, that he was there with a male prostitute. That's what he tweeted. Oh, the conspiracy theory that he circulated? Yes. Yes. But from a group that thinks it. Come on.

I mean, it's been tough. He's on the network for almost 36 hours and just one small slip up. I know. No, no, that's bullshit. He's got a trans kid. And of course, the first thing they pick is an anti-gay thing. And if not, it would be anti-Semitic. This is 10 steps from Kanye, right? This is 10 steps from some Kanye outbursts who continues to have outbursts. And I just don't, I'm tired of it. It's bullshit. continues to have outbursts. And I just don't, I'm tired of it. It's bullshit. This is a response, you're supposed to be responsible like Apple or any of these companies. That's what I was pointing out actually in that tweet storm. Away from my, just like this, these people are just reprehensible is the idea that do I get value out of it? Do I actually get value? And so I went through some of the things I pay for and I get value out of all of them. And they cost half as much. And that's all I was pointing out. And I don't know if he's charging $20 for verification. I'm sure it was a lie just to

see what would happen. Who knows? But I certainly wouldn't pay for it. Now, you would. I just want to press pause because welcome to the club of people who see Elon through clear, sober lenses. I mean, what's going on here over the weekend? I guess I'm angry because someone said, has he changed or something like that? And I said, not the person I knew. This is not. This is someone else. And fine, change or not.

But go ahead. Go ahead. I think you've been more balanced on Musk than the majority of people. I think genuinely you've tried to give him the benefit of the doubt. Yeah, he's an insider. And you also are quick to recognize his obvious and noticeable or notable accomplishments. But within 48 hours of the deal closing, he fires the top three people for cause. And by the way, he's trying to fire them for cause.

I want to be clear. This is for the second time in a few months, just as they're about to go to court, and I'm sure they've already said they're suing him for the money that Twitter owes those top level employees. A judge, as they get closer to his firm, his legal firm is going to rack up millions of fees, and then they're going to sit him down the day before he goes into court and go, you can't go under deposition because you've lied so much. And also, you are going to lose. Firing someone for cause, I have, you know, I've run companies.

I remember I had an employee who became addicted to opiates, took the corporate card, ran around town over several weeks getting opiates and all manner of things from pharmacies and stores and racked up a hundred. That was a friend. Oh, sorry. Sorry. We still share. We have joint custody. Anyways, $120,000. So basically, addicted to opiates stole $120,000 from the company.

And my counsel's advice was it's going to be difficult to fire her for cause. My counsel's advice was it's going to be difficult to fire her for cause. Yeah. So unless the FBI shows up and then charges them and then they are convicted by a jury or their peers, he is going to pay every dollar. So this is nothing but a intimidation or a really weak, lame attempt at intimidation. Yeah, of course. Not to these people. And a belief that what I want is bigger than the law. I can muscle around anyone in any institution.

Yep. So just dumb. And then, and I'm going to bear, it bears repeating because it is unforgivable. It is unforgivable that the third person in line to the presidency, an 80-year-old couple, family of the Speaker of the House of the greatest deliberative body in the history of our planet, is attacked and assaulted in his house, disproportionate number of people in one party are slow to condemn the violence, which, by the way, is a key step to fascism. You refuse to condemn violence against your enemies. And then the Santa Monica Observer, one of these conspiracy rags, pieces of shit that the algorithms of social media love because it creates enragement, engagement in Nissan ads, puts out a thing saying, but wait, this was Paul Pelosi's gay lover.

Not a lover. Not that he's having an affair. Not that there's a conspiracy. But let's really get everyone riled up and say it's a gay lover. Not a lover, not that he's having an affair, not that there's a conspiracy, but let's really get everyone riled up and say it's a gay lover. Everyone's going to believe that very soon. And then this guy, who is supposed to be extending olive branches everywhere and figuring out a way to make this sewer less toxic so we can get advertisers back on the platform, so we can keep the biggest people with the biggest followings, i.e. Kara Swisher, on the platform. Yeah.

Retweets that to his 110 million followers. Yeah, see? You're wondering why I'm angry. But he literally – but boys don't have a prefrontal cortex. That's the problem. As the father and mother of boys – He's not a boy. He's not a boy.

Well, let me finish. Okay. But you essentially serve as your son's prefrontal cortex for two years longer than you have to serve as that prefrontal cortex for your girl. They don't know gas break. They don't have a sense of proportion and the fact that actions create reactions and they have responsibilities. This individual, the wealthiest man in the world, he literally has no prefrontal cortex. He has no ability to assess this situation and go, is this a good idea on a risk-adjusted basis? He did. Trust me, he did.

And he decided it was good? No, he used to. I'm just saying that's what I meant. Oh, you're saying he used to have it. Yeah. Yeah. I would agree. This is why I'm furious. So anyway, just like 10 actions, all of which are reprehensible. And they're also suggesting things that you suggested, and they strafe you all the time, which is my favorite part. Their ideas are all Scott Galloway ideas, and they just love to attack you, which is my very favorite part of this. You know, to be called a fool by an imbecile is a badge of honor. Yeah, honestly. By the way, I was on, like, I was such a media whore this week. I was on CNN like 11 times this weekend. Yeah, me too. What were you, I was on, like, I was such a media whore this week. I was on CNN

like 11 times this weekend. What were you, I can't even imagine the requests you got. Anyways, so do you realize, talk about going into the middle of a forest that's cold and not survivable, digging a pit, throwing cobras and grenades in there, and then jumping in. Yeah. Look what Elon Musk has purchased himself. And some of this, the shit show that this is about to become, some of it isn't his fault because some of the business decisions he's making, I'm actually very supportive of. And quite frankly, they basically got a blog post of mine and have decided to like sign it and note it themselves. I know, that's what I've noted. You know, you're an insufferable numbskull, Scott, and they're brilliant. They're geniuses.

Yeah, yeah. Anyways. They're literally your playbook. It's so funny. So anyways, but look what's about to happen here. The midterm elections are going to come up. The PRC or the CCP, basically, you know, China, has already been unmasked by Twitter is trying to create bots and fake accounts to fuck with the midterms. ounce to fuck with the midterms. Meanwhile, the guy who owns Twitter gets a quarter of his bit revenue from his entire net worth, and probably 50% of his net worth is probably tied up in his relationship with Xi Jinping and China, because there is no sunlight between those two things.

So when all of a sudden he gets a call from someone representing Xi and says, you know, we love Tesla and we hope we can continue to be partners. But some of this rhetoric coming out of your safety counsel is just jingoist and really anti-China. We hope we can continue to work with you. You don't think he's going to get that call in like a hot minute? And here's the thing. He doesn't even have to take any obvious actions that look as if he's doing it. All he has to do is nothing.

He doesn't even have to take any obvious actions that look as if he's doing it. All he has to do is nothing. And then what happens, to your point, when Bolsonaro starts claiming election misinformation and bad actors see an opportunity to weaponize Twitter and start spreading election misinformation about the Brazilian elections. And by the way, Bolsonaro and Brazil are key components of rare earth materials for batteries. This guy is so, say what you will about Mark Zuckerberg, they don't get any money from China, so they don't have to do that dance that Apple has to do. This guy from day one is compromised and is going to have a really difficult time not having the immediate perception of being totally compromised. Well, here we are. So, interestingly, the N-word on Twitter spiked 500% in 12 hours.

Yoel Roth, the head of safety and integrity at Twitter, said the increase was caused by a trolling campaign with 50,000 tweets from only 300 accounts. Of course, you dumbasses. That's how it works. Like, this is so stupid. We know that it's never from a lot of people, but it gets other people going. Just like Musk's tweet from that junk news site. He deleted it. I don't know who got him to, but thank you for that.

At which point, but it already had 86,000 likes. Like, this is how it works, people. And it just gets it out there. It adds it to the fire. And that's all these people want is for misinformation to go all over the place. And so what's really problematic here is that it's not good for revenue. It's not good for business. General Motors, now they're a competitor to Tesla, let's be clear, but they were on there. Why wouldn't they be? Suspended

advertising on the platform following must take over. I was doing a really interesting thing with General Motors as the sponsor on Twitter. They're not doing it there. That's fine. They have every right to do that. They're taking their money and spending it elsewhere on my stuff. And I'm going to try to come up with something else for them. And then the blue check thing, you want to pay for it, right?

Whatever. He's considering $20, $5. I don't know what the fuck he's going to charge for it. But the idea is that verified users get to keep their blue checks for payment. They have 90 days to sign up or they lose their marks. So I don't know. You want to pay for this. I don't. Well, okay. See, here's that anger coming out. I sense that anger. You want to pay for this. It's not like Twitter's a prostitute and I'm asking her to come into our marriage or him. Patrick, hello, Patrick. His rates have gone up, by the way, just so you know. Inflation, Carol. When you rant on, you're not angry, and I'm angry.

You really are angry. I'm angry because you're not letting me be angry. I'm sorry. That's it. I'm getting you a rabbit coat and we're going to the Olive Garden this weekend. It's clearly you need some letting me be angry. I'm sorry. That's it. I'm getting you a rabbit coat and we're going to the Olive Garden this weekend. All right, all right, go ahead. It's clearly you need some attention in this relationship. Explain why you want to pay for it and I'll explain why I don't. I'll try not to be hysterical the way women are.

I didn't say that. I did say that. I am much more emotional than you. Yes, you are. I just called you angry. That's okay. I am angry. Look, I think that there are two things that haunt Twitter.

The first is it's a shitty business. They are subscale. And they are not able to have – they don't have the ad stack and the scale to get the kind of – create the cash volcano that has been created through these colliding tectonic plate shift of scale. Everyone's on Meta and Google. Everyone's on Meta and Google and then this unbelievable tech ad stack where they can target houses in New Jersey that have a 16-year-old who just got a driver's license if you're Geico and want to sell them insurance. It's a shitty business. A better business is subscription. So let's just start there.

Subscription is a better business. Yes, I agree. And there is huge surplus value. huge surplus value. When Caitlyn Jenner gets paid $400,000 for a promoted tweet, I think it would be reasonable for Twitter to go, all right, we're a little bit going a little bit Apple, and we're going to take 30% of revenue that is created as value on our platform. You're getting $400,000. And then all the way down to, okay, Scott Galloway, you have half a million followers. You're not a journalist. You're not a nonprofit. You're getting $400,000 if they say – and then all the way down to, okay, Scott Galloway, you have half a million followers. You're not a journalist. You're not a nonprofit.

You're not a humorist. You are someone who is putting out content that is business-related because clearly you make money off of it. Now, you make money off of it different ways, books, speaking fees, whatever it might be investing. But we think realistically you're getting X amount of value, and we're going to charge you 10% of that value. There's so much surplus value from Twitter that they could be charging where they have made a mistake. They're moving in the right direction. And I know where they're going to go because they're smart people, and they'll figure out eventually. They want one-size-fits-all blue check. No, that's not it. It should be similar to how you price an airline seat. An airline seat is worth different amounts to different people at different times. And every

Twitter account has a different amount of economic surplus value that is not being captured, and they should capture it. Anyone with less than 100,000 followers or 10,000 followers, I don't know what the number is, anyone from a nonprofit, anyone in the business of journalism gets it free. I think there should be some sort of decentralized identification, which gets everyone's hair on fire. I get that. Or maybe they have the technology to clean up the bots without doing it. But their subscription and recognition their current business doesn't work and capturing some of that surplus value is absolutely the right strategy and where they will go. And just one more, just to finish my

word salad here. Yes. All this bullshit, he's already dialing it back around. This is going to be, we're going to unlock the, we're going to save this from the wolves of censorship. Whatever. There should be a public square. Take every platform and assign a moderation index. So the moderation index of zero for 4chan, no moderation whatsoever,

Wild West, go on, say the most vile things in the world, that's fine, right? The most moderated is TikTok. And then in between, you have Twitter, Pinterest, Meta, Instagram. As you go up the scale of moderation, the more moderated, the better the business and the bigger the growth. The correlation between additional moderation and viable economic, a viable business model and growth, what is by far the most moderated? If I, when I'm on TikTok. All right, we done with this. Yes, keep going. I'm not done. There's that anger again. There's that anger again. I want to say something. keep going. I'm not done. There's that anger again. There's that anger again. Anyways, when I go on TikTok and I talk about the CDC, if I use the word CDC, there's a good chance my account's going to be suspended. Yeah. Because they've said anything around vaccine is a no-no.

And guess who's doubling in revenue this year? The most moderated platform in the world. Yes, I agree. It's got to be. My reasons why one is I don't think I get economic value from Twitter that I can think of. I've looked at all our data and the stuff that brings things to our platform is search. I've looked at it over and over and over again, Scott, and it's never Twitter. It's always very small and it's very hard to understand. Second, I'm a content creator on Twitter. I make it a better place. I'm painting their fucking fence. I'm not paying them a dime for my verification. If they don't think verification of knowing me as me is valuable, fuck it. I'm not paying for it. I'm not

paying a dime for it. Thirdly, when you think about the blue check thing, if I don't pay for it, someone else will try to pay for it and probably will be an asshole and they'll think it's me. I don't care. It makes their service shittier. What I'm getting out of it is I'm addicted to it and I like getting the news and I like certain people. I don't think it ever pushes things to things. I just, I never see the numbers. I never see it increase that much. And I really am not beginning to not enjoy it because I have to endure a whole bunch of knucklehead assholes, and I don't have the time. I'd like to get my time back,

and I'd like to find somewhere where I can curate amazing people in one place. That's my whole thing. So there's a couple things there. The first is, and we referenced this last week, just as I think mental illness has been somewhat destigmatized, especially for women. Men still aren't allowed to talk about their mental illness has been somewhat destigmatized, especially for women. Men still aren't allowed to talk about their mental illness in my viewpoint. But I think we're starting to destigmatize just how damaging Twitter is on people's mental health.

I don't think it's a joke. I think if you're someone, if you're a journalist or if you're in the fashion world or in a consumer business, you are expected to have a Twitter presence. It is very hard to build a business in today's economy without a social following. I mean, that's what they look at. I'm sure the Washington Post, if you want to be a journalist, or I'm sure Vox, or if you want to be in podcasting, or they want to buy- They don't care. You don't think they care and look at your following? No, not really. But anyway, go ahead. But go ahead.

I think one of the things that people absolutely look at when I'm, I can tell you the reason I've gotten what I think most people would say is a crazy number for my books is they think that I can market the shit out of it because of my social followings. Okay. And I think these are things that are real assets. And one of the things I tell young people in my brand strategy class, I task each of them like pick any platform. I need you to be in the top 5% by the end of the semester. I need you to own it, get great at it, because it's an asset over time if you build it. Anyways, but here's

the thing. I think there's a certain expectation professionally for economic substance across a lot of industries. I think if you're a world-class journalist or aspire to be a world-class journalist, you have to figure out these platforms. It is very hard without it. Some people are such, Jean, Nicholas Christophe, you know, whatever, Maureen Dowd, they would make a living without them. But they would make more with, you know, anyways, they're important. It's not, these aren't recreational activities that you just say, I'm done, I don't like it. Yeah, but I think it's waning.

I think the power is waning. Everyone's over at TikTok. Everyone who I want to reach is over at TikTok or even LinkedIn. I get more. Whenever I do anything over there, thousands and thousands, tens of thousands of people that actually buy books. Like, this is all just noise. And so the question is, I love this particular social media, but in the back of my mind, it doesn't really help me that much. media. But in the back of my mind, it doesn't really help me that much, honestly. But where I was headed with this, Cara, is that if this is part of your professional responsibility across a number of industries, and if you have any reasonable amount of success,

or you're in certain industries where you have to express a viewpoint, whether you're a journalist or an academic or a quote-unquote thought leader or even a celebrity, you eventually, because of poor safeguards and because the incentives are to let the thing go wild and create a toxic atmosphere, which creates more engagement and more Nissan ads. At some point, at some point, unless you are in either incredibly high self-esteem or incredibly low self-esteem, this is going to fuck up one of your weekends. You are going to get attacked. The algorithm is going to love that you're going to get attacked.

It's going to show the controversy to say to more people. It's like in the third grade when people start having words, they would usually walk away. And then someone, then 10 kids surround you and start screaming, fight, fight, fight. That is exactly what these companies are in the business of. And it takes a real toll on people. And you don't like to admit it because I don't like to say it. I'm an alpha male. I think of myself as being fairly strong. I would say if I've had six really weekends where something has happened to me that has rattled me. Text from me. I would say two of the six every year start on Twitter. Yeah. And it's like, who the fuck needs that? And here's the thing. Well, hold on. Here's the thing.

They could fix it. They could fix it. They throw up their arms and the same delusion of complexity that all the big tech foments such that they can act like these problems are too big to solve. They could clean up this shit. Yes. But this is not the gang that's going to do it. This is the gang that's going to make it worse. I know these people. So worse. I know these people.

So far. I know these people. They love chaos. And good luck. Enjoy yourselves. I'm going to drive off in my Chevy Bolt. Anyway. But let me just say, white, very insecure little dick white men who are worth hundreds of millions of dollars are exactly the right people to understand these problems.

That's right. They're exactly the people to understand these problems. And by the way, if they want to create a council, what person is going to join these problems. That's right. They're exactly the people to understand these problems. And by the way, if they want to create a council, what person is going to join these people? Nobody. Nobody. Anyway, we'll see who does it.

My favorite departure, and I don't care. Celebrities depart, whatever. They can go. I don't care. I'm not going to make a big deal of it. I'm just going to leave. Tia Leone, who I love so much. Madam Secretary.

The real Madam Secretary, not Elon. Hi, everyone. I'm coming off Twitter today. Let's see where we are when the dust settles. Today, the real Madam Secretary, not Elon. Hi, everyone. I'm coming off Twitter today. Let's see where we are when the dust settles. Today, the dust has revealed too much hate, too much in the wrong direction. Love, kindness, and possibilities for all of you. Thank you. Classy dame.

Classy fucking dame. I love it. I like her, too. Bygones. She's been in some good movies. She's wonderful. Hello, hottie. Anyway, stop. Oh, my God. Stop. Anyway. Hello. We're going on a quick break. Do you believe in love and first sight, or should I walk by again?

Oh, my God. Hello, ladies. When we come back, there's good news for Apple and for Exxon, and we'll speak with a friend of Pivot, Margaret Sullivan. 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. Scott, we're back. payment platforms, remember to only send money to people you know and trust. Cook, who will never say anti-gay stuff, said it would have increased by double digits if not for a strong dollar. iPhone sales increased by 10% compared to 47% for the same quarter last year. Cook said the company is hiring deliberately. Apple stock rose by 7% on Friday and is at 153 at the time of the taping, showing a demand for slow and steady in the times of turbulent growth for tech. steady in the times of turbulent growth for tech. Amazon shares fell 7% on Friday, briefly reaching the lowest point since April 2020 after projected slowdown in holiday revenue. Well, what do we think? What do we think? What do we think of this? This is, I mean, there's two things here. One, this is just a staggering quarter for Apple,

but the real news here is that Apple has disarticulated itself from the rest of big tech. Because now it now occupies the Iron Throne, full stop. And, you know, you had, I mean, Amazon off 14%, one of its worst days. Meta has just been the shit show that keeps on giving, so to speak. It's just, and then there's Apple in the face of these headwinds around the economy. And I think it says a few things. One, it says, we've talked about this, hardware, subscription, better businesses than advertising. And also, I just don't think there's any getting around it.

I've always thought Apple is the ultimate proxy for how the top 10% globally are doing. Apple is the ultimate luxury item. It's got a billion users. It's the billion wealthiest people on the planet and distinctive inflation, distinct economic headwinds. The top 14% economically globally continue to kill it. I really do think this is a wealth index. Apple has become the global wealth index. And you think, okay, well, it's a mass product because it's 50% in the US. It doesn't have that share elsewhere

because the majority of people can't afford an iPhone, but the people who can afford Apple products are doing just fine. Yeah, yep. I would think that. So I think it was a very impressive performance. That's all. It's just impressive.

They know how to handle their company. They know how to run it. They know how to push the buttons where they need to. They certainly have got to be thinking about new products. iPhone sales are not going to continue to boost them all the time. That said, they do a great job running the company and running it efficiently. They're already moving stuff to India. They're just adults. I don't know what else to say about them. They certainly face some pressure from regulators around the App Store, but otherwise, they do. They have disarticulated. That's a really good way of putting it. The other people who have done very well was

ExxonMobil broke records for its third quarter profits. What a shock. The old giant reported more than $19 billion in net income, an increase of $2 billion from the previous quarter. Exxon boosted production to meet demand during the quarter and is expanding its refinery in Beaumont, Texas, expecting a more available product early next year. Gas prices have eased, but they're still on average 36 cents more per gallon than this time last year. In August, President Biden said Exxon made more money than God this year. I definitely meant it very well. So here we are with them. This is no surprise whatsoever. I don't like the Senator Warren and President Biden. I think it's a really bad narrative that go after oil for record profits.

I mean, the profits these companies have made is extraordinary. But the profits, they are dwarfed by the profits of big tech over the last 20 years. Yes, that is true. In addition, when COVID hit and no one was saying, oh, poor, you know, poor American huge industry, big oil. So this is an easy target. I think it's really lazy politics to go after these guys. Yeah. Because it's a big industry in the U.S. Investors have finally made good money in an oil stock over the last two or three years. And I think it just outs you as not understanding economics and playing

favorites and finding, you know, we need, quite frankly, we need more drilling right now to get off of oil from a nation that uses it to fund war and atrocity and then absolutely pivot to renewables. But short term, we need the West to be energy independent. Anyway, I really, I don't, I don't understand. And I find it really lazy politics and just plain wrong to demonize these companies. Yep. I would agree.

I would agree. Look, you certainly should be fighting for other alternative energy sources. But I think it's typical in politics. This has gone on for decades. I don't think it's anything fresh and new. And these prices, these profits are really something else. And I don't think it's just because they're so good at their jobs. In Apple's case, I do think they're so good at their jobs.

I think it's because people need gas. There's things in the Ukraine, other external circumstances. Well, we're not experts on oil, big oil, but let's bring in our friend of Pivot, who is an expert on something we also do know about, the media. Margaret Sullivan has been a media columnist for The Washington Post and author of a new book, Newsroom Confidential, Lessons and Worries from an Ink-Stained Life. In her new memoir, she recounts her long career in journalism, including her time as the public editor of The New York Times. Welcome, Margaret Sullivan. Thank you so much, Cara. Great to be with you.

You're one of my favorite columnists. So let's recap briefly. The Times created a public editor position in 2003 after a plagiarism scandal. It eliminated the role in 2017, saying that social media become effective watchdog for the paper's reporting. So with that, I want to get into your book. What's the state of trust in news media today? And how did we get here from a larger landscape? Well, the state of trust in the news media is pretty low. It's, you know, depends on when you measure it and so on, but it's certainly below 50%, well below. And if you measure it among Republicans, it's rock bottom. There was a time in the mid-70s, shortly after the Watergate scandal and the fact that Woodward and Bernstein unveiled this, and after the New York Times and the Washington Post published the Pentagon Papers, when the public's trust in the news media was in the mid-70s. So it has really plummeted over the years. And I mean, it's only fair to put this in context a little bit in the sense that trust in institutions generally is way down. Yeah. And also the press wasn't very popular for most of its history in the United States, for sure. Was or was not?

Was not. No, that's true. So that may have been sort of a moment in time. It's sort of when Gallup started doing the measuring. So I can't tell you what it was like in, you know, 1850. But it's pretty bad right now. It's pretty bad. And what do you attribute that to? I mean, it's a lot of different things. One is that people feel like there's a lot of bias in the media. And you hear this across the political spectrum. So, you know, that's hard to battle against. I think that, you know, some of the things that happened years ago, for example, the flawed reporting in the run-up to the Iraq war. By the New York Times. By the New York Times, but not just the New York Times. Right. Really was very, very destructive to trust in the news media. And that actually, Cara, was one of the reasons, not just the Jason Blair scandal at the Times, that the New York Times decided to have this role

of this internal watchdog and the public editor. So let me ask one more question. When you think about the changes, these were mistakes too. These were just mistakes, but it just, do you think that was it or was it the rise of social media where people do get to say whatever they want? Just yesterday, Elon Musk was trolling everybody, but the New York Times particularly, after he tweeted a fake news site, then he said, no, I didn't tweet the New York Times. Yeah, no, I think social media does play a big role in it. And I think another aspect of it is that we've spent the past, what, five years or six years having Donald Trump disparage the press constantly and say, don't trust these people. In fact, as you might recall, he said to Leslie Stahl of CBS News, I do this for a reason so that

when you guys, meaning the reality-based press, when you guys do a negative story about me, no one will believe it. So he set out to disparage the press so that it would eat away, it would erode the trust, and then people would go, oh, I don't know what. I mean, the problem is people say, I don't know whether to believe that, and that's actually very bad. Yeah. I have my mother, she always says, that's your opinion. I'm like, no, that's a fact. Like, if that's your opinion, it's her favorite thing. I was like, no, it's a fact. That's success. Scott. Margaret, nice to meet you.

Hi, Scott. When I think about trust or lack thereof, doesn't it all reverse engineer to the profit motive? Yes. At the end of the day, news used to be a public service, run Tang and Pontiac ads all day and then have 21 minutes of news. Then they figured out they could make money. Then they use processing power and a profit incentive. Don't we need state-supported news that attempts to call balls and strikes? Well, I agree that a lot of what's happened is because news is largely operated by corporations, more and more

so. And local news has been bought up by chains, and the chains are owned by hedge funds. So that's always, that's very, very bad. I do think that more publicly funded news media would be a good thing. And you would have to really build in a lot of guardrails so that you don't have, you know, politicians telling you what you can and can't do. And that's a worry. Do you think the BBC is a role model for that? I just think the institutions that are trusted, it's PBS, BBC, Wall Street Journal, I think I read. And other than the Wall Street Journal, it struck me there's a big nonprofit component. That there's a nonprofit component in all of that.

In all of that. Yeah. Yeah, that's true. The correlation with trust is directly linked to the nonprofit status. Yeah, I guess so. I mean, I do think, too, that, you know, one of the things that the polls and the studies show is that local news is much more trusted than national news. And paradoxically, it's local news

that's had such trouble staying afloat. That's interesting. Do you know why that is? That's really interesting. Yes, I know why it is. I know why it is. It's because the business model of local news has disintegrated. I mean, it was basically, it was based on print advertising. It was based on, you know, Warren Buffett once said that in a monopoly market, a newspaper was like an unregulated toll bridge. You want to get there, you know, with your ad, you got to walk across my bridge and I get to tell you how much it costs. So that has gone away because the internet. So when you think about the midterms fast approaching, did the media learn anything from 2016 coverage? How should you

cover people who don't believe in democracy or believe in, what I said, alternative facts? I hate even to use that word. They've learned, but not fast enough and not enough. I mean, I think that, you know, eventually the news media started saying the word lie, and eventually the news media started using the word racist, but they tiptoed around it for a long time. They still tend to, you know, take whatever politicians say and put it in a news alert, in a tweet, at the lead of a story.

They don't really think about what's good for the public. They think about what's good for engagement. And so it's, no, I wouldn't say they've made tremendous progress or anything. And I see things every day that actually are terrible. Give me an example. Oh, you know, I mean, an example that everybody's been chattering about recently is a story in the New York Times about a week or two ago in which, you know, the question of how Americans are upset about the loss of democracy. And there's a line in the story, and this is just emblematic of the kind of thing you see, the line in the story says, but the loss of democracy, what it's about depends on

who you ask. You know, Republicans think that it's about, you know, liberal professors and critical race theory being taught in the classroom and voting rights being extended so much that it opens the way to fraud. Well, that is not what the loss of democracy is about. holders who aren't going to accept the results of a free and fair election and refuse to accept that, you know, that part of democracy is turning, you know, the peaceful transfer of power. It's not about liberal professors. So the fact that the Times kind of reported this, you know, in this both sides-y way of, oh, well, there's this and there's that, and they're both kind of equal, and they're not equal. It feels weird to say this, but just thinking about there's that, and they're both kind of equal. They're not equal. It feels weird to say this, but just thinking about there's people who've tried to become billionaires by building a media platform, and then there's billionaires who buy a media platform.

And it feels weird to say this, but it feels like the less toxic platforms have been the ones that billionaires buy after. Like you're thinking of Jeff Bezos. Bezos, yeah. But what about Elon Musk? I mean, we haven't seen what's going to happen there, but I think we're getting a pretty good idea of it. Yeah. But I mean, I do see what you're saying.

I mean, in L.A., Patrick Soon-Shung bought the L.A. Times and has kept his hands off the newsroom and supported it. And I think that that's... I mean, on the other hand, I mentioned Warren Buffett. He owned the paper I was the editor of in Buffalo, and he kind of got out of the news business. I mean, he could have stayed in and tried to save it, but he sold off to a chain. And, there are billionaires and billionaires. And Bezos has been a good owner of the Washington Post. He has, you know, he has allowed the paper to figure it out, figure out the digital model while keeping his hands off the editorial product. So that's what you want. Yeah, presumably. This idea of objectivity, can it exist anymore? Or was it just not true before?

If one side views zink in fact as bias, how do you get back to, is there any way, given the noise and the reductive nature of everything and the constant dunking and dunking back and the dunking and dunking back, where you can get to a better place with news? You know, there's this idea that about objectivity that, I mean, it's a very fraught word these days in the inside journalism circles, because there's a lot of people who say, well, you talk about objectivity, but whose objectivity is it? It doesn't take into account me. I'm a young, I don't mean me, but someone talking, young woman of color, for example. That's not my, that's not my sort of idea of what the

basis is. But if you think about it a different way, that what it means is approaching every story with an open mind and doing the reporting that leads you to a conclusion based on evidence, then I think objectivity is a good idea and we should want that. So some of it is about the word, which is why I like to use words like accuracy, fairness, evidence, instead of objectivity, which makes everyone nuts. But it doesn't pay off. Look who's most popular in cable, for example, which is Fox News, which is a profit machine. They make a lot of profits by not being- They make a ton of profit. Well, they're also being sued right now by two voting machine companies for billions and billions of dollars. And that just might end up restraining them in a way that no advertising boycott is ever going to do.

It's interesting. That might be the one thing that makes them pause and say, oh, maybe putting a bunch of misinformation out there isn't such a good idea after all, because it cost us a lot of money. So we'll see how that plays out. But you're right that people talk about how they would like, oh, we want substance in our reporting, but what they actually seek out is outrage and having their own points of view underlined and validated. Which is to me, just propaganda, as far as I can tell. It's essential. Well, I mean, yes, it can be.

It certainly, I mean, I think Fox News certainly falls under that category. And they've done a tremendous amount of harm, in my view. You know, it's been bad. So, Margaret, who or what is the role model here? As far as a news organization goes? Yeah. Who do we model? You know, I think

there's no perfect model. There's a bunch of, and I wish I could say, okay, it's the Minneapolis Star and Tribune do everything like they do. I mean, I think the New York Times does a lot of things right, and they do some things wrong. Same with the Washington Post. The networks, you know, they seem to be, you know, trying to take everything down the middle because nobody wants to lose out on the biggest possible audience. So you don't, you know, that's why CNN, for example, the new boss there has gone to Republicans and said, hey, you know, you're welcome. We want you to feel welcome. And even if you're an election denialist, you know, feel free to come and talk about other stuff. So, you know, I don't, it's a great question, Scott.

I don't really, I don't really think of a model that I truly believe in. I can see good stuff at various places. So when you think about your life as a public editor, because you're a terrific public editor could do something that you cannot do on social media, which is hear from the actual readers, go to the actual decision makers and say, hey, could you please explain this and what gives and why did you do this? And then synthesize that information and come up with a reasoned conclusion that you then put in the very pages or on the very website where the readers who are complaining will see it. I mean, that is nothing like people spouting off on Twitter, nothing like that.

So I think it would be a good idea for it to come back, but I don't believe it will. I just think it's gone. So I don't worry about it. One of the things is, I would say, you're saying lessons and worries from an ink-stained life. There's a lot more worries here. I didn't feel great after reading it, but give me your biggest worry and your biggest lesson. Well, you know, my biggest worry is that the American press is not up to this moment that we're experiencing. I was just thinking that this morning. You know, that we are at a hinge moment in American history where democracy is truly on the line, and the press is kind of very mired in doing things the same way as always. And while they

tinker around the edges, they're not really getting together or just in their own newsroom saying, oh my God, we need to rise to the occasion. We cannot be asleep at the switch. Okay. And so that is a very big worry. And my, I guess my biggest lesson is more on the personal side that, you know, I think about young journalists and I think about my own career and I think it is actually a fabulous thing for young people to do. And I encourage it. And I also encourage them to try to spread their wings in a way that gives them a lot of opportunity to do different kinds of work. Like don't come out of J school and say, okay, now I would like to be a dance critic for the New York Times. You know, you have to be able to get some solid reporting in,

have a varied career. And I also say, try to work for somebody you respect and believe in and who, you know, knows how to treat you well, because that is extremely important. And I think people get burned out and it can be a very tough life, but it's also extremely rewarding. And I have loved it. What would you ask of consumers but it's also extremely rewarding. And I have loved it. What would you ask of consumers? There's content creators and there's organizations themselves. But what would you ask for consumers of news? Oh, I have a strong feeling about that. And thanks for asking.

I think that consumers need to be well-informed. They need to have some sense of news literacy. Like when you encounter a piece of information before you share it or even believe it, should do just a modicum of work to figure out if it's true or false. And also to stay tuned in, to not give in to this idea of, oh, the news is so bad, I just want to turn away and, you know, watch something on Netflix. I mean, I think as American citizens, we owe our country the being well informed and being engaged. So to pay attention to the news and to know what's right and what's not right and try to distinguish between the two. That would be great. That would be great.

That would be nice. That would be nice. I do think, you know, this information desert has turned into information obesity, most of which is really empty calories. Oh, it is. I am persistently surprised by people's lack of information, really good information. You know, I think that when people find a commentator or a reporter or columnist that they feel a connection with and believe and have reason to believe, then they can sort of make their way through the jungle a little bit better. And so that's why it's very important for news organizations to have people like that who can sort of guide the way a little bit. Yeah, except there's so many false prophets. It's crazy. It's crazy.

Yeah, it is. It's just crazy. Anyway, the book is called Newsroom Confidential, Lessons and Worries from an Inkstained Life. Thank you, Margaret Sullivan. Thanks, Cara. And Scott, great to see you. Yeah, likewise. Nice to meet you, Margaret.

All right, Scott, one more quick break. We'll be back for wins and fails. Support for this show comes from Indeed. If you need to hire, you may need Indeed. for the show comes from Indeed. If you need to hire, you may need Indeed. Indeed is a matching and hiring platform with over 350 million global monthly visitors, according to Indeed 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. Okay, Scott, let's hear some wins and fails. What do you think? Well, I'm going to project and I'm going to predict something. I think that... I love Brazil. I go there every year. Do you? I find it... Oh, yeah, I go surfing in Florianopolis, then I go to Rio or Sao Paulo. I love it. Okay, all right.

I was in Sao Paulo just a few months ago. Oh, yeah. The natural beauty of that country, they're blessed with natural resources, arguably one of the greatest natural resources, not only for our consumption, but for the consumption of the ecosystem. The Amazon is a treasure that the Brazilian people, I think, have voted that that is something worth protecting. And I think the joy of life that is just built into the character of Brazil, I think a lot of people, anyone who's been to Brazil is pulling for them. Yeah.

And the peaceful transfer of power, I think they can be a role model for democracies. Yeah. And I think so far they've handled it pretty well, other than Bolsonaro refusing to concede. So my win is what I'm hoping will be a peaceful transfer of power that inspires all of Latin America, and quite frankly, unfortunately now, all of North America, because we need more role models around this. Yes, I would agree. The numbers are increasing for him, by the way, but go ahead. My fail is, you know, I've been thinking a lot about this, and we have this cold comfort that, quote unquote, it couldn't happen here. And there are just some very basic steps to fascism. quote, it couldn't happen here. And there are just some very basic steps to fascism.

It's the normalization of the demonization of a group. I think on the left, we play an unfortunate role. We have conflated empathy, you know, neutrality in the face of evil. It's not neutrality. You are not showing empathy for mental illness when you kind of look away from Kanye's comments. You are not protecting free speech when you are somewhat slow to totally condemn the types of comments. This stuff has to be extinguished in the crib. I mean, and it's a normalization of violence. Violence jumps mediums, and it's always the go-to, the conspiracy theory that always endures, and there's always a veneer of it. When you see the beginning of the rot of a society, it's always the go-to conspiracy, and that is a conspiracy against 2% of the American population and 0.2% of the global population. It is anti-Semitism. And the ridiculous comments, the vile comments of QAnon or President Trump that mock people of color, that is awful and it's vile.

But it takes on a different level of immediacy or threats to violence when you start saying death con and you start saying before it's too late. I think there was some layers of anti-Semitism around the attack on Paul Pelosi. If we don't immediately, immediately, like, put these people out of business, I'm not saying they should be arrested for saying vile things. I'm saying that every person, every media outlet, every commercial interest should say, there's just so much to lose here when you start behaving this way. We can't have anything to do with you full stop, regardless of how much it costs us. And then when you have the new owner of one of the most influential platforms in the world, and one of his first acts on the test, the owner is to spread conspiracy theory with homophobic overtones, undertones in it.

You you're literally taking us down the path to hell. And we're already seeing it. Fascism is a refusal to condemn violence against your enemies. It's a demonization of a group. It's anti-immigrant. And then you layer in a bunch of disaffected young men who for the first time aren't doing as well as their parents and are looking for someone to blame. And the missing piece here that would be really fucking frightening, and it's a difference between 20s Germany when Hitler was put in jail and then 30s Germany when he was elected

chancellor, is a severe economic shock. And so I really, I think we all have a responsibility. They did have a wartime loss where they were shamed too, but go ahead. There was a lot of other factors in there. I think all of us have a responsibility to not look away, to not think, oh, it can't happen here, or to believe that, well, he's mentally ill. Well, I'm sure a lot of people who have created a lot of evil were mentally ill. What Elon Musk did over the weekend is unforgivable. It's just unforgivable that he wouldn't— You're asking me why I'm mad? Thank you. Anyways, my loss, my fail is I worry that there's a level of resignation or we're bereft or on the left, we think we're being empathetic to mental illness.

Or we have some fucked up, weird, perverted notion that we've gotten from the right that it's free speech to tolerate this stuff, that you're protecting free speech when you let these individuals say these vile things and not have any sort of ramifications. So my fail is the slow creeping towards fascism that the right and the left, we seem to be comfortable with here. Yes, I'm not comfortable, which is why I'm mad. I have two wins. One is Scott Galloway for letting the Swisher cats stay in his apartment this weekend. We had a great time. I left a lot of towels in the washer for you. I did not put them on. I kept the place beautifully clean. I don't think I've ever, I've used one towel since I've been there. Oh, really? I'm glad the towels are getting some use. We'll be coming back for more. The kids love that apartment. They love running. You saw that picture.

That was a gorgeous photo. It was a gorgeous photo. They love that apartment. They love running around. So I really appreciate it. Daddy has a climbing wall. That's for chicks. They think I'm more sensitive than I am. Alex climbed it for them. They loved it. All four kids were there on Saturday night, which was great. We had a great time. Amanda was helping Alex with his college essay. Louis and I were watching the bear on the couch. The kids were playing around. It was really, really nice. And that's my biggest win is when I was getting angry about this stuff on Twitter, my son was like, what the fuck do you need that for, mom? And I was like, you know what? Wise children I've raised. So there you go. Anyway,

to my nice men in my life, all of them, and my lovely daughter, who is going as Anna today in Frozen, and tonight as a giraffe. Everybody have a great Halloween. It's going to rain here, unfortunately, but Clara Jo Katz is getting ready to get out there and get all the candy she can. Last year was her first big trick-or-treating, and all I could see in her eyes, I have to say, was what a racket. You go to their house and you get shit? What a racket. And now she fully understands it and is ready to go. So I'm very happy that I've grown this little smart little girl who gets it.

Scott, thank you so much. And thank you to our listeners. We want to hear from you. Send your questions about business tech or whatever's on your mind. Go to nymag.com slash pivot to submit a question for the show or call 855-51-PIVOT. Scott, that's the show. I'm going to take a few days off and not talk. We'll be back on Friday for more.

Please read us out. Well, tonight I'm dressing up as a few days off and not talk. We'll be back on Friday for more. Please read us out. Well, tonight I'm dressing up as a screwdriver, hoping that I'll turn some heads. That's a good way to call it. Today's show was produced by Lara Naiman, Evan Engel, and Taylor Griffin. Ernie Dertot engineered this episode. Thanks also to Drew Burrows and Neil Silverio. Make sure you're subscribed 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. Brazil, congratulations on what we believe is going to be a peaceful transfer of power, one of the world's great cultures, one of the most beautiful places in the world. Go, Amazon! And when I say go, Amazon, I'm talking about the real fucking Amazon. Way to go, Brazil, A huge, important democracy.