Pivot - Corporations Adapt Post-Roe, Disney’s Bob Chapek is Here to Stay, and Cassidy Hutchinson’s Testimony

Episode Date: July 1, 2022

Kara and Scott take a look at how corporations are adapting to a post-Roe world, including Facebook blocking abortion content, and major pharmacies limiting the sale of Plan B. Also, Disney CEO Bob Chapek’s contract was extended and Pinterest CEO Ben Silbermann is stepping down. Plus, Cassidy Hutchinson’s blockbuster testimony and Snapchat’s subscription service. Send us your Listener Mail questions by calling us at 855-51-PIVOT, or via Yappa at nymag.com/pivot. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

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

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

And I'm Cara Swisher. And I'm in a relationship with a quarter of a million people, Cara. You are. I see that. I know you texted me in the middle of the night, which I ignored completely until the morning. I do some what I think is good work on my blog, a bunch of stuff I think is going to get reactions talking about the economy and various topics of interest and all anyone is emailing me about.

And when I say anyone, I mean a couple dozen people a day. Why are you moving to London and what procedure did you have? So you mentioned in passing that you'll be attending a lot more Chelsea football games, although there are some troubles there at Chelsea. There was a good New York Times story about all the hubbub inside the company. But tell us about London. Tell us about why you are moving to Londinium. I know you need to be near the Queen in her last moments,

but what is the reasons? What's the reasons here? So a lot of people have said, are you moving because of guns or Roe? And the honest answer is I am moving because of America, but not because of anything bad about America. It's a function of how wonderful America has been for me. I have the opportunity to expose my kids to a different culture. I have the opportunity to go back to a place I've always felt a calling as my dad and mother are from Glasgow and London, respectively. a chance to spend a lot of time in beautiful places with great food and wonderful cultures.

So the honest answer is I'm moving to London because I can. And I want my kids, we can't do better, but we want to do different. And I'm blessed because of the incredible- Your wife is also from Europe. Is that correct? Yeah. Born in Poland, raised in Germany. And, you know, I mean, the reality is because of the incredible opportunities this amazing country has afforded me, I have the opportunity to go live in another country. So why London versus, I don't know, Krakow or wherever, Germany, Berlin? Well, if you like cities, which I do, I think I've spent probably 60 days in 17 of the 20 world's great super cities. days and 17 of the 20 world's great super cities. If you like cities, I think New York is probably edges out as number one, but I think London is number two. I think London's just an amazing city and I need a place where they can speak English, a place where I could potentially at least theoretically get some work done. London has gone through because of private property laws,

which have had some externalities, but basically London has had the equivalent of a two or three trillion dollar facelift over the last 20 years. London's an amazing city right now. It is. I was just there. It's really, it's very vibrant. It's fun. It's not very far. It's not very far. Are you going to miss Florida? Florida's been wonderful to us. It's been a great quality of life. I don't like the politics, but we have wonderful friends there and it's been wonderful for our kids. So Florida, look, there's a lot about America I don't like, but I owe most or all to the country. I owe a lot to Florida. I don't think we'll move back to Florida, to be blunt, but it's been a wonderful decade there.

You know what it is? At this point, Kara, I'm getting very sentimental about Florida because that's where we raised our kids. But what you want from a place where you live is you want a secure, loving place to raise a family. And Florida's been that in spades. So, you know, I feel very positive about the people and the lifestyle in Florida. Right, but the politics. Yeah, but you know what? You can't let that define your life. You can't, actually.

But okay. Oh, okay. Then you're going to be can't let that define your life. You can't, actually, but okay. Oh, okay. Then you're going to be really upset 50% of the time. That is correct. That is correct. Speaking of which, today we'll discuss how corporations are responding to the repeal of Roe v. Wade. Also, there's some rare good news for the CEO of Disney, Bob Too. We'll hear from a listener with a question about pizza. But first, the fallout from Cassidy Hutchinson's blockbuster January 6th testimony. Let's listen to a clip. But when we were in the offstage announced tent, I was part of a conversation. I was in the vicinity of a conversation where I overheard the president say something to the effect of, you know, I don't effing care that they have weapons.

They're not here to hurt me. Take the effing mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here. Let the people in. Take the effing mags away. testify, issuing a subpoena for his testimony. He has so far resisted publicly testifying, even though he seems like he tried to do the right thing every time Trump tried to break the law, or allegedly tried to break the law. John Eastman is dropping his bid to keep his phone records from the committee, problematic for the president, I suspect. Ginny Thomas's lawyer, the wife of Clarence Thomas, says she won't testify and that there is no, quote, no sufficient basis for her to do so. Okay, Ginny, whatever you say. Are the hearings having an effect on what the Democrats want? What did you think of these

hearings? And will the GOP just put its fingers in its ears? I think a lot of people were pretty appalled after this testimony by a young woman who was clearly part of, you know, the Trump movement. There's a lot of women actually have stepped out of that. So the right wing is trying to punch holes in her testimony. I think it's difficult. There's, you know, I think it's difficult. But what do you think? I think in law schools, they'll play her testimony and they'll highlight her as what makes a credible witness. It really is difficult to imagine a more credible witness because you got to go to incentives. You got to go to kind of the complexion, the way they present themselves. Price she's going to pay.

Oh, exactly. She has disincentive from what she said. She's worked for Ted Cruz and Mark Meadows. She was very good. Steve Scalise, too. And not only that, but where you gain domain expertise. And again, I always like to try and reverse engineer it to a lesson for a young person. One of the ways you demonstrate your domain expertise is to, on a regular basis, acknowledge that you don't know. And she was careful to do that.

She was careful to say on several occasions, I don't know, I wasn't in the room, or I'm not sure you could say that. People would try and lead her, and she would say, no, I didn't hear that. And she came across as not emotional. She came across as just, she put on a masterclass in what it is to be a credible witness. And I don't think, you asked about the hearings. I admire, I've always felt, and I resent the Democratic Party because I think we're ineffective and stupid. I think we're right, but I think we're ineffective and stupid. And I don't know which is worse, whether to be wrong or ineffective, which is the two parties right now.

But I thought the January 6th hearings, they really got their act together and they have played for the crowd in terms of the way they have orchestrated it, the way they have led and teased the hearings, their use of social media, the way they have framed things, even the camera shots and the lighting. They like, yeah, they've done, I think, a fantastic job. I don't think it changes. At this point, I think we're so polarized. I'm not sure it changes a lot of opinions.

But I do think here for the first time, I actually believe the president is going to be indicted because now there is evidence that connects him to an intent to incite violence. Yeah. And that can trigger an indictment. So I think that- I do think it has a huge effect on Trump. You're seeing a lot of Republicans be like, whoa, whoa. Even my mom was like, whoa, this is problematic.

Even if they don't believe it and they keep trying the witch hunt thing, it's not, I think Trump is losing enormous ground. I think that's the point here is we can't have this man in office again. He's a dangerous character. You know, you can have your problems with Ron DeSantis. I have enormous problems with Ron DeSantis, sort of Trump-lite. But I cannot imagine he would try an insurrection. I just, for some reason, I feel as if perhaps he would stop there. They all have to pay lip service to the ridiculous election lie whenever, but he lost ground on a bunch of primaries in Colorado. A number of election non-deniers won over election deniers, which was a good sign for the Republican primaries.

I think people are getting a little tired of Trump. And you can see it with DeSantis sort of coming up, Glenn Youngkin in Virginia, there's all kinds of activity among Republicans trying to both use Trump as I love the Trump, but try to get rid of the actual Trump, you know, the actual person. Cassidy Hutchinson also said Trump threw dishes to the wall, no surprise to me, I'm sure he did it many times, which she sort of insinuated and left a trail of ketchup after she heard after he heard that Bill Barr was said there was no election fraud, which gave us the best tweet of day from Justin Chang. We probably should have known that presidency would end with ketchup dripping down a wall. But then hindsight is 2020. down a wall, but then hindsight is 20-20. Hindsight. It's shocking that anyone's shocked, but I think there's some nuance. I don't think,

I think the people who like Trump still like him. I think the way it's hurt him is that people now believe, even if they like him just as much as they did before, or they don't believe what's being said here. They believe he is a less viable candidate and everyone wants to back a winner. And so fewer Republicans who probably would have supported him and written him checks. More of this, quite frankly, the big winner coming out of this, Cara, is Ron DeSantis.

I think Ron DeSantis comes out of this hearing. If you look at as much as we'd like to believe this is a big call to the ballot box for Democrats, I hope you're right, my sister. Right now, the odds-on favorite to be president, in my view, is Ron DeSantis. And he comes out of this with, I would say, another 5% to 10% support. Well, you do remember how popular Scott Walker was. Remember him? No, you don't. Because he didn't. Remember, he was Mr. Wisconsin and didn't work out.

Giuliani, Fred Thompson. There's always somebody. There's lots. I say it's a long road. I think we'll be. That's a great point. And usually the person who's identified as the leader at this point, what you know is they won't be the nominee. Biden was way back in the pack.

And so I just wait and see. You did not. I did, actually, which is interesting. Anyway, we'll see where it goes. I just want to take a pause here to highlight that yet again, you were right and I was wrong. As always. But let me just tell you, I think Donald Trump is toast at this point. And I actually have not said Donald Trump is toast.

I've never. At this point, he is, I think, unless something changes something. People are sick of him. He's a nasty old man who throws plates and causes insurrections. That's really pretty much what it is. Snapchat confirmed it's launching a new subscription platform. Snapchat Plus will include a collection of exclusive experimental and pre-release features. It will be $3.99.

It will be added revenue stream for Snapchat. It was mostly dependent on advertising. I mean, we'll see. We'll see when it comes out, I guess. The Twitter one hasn't worked out rather well. But again, it's the directionality that's important. What do you think of this? Yeah, I didn't think that was the big news. Look, when it comes to subscription, it's absolutely a more enduring business model. So Aswath Damodaran, my colleague at NYU and who I think is probably the best teacher in the world right now, you know, the question he was asked in this podcast was,

how do you make a company enduring or inflation-proof? And he said, you have to make it sort of something that's not discretionary. You have to go from being a discretionary product to non-discretionary. And he had this really interesting point about Apple. And he said, and I've been saying this for a long time, is that if Apple, Apple is actually quite vulnerable because Apple is really the iPhone and the seven dwarves. And in a recession, are you, would you be more likely to upgrade or excuse me, less likely to upgrade to the new iPhone 13 or cancel your

Apple subscription that gave you all your products? And his whole point is, and this is what is so powerful about subscription, is that it's a much more enduring business model. And that is, if Adobe still had Adobe Illustrator, and we were headed into a recession, and it cost $1,300, companies might say to their creative director, we're going to wait on all upgrades of software right now. There's no upgrade policy. But nobody is going to cancel their enterprise license that turns off all Adobe software at once. So their

ability, and actually, if you look at Apple, some of it's China risk. It has real issues here. Anyways, but I think we've talked about this before. The strategy is the right one, but here's the hard part. The memo is out around the power of subscription and the shareholder value it creates, which has created such a massive investment. You could even argue an overinvestment as typified by Netflix now as a content budget that is the defense budget of many nations. What you have is an expectation from consumers that if I'm entering into a monogamous relationship with you, you better be ridiculously fucking hot. And what I mean by that is you better be offering me a billion dollars a month per dollar of subscription fee. And so the barrier, the hurdle to get someone to sign up for a recurring revenue relationship is so enormous.

And Snap doesn't even get to the hurdle, much less clear it with this ship. We'll see how good it is. Let's just see how good it is, what they'll do. But in any case, it's a move in the right direction, I think. And we'll see. They're very creative. And I suspect they'll be much more creative than Twitter was. I think Kevin Spiegel, who's also coming to code, is very creative.

So maybe he'll roll out some things and show us. But it has to be good. You're absolutely right. So let's go to our first big story. Corporations are trying to adapt to a post-war world with mixed success. Major pharmacies, including Walmart, CBS, Rite Aid, are capping purchases of emergency contraception due to increased demand. That's, I think, the morning after pill. Amazon is limiting the sale of this Plan B, although CNBC found a way around it by ordering a different brand of that drug. Walgreens temporarily sold out of Plan B for delivery orders. This is sort of like the vaccine, the COVID test or formula problem. Meanwhile, Facebook and Instagram are removing posts that offer abortion pills to people who may not be able to access them, which was bizarre, but you can put guns in there and it's just fine. An AP reporter, as I said, tested the ban by posting an offer to forward abortion pills by the mail. The post was removed within a minute. Similar posts offering forward weed and gun were left up. are complying with the law? Is this an overzealous CYA? Twitter and Reddit don't appear to be

removing those posts. 13 states have trigger laws that take effect after the Roe reversal. Some have already kicked in. Abortion pills may be illegal in Wisconsin, for example. Most abortions in the U.S. are now medication abortions, according to the Guttmacher Institute. So let's start with that. What do these companies start to do? I mean, there's just so much there. I think medical abortions, I was actually happy to hear or see so much press around the supply chain shortage of Plan B and, quote, unquote, Plan C, and the majority of women terminate a pregnancy very early. But I think the more awareness that's brought to this fantastic technology and companies

like HeyGene and what I'll call Femtech, I think one of the most discouraging symbols of the lack of progress in the venture community is the woeful underfunding of women's health. And so I think attention, even if it's a temporary supply chain around medical abortions, is a wonderful thing. Because when I think of Roe, like, you know, political abortions is a wonderful thing, because when I think of Roe, like, you know, war on society, war on rights, it's not a war, you know, is it really a war on women? I would argue no. I think it's a war on not only just poor women, I think it's a war on poor women of color in certain regions. I mean, it really is, when you really think about who it's impacting, it's probably, arguably, in terms of its impact on the ground, one of the most bigoted things we've done in the last century.

When you really look at who it's going to impact, it's like you say, okay, who is this really going to impact? It's all the same. It's a similar person of the same age, of the same economic group, of the same racial background. And the whole point of the fucking court is to not let that happen. Anyways, but so I like the fact that this fantastic technology is getting a lot of attention because unfortunately, I think a lot of women or just a lot of people in the U.S. aren't as cognizant or as aware of their options as we would hope that they are. What is really frightening, and I think what the Democrats should be working on instead of

marching around Washington Square with colored signs thinking that Amy Coney Barrett is going to change her mind, is figuring out a way to ensure that these medical abortions can be legally, safely, effectively, crisply distributed to all four corners of the country without any hindrance. I think you're being unfair. They are doing that. They can march if they want. It's also a symbolic thing.

It's a clearly symbolic thing. I'm not questioning the right to march. But anyone who thinks— Nobody thinks that's going to change them. We now have a supermajority conservative court. That is correct. And it's not going to— They're not going to change their mind. It is not going to change until we have more moderates in the Senate.

And had we had just a few actual moderate Republicans, including many who have retired in the last 10 years, they would have said, we just can't vote for this individual. Look at her track. It's like, again, let's go to a business learning. Vote for this individual. Look at her track. It's like, again, let's go to a business learning. Interviews, I think, after hiring and firing, I don't know, 1,200 or 1,400 people over the last 30 years, I've come to believe that interviews are almost worthless, just as Senate hearings are almost worthless. hiring somebody is do everything you can using LinkedIn and using second and third degree connections to get an arm's distance reference, honest view off the record of this person.

And I have hired people that have had terrible interviews when someone has said they're great. It's an automatic hire. If someone I trust calls me and says, this person's great, they could have thrown up on me and I'll hire them. And then I've had other people, I thought this person just seems great. And then I call someone and go, yeah, they don't deliver, or they're hard to get along with, and I won't hire them. And here's the thing, these hearings are ridiculous. All right. But this is the way it is though, Scott. One of the things, of course, they should have done this, Susan Collins, Susan Collins, Susan Collins, or whatever. You know, this is what we have as the system. I think what's important in this case with the technology, and it really is technology, is that these companies have to take a stand.

They can't be sitting in the middle. Now, it's legally problematic because a lot of these states now of anti-abortion people are even worse. they're not even just happy to get what they got which is everything is they're now trying to go after legally people who cross state lines uh people who go to other states so people live in their state they're going to try to prosecute if they move go to another state to get an abortion come home um that's really frightening is that surveillance that it's we have to get these tech companies not to allow it to happen. We talked about this on Monday with Evan Greer and many others. This kind of stuff is very smack in the middle of technology, and they've got to resist governments that are trying to do this. Now, blue states are trying to pass laws saying we're not going to cooperate with these red states,

but in effect, it's a legal civil war that's going to happen. And people tracking, you're allowed to cross state lines to do commerce, as actually Brett Kavanaugh noted in his concurrence. He lied. Hello, he lied. But nonetheless, he noted that. I think he was trying to signal people to cut that stuff out. But there's all kinds of stuff these tech companies have information on, including movement, where people go cut that stuff out. But there's all kinds of stuff these tech companies have information on, including movement, where people go, that they cannot allow these appalling state legislators to use to prosecute their own citizens. That's one. Two, the ability to get these abortion pills should, good luck trying to stop that. That's all I got to say. Good luck monitoring Amazon and the mail. And these companies have got to step up and not allow it to happen.

If people want to buy those pills, they should buy those pills. They can walk across state line and take it. Whatever they want to do, they should be able to do. But they cannot ban abortions in other states if they believe what this ruling says. So, you know, it's interesting how Facebook is taking down this stuff because these are the free speech maximalists, right? So will free speech absolutists like Elon come out in favor of keeping those posts up? And by the way, where is Elon anyway? He's been strangely quiet since the ruling. He probably should. That's probably a good idea.

So I think that's the question is these people that go on about free speech, of course. I put up a post that said it seems they can moderate. I think you're focused on the wrong thing, Cara. Why? Why? Because we keep when government doesn't step into the void, we create a void of through a lack of leadership. We keep hoping for this hollow strategy, waiting for tech CEOs, better angels to call.

No, I didn't say it's the only thing. I just think this tracking is critically important. Okay, what Amazon or Google does or doesn't do, or the courage that their CEOs show, and I think this is an opportunity to show leadership around this issue, it just doesn't have a lot of impact on women of color in Mississippi. Amazon, you know, Google doesn't have a lot of operations there. So I understand what you're saying. But until we restore, until we have a process in this country where we unfuck the electoral system, it used to actually be congressional districts actually represented the people in the district. And instead, they've slowly but surely been gerrymandered.

We have an electoral process that gets extremists. I mean, it all comes back to the same thing for me. And that is, everyone's talking about a movement to the ballot box. I hope it happens. I'll get involved in it. I'll give money to it. I'll, you know, I canvass for Democratic candidates. But until we have more moderates actually figuring out whether who should sit on the Supreme Court. We're just going to have batshit crazy decisions that we can be outraged about, but the outrage doesn't translate to anything. And the thing the Republicans do to the Democrats-

I'm sorry, that is so not true. Outrage translates to lots of action. Outrage is the beginning of action. Without ACT UP, we wouldn't have all the things that gays and lesbians acquire. Mitch McConnell has calmly torn our outrageous ass limb from limb. Well, this is true. We need to be more Chinese. We need to think long-term here and go do what the Republicans

did and go up and down these middle and lower tier offices, state legislatures, assemblymen, figure out a way to create an electoral process where we get more moderates who can come together. I mean, if you read this decision, it's just striking when you read the decision. This decision basically reads, one, they've neutered. The chief justice used to be an actual role. There was a chief because the chief was supposed to bring some sense of moderation and get everyone saying, you know, that's a little extreme on the left or the right. Don't we want to think about this? He has now been neutered. The super majority, if you read this opinion, it's basically like, fuck you, bitch, I'm on top. It doesn't even acknowledge

the rights of the woman. It doesn't even, it acts as if the unborn is being carried by a robot. I mean, it doesn't even acknowledge her rights. So until we have a body that gets to decide this person is probably not the person who should be on the Supreme Court, i.e. moderates, this is going to happen over and over. And what Mitch McConnell has done that the Democrats are unable to do or think is he's played the long game and he's been very strategic. And they have made huge investments in these little elections that people don't think about. Well, that's how a minority takes over a majority of opinion, of opinion. I would agree with you. What's interesting, one of the interesting things is a test for Mark Cuban's cost plus drugs. I'm

going to get back to tech in that way. His mail order pharmacy carries 14 types of birth control and emergency contraceptives, prescription needed. It doesn't take insurance, but sells drugs at a cost plus 15% markup and some small fees. I do think these kind of companies will play an important role in the interim in terms of getting people the needed medical care they want. Have you talked to any of them, though? Do they see it as a priority? Are they upset and want to participate, or are they just like, shit, we don't want to wade into these waters?

That is correct. That is the latter, is what I would say. I haven't talked to all of them, but I think it's very— I think they're tired of being in the middle of this, but they, of course, put themselves there by talking about free speech absolutism. If they believed in that, they'd let these posts stay up, right? And most of all, they're worried about legal exposure. That's always been their problem. That's always been their thing. No matter what else they said, legal exposure and financial exposure was always their

concern. And they should just say that. I wish they would just say that. I think Mark could be a really interesting player here in terms of getting people these drugs, but we'll see. But you're right, we have to get these people who cannot afford it, the abortions, if they want them. But I think it's really important to, there's a tactical to be a lot of pain for a lot of women up and down the chain, poor women most especially be impacted. And so the tactical stuff is just as important, the ability to get these pills, the ability to go to other states without being prosecuted, etc, etc. And that is a that is a ground game. Now, it's actually showing some interesting numbers in like Georgia, suddenly Stacey Abrams is competitive with game. Now, it's actually showing some interesting numbers in Georgia. Suddenly, Stacey Abrams is competitive with Brian Kemp. Warnock is up 10 points on Herschel Walker. These are voting issues. I agree that the inflation and crime are also critically important, but I think it's – we'll see.

One of the things, Facebook had blocked searches for abortion pills last September in the wake of Texas anti-abortion laws. They said they were blocked in error, but no, apparently they're not. And posts about pills aren't the only abortion content Facebook was blocking, by the way. Meta also designated the abortion rights group, Jane's Revenge, as a tier one terror group subject to the strictest censorship on Facebook and Instagram. I have long given up on them to do anything consistent. And I don't even say right or wrong. It's just consistent. They just change at will. And that's what we're going to get from these people. So it's nothing fresh and new, in my opinion. In any case, James Ravine has taken credit for

acts of vandalism against anti-abortion groups, which both neither of us, I think, are thinking. I see why people do it, but it's not what we would do or support. But it is not alleged to have targeted or injured people. For context, the Oath Keepers and Three Percenters, two groups that participated in the insurrection, had lower designation of Tier 3 last year. It's not known how Facebook classifies these groups. Again, inconsistency and confusion seems to be what they do at every one of these junctures. The observation I made when you forwarded me that about Facebook is that I've always thought that the complexity and difficulty

of moderating content on a quote-unquote open platform has always been exaggerated for the benefit of the company. And that is, okay, we close one account and somewhere between 30 and 60% of election misinformation goes away. And there's no way that Twitter didn't have some idea that was going to happen. And it seems that Facebook has been remarkably efficient at pulling down posts that talk about medical abortion. And which says to me that they have the technology to moderate content.

That is correct. That's what I noted. They've just decided we're going to use it when it's convenient, when it gets in the way of selling more Nissan ads, even if it involves hate content or content that might depress teens. I've always thought these problems have been totally exaggerated. Like, they throw up their arms like, what can we do? What can we do?

I think they're the squirreliest company on earth. I've always thought they were the most compromised company. For example, it says they will pay for employee abortion travel, quote, to the extent permitted by law. What does that mean? It also bans employees from discussing abortion. You know what? The squirrels are out at Facebook as always. Let's move on to something else.

By the way, Clarence Thomas may want to make it easier for politicians and celebrities to sue the press. Currently, public figures who sue media organizations for defamation have to prove malicious intent and uphill battle. Just ask Sarah Palin. The Supreme Court declined to take up the case that could have removed that burden. Kind of ridiculous. We're not Britain. Speaking of London, Justice Thomas disagreed with that decision, saying the current arrangement allows media organizations to, to quote cast false aspersions on public figures with near impunity. Justice Thomas, you need to fucking get over it.

It's big time politics. You're a Supreme Court justice. You don't have to continue to give everybody hell for your shitty hearing that you felt was shitty. Others did not. Anyway, he keeps trying. He keeps raising getting rid of gay marriage. He raises getting rid of all kinds of things. He's using that bully pulpit for doing that. So anyway, the Thomases are quite a pair.

to talk about, though, is the U.S. government being a noble force for change. Here you have Biden sort of hamstrung in many ways what to do. Others think he's not pushing hard enough. I hate to say this, but from a marketing point of view, with inflation and everything else, the concerns about his age and whether he's running, that, of course, is a typical Washington dinner party thing. What is the move here for the Biden administration? What is the move here for the Biden administration? That's a correct question that requires a more thoughtful answer. What I would comment on or the observation I would make is that you have almost every cabinet member, every Democratic senator and several Republican governors will come if you invite them, because I think it's become

almost common knowledge now that people believe Biden is not going to be president in 2024. Well, not according to Biden, but go ahead. I think Vice President Harris is already campaigning. I think she's already positioning herself for a run. I think there are several Democratic senators who will say publicly, and one of them, I'm a huge fan of, I will likely support Senator Amy Klobuchar. I think she's a wonderful leader and brings confidence and ethics. I like people who do the work. Anyways, I think she's already running. And they say publicly, I'm supporting Biden and he's running. And then they say, oh, oh, there's something in Iowa.

I'll go. I mean, and what you're also going to see when you just think about kind of knock on a second order of facts. I think you're going to see a ton of people who we weren't expecting and who they themselves weren't planning on running. I think Mark Cuban is likely going to run. I think Michelle Obama might run. I think people are just so upset by this that I think they might decide maybe this is a moment for me to take this risk. Howard Stern says he's going to run. He could be his running mate. Okay. I think Jon Stewart might run. I mean, I think there's just a lot of people out there that people respect, that have awareness,

that have voices in their life. If Trump, if this B-level reality TV actor could end up inciting a mob to take over the Capitol, maybe I do have a calling and a responsibility. Maybe this is my moment in time, right, to try and— All right, if you had to pick any of those celebrities, I get it. It's not completely out of line to think that possibly which one would work from your perspective. Oprah, Howard Stern, Mark Cuban, and I'm kind of putting him in the celebrity category. That's a really interesting question. The reason why I think I sort of go towards a little bit

towards Mark Cuban, because I think it's really convenient to be a billionaire when you run for president in our society, because it frees up about 40% of your time to focus on campaigning as opposed to fundraising. I think Michelle, I hate to say, I think Michelle Obama would be amazing, but I don't think the presidency should be passed back and forth between family members. That's always bothered me, whether it's the Bushes or Hillary and Bill. But let me put it back to you, because I don't feel like I have a thoughtful answer. Cuban. I would like to see Senators Klobuchar and Bennett run, but unfortunately, neither of them are very good at Twitter.

So anyways, what are your thoughts? Cuban. Cuban. Cuban. Cuban Klobuchar would be interesting. Cuban. Adam Abrams. You know, Cuban.

That would be fun for us, too. Well, here's the thing. To get on Air Force One for the first time in our lives. Maybe. He's smart. I think he's a high-character person. You know, he has the capital. I think he understands social.

He understands technology. He kind of has this thing he's doing with Cost Plus is at the center of a huge issue that a lot of seniors will relate to. So he's a very viable candidate. But the wonderful thing, I think actually kind of the wonderful thing about the presidential race is whoever we settle on, it's almost like a hex, right? It just never works out that way. Here we agree. Here we agree. In any case, we'll see if he does it. It might be a giant frigging headache for him. Anyway, we'll go on a quick break. When we come back, we'll talk about Bob Too's good week and take a listener question about work and pizza. 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. Thumbtack presents the ins and outs of caring for your home. Out. Procrastination, putting it off, kicking the can down the road. In. Plans and guides that make it easy to get home projects done. Out. Carpet in the bathroom. Like, why? In. Knowing what to do, when to do it, and and who to hire start caring for your home with confidence download thumbtack today scott we're on our second story now more news from disney and bob too a also known as ceo bob

chapik uh this week's disney board voted to extend his contract for three years. He recently came under fire for the company's response to Florida's Don't Say Gay bill. And under his reign, Disney was the respondent in the lawsuit from Scarlett Johansson. He didn't handle that very well. But not every chief executive is having a great week. Pinterest announced CEO Ben Silverman is stepping down. Google Commerce executive Bill Reidy will take his place. What do we think?

I knew they were. We said that. We said they were going to keep Chapik. His contract runs out in 2025, which allows, if there's any real problems, they can pay him out. So we'll see. They let people have a long leash at Disney. So we'll see. We'll see.

I think he's getting his footing. He's following a very successful CEO. And I'm actually hoping to have him at code. Also hoping to have Mark Cuban at code. So we'll see where he goes from here. He's got a lot of challenges that he has to deal with. Not political necessarily. All business, I think. So, Lightyear didn't do well, but Thor looks fantastic. They're real high-quality content makers. Very difficult time. First, start with Chapik and then talk about Silberman. Like Disney, a board like Disney doesn't scare easily. And political or PR snappy, whatever you want to call it, an error in communications in Florida, that's not why you fire the CEO of Disney.

And he's a proven executive. He ran, I think, their most profitable division, their parks division. Is that where he came from? They know him. The board's had exposure to him. They just don't scare that easy. They're not going to fire Bob Chapek after. He's going to be there minimum six years, probably nine or 12. And if you look at the thousands of decisions Disney has had to make or the CEO has had to make, I mean, what you would get a sense for when you're on boards, this is how I've evolved. When I first went on boards, I thought I was there to like heckle from the cheap seats and demand more from the board and ask them hard questions. And then what you realize is your

job is really there to support them until the moment you kind of all meet in the parking lot and go, we need to let go of Bob or Lisa. Until that point, you're there to support them until the moment you kind of all meet in the parking lot and go, we need to let go of Bob or Lisa. Until that point, you're there to support them because the reason you support them is because it is such a difficult job. Your inbox is never empty when you're the CEO of a public company. And you have to sacrifice relationships with your family, with your health. It's just there is no balance in that job. It is a very difficult, stressful job. Now, are they overpaid?

Yes, but it is a difficult job. And the thousands of decisions Disney has had to make and that Bob has had to make, I would argue his batting average is pretty strong here. If you look at Disney+, probably one of the most ascendant stories in tech in the last 36 months is Disney Plus. Started by Bob Iger. Right. Okay. But at the end of the day, Bob didn't fuck it up.

Bob Chapek. Bob, too, is carrying the momentum. And the parks have been open through a very difficult time. He's got a difficult job. I think this was not a surprise. Again, Disney's not a tetchy company that has to move by public opinion. And I think the board probably did the right thing. They'd look idiotic if they got rid of him. They'd look idiotic. I mean, everyone would look, including Bob Iger, by the way, because he picked him, right? So even if they don't like each other, which apparently they don't, or maybe they will someday again, or don't get along, you know know he'll figure it out he'll figure out that he needs to be a little bit smoother um an excellent interview with Kara Swisher would work well for him I think um in any case um we'll see I think he's we thought this was going to

happen it's exactly what happened um uh Silberman uh stepping down again is not a surprise I think he's missed a lot of turns in a lot of ways. I think it's because his enthusiasm for running it was not, you could feel it from him. They missed a lot of turns, and now the stock is down. I don't think they evolved enough. They had a lot of, they've had to talk about management turnover there. And then the self-inflicted problems around women, And then the self-inflicted problems around women, one of their high-ranking women executives sued them. Also, two people of color sued them. Just a lot of stuff going on there. And never really moved into the e-commerce space like they're moving now.

I was always perplexed by that. But anytime I had dinner with him, he was enthusiastic about everything but Pinterest. That was my experience. And he's a lovely guy, by the way. But just he wanted out. Even years, I remember one dinner and I was like, he felt like he wanted out then. And just the burdens were heavy on him as a CEO. So what thinks you? Well, it represents a few things.

The first is you got to acknowledge as he's stepping down, he built a great company. Yes, 100%. He's obviously an incredibly creative guy. So hats off to him for building something exceptional. You know, 99.99% of entrepreneurs would pray for Ben Silverman's success and vision. Having said that, and I said this two years ago, I listened to an earnings call. He's not a CEO. Having said that, and I said this two years ago, I listened to an earnings call.

He's not a CEO. He doesn't inspire access to cheap capital, although they got that because of the space. I never thought he just demonstrated the qualities I would say of a CEO. A CEO needs to, one, demonstrate excellence, have the ability to attract and retain the best people, and also be an amazing storyteller such that they can attract cheap capital over and over and over. And I've always thought he just struck me as an incredibly creative guy who was sort of this accidental CEO. Yes, I would agree.

And what it also represents on a macro level is that I think what we saw with Adam Neumann. So when I was starting companies in the 90s, it was just conventional wisdom that once the company became real, once you got to the point where the company's like, okay, it might go public, it might get sold for hundreds of millions of dollars. It was like, okay, now we got to bring in the 55-year-old guy from Pepsi or IBM. I mean, it was just because founders were a necessary evil. We were crazy. Okay, fine. We birthed companies, but we should not be there to run companies.

We're crazy. We're entrepreneurs. And then you had Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. And slowly but surely, the pendulum swung so far back to the founder that they didn't, in my opinion, investors have tolerated founders who were visionary and brilliant, but shouldn't be CEOs. Yeah. Some are good and some are bad. It's a mixed bag. Gates obviously was good. Bezos was good. It depends. Piero Mediar left. He was smart enough to leave and let Meg Whitman take over. It's a difficult thing for these people. I don't know

why Ben stayed. I think I asked him that. Yeah, I don't understand. I think this should have happened five or seven years ago. I just don't. He's an incredibly creative guy. I don't know why he'd want to do that job. But you're seeing what you're going to see. You're going to see a lot of this over the next 12 months, Kara, because nothing distinguishes the bright line between a founder and a CEO like a bear market. And that is when everything's going up

and to the right, everyone's fine with, oh, he or she is the founder, they're the DNA of the company. But when there's inconsistency around earnings, when they don't appear to be articulating a strategy or during a bad earnings call, have the ability to calm investors' nerves, make hard decisions around cost cutting. Everyone talks about the ability to grow a company, it's also really important to be able to effectively shrink a company. Enthusiasm. Enthusiasm. You know, I just, I like him.

But honestly, if you spent five minutes with him, it's sort of like, oh, oh, oh, this is terrible. And also, by the way, the stock has mostly flatlined and declined. It started off in the 24 range. It had a peak, of course, during the pandemic, especially to 85. Crazy. And now it's back at $18. I was disappointed.

I know their CFO. I served on a board with him, Todd Morgenthau. He's a really thoughtful, I think, great operator. I was hoping he'd be the CEO. Yeah, the new guy is really quite good. He's worked on a lot of things at Google and stuff. I know him a little bit and very competent. I think he's probably a better choice for this. In any case, Ben,

bon chance. Congratulations. Have a good time. Go do something you like. Smile. Good for you. Smile. I shouldn't tell men to smile. They always tell women to smile. You could smile more. In any case, let's pivot to a listener question. You've got, you've got, I can't believe I'm going to be a mailman. You've got mail. This one came via email from a listener. We'll call Mark. I'll read it. Hi, Karen Scott. I recently received a call from a headhunter about a position at Papa John's organization. The job is good. The pay is right. The benefits are there. And this would be a step in the right direction for my career title and responsibilities wise. The only problem is dot, dot, dot the politics. Papa John's is a polarizing brand. I want to work with more progressive companies in the future, but will my resume be tainted if I

work for a company that does not align politically with companies I would like to work for? That's an interesting question. Thank you, Mark. Well, Mark, that's a, wow. I guess you would call this question a personnel pan pizza. That was a joke written by, I don't know, fuck. Evan, was that you? Anyway, this goes to a bigger question of whether it can be a separation of corporations and politics. This is a big question. I think it's important.

I left News Corp because I just couldn't stand Rupert Murdoch. I just couldn't. I wasn't worried about my resume. I just was like, I'm not working for this fucker. Like, I just don't want to. And I had the choice. I don't know. I don't know.

They make a perfectly good pizza but there's a lot of pizza places I don't I think it's more important to live in states and work for companies that align with you both on either side if you happen to be conservative if you want to work for you know whatever the cracker barrel go for it like or if you want to work for

you know live in the state that makes you feel good you should do that I do think politics is more important and pretending it isn't is kind of a waste of your time, I think. But I don't know. What do you think? If you're a meta and you can't discuss the Supreme Court ruling that overturned Roe versus Wade, are you at that Kraken where that jackass is in charge? I would leave. I don't know. What do you think? Yeah, look, I think, I mean, if a lot of people decide to go to work for Patagonia or Ben and Jerry's because they get huge psychic income from going to work for a company with those type of values.

And a lot of people just could never go to work for Hobby Lobby. They would hate it every day. Or they like it. Or they like it. Let's go positive for those. I think the vast majority, like 90 plus percent of people, should and will make their decisions based on where they feel they can best develop economic security for them and their family and have some balance in their lives. I think that's the role that work plays in your life. And what I've also found, I did some work with Chick-fil-A and everything I knew about Chick-fil-A was in my world,

I thought, oh, Chick-fil-A, they're the homophobic fast food company. And what I found is when I worked with people there, and I never ate there just because of that. And what I found out is that, A, that shit's for real. That's almost in and out like good food. And B, there's a lot of very talented progressives working there who realize the opportunity to make a good living there. And we have a tendency to make a caricature of these companies. And so what I would say to this individual is that if he's someone who really carries his politics with him everywhere, and there are some people like that, there's nothing good about that, there's something bad about that, that's who you are, then fine. But I would say for the majority of us, work is meant to be a place where we can establish the economic security so we can focus on the important

things in our lives, that is the relationships. Because without that economic security and enjoying your work in America, your life can be very stressful. So unless you describe yourself as a political animal, brother, go where the opportunity and the Benjamins are. I don't think people will hold it against you. I've never had anyone hold it against me. I work for Rupert Murdoch or something. I mean, and you could always say, God, those assholes. You know, when you, I did a great job, but

God, those assholes. Like, you can play it for benefits later. And management changes and companies change. Yeah, I think, I wouldn't work for them, but, you know, I don't think you'll hurt. Resume be tainted? Probably not.

No. No. No. That is 100% not true. I don't think people do that unless you, you just, it won't. It won't. I think it's a one word answer. Congratulations.

It sounds like you got the job you wanted. Yeah. That's a great thing. But if it really bothers you when you're there and you have to listen to some shit, get out. That's where you get out of companies when there's like, I'm just saying in general, that's why you leave companies when there's abuse. You know where that happens more is in the tech community because the CEOs have invited it. They've pretended to care about their employees' political views and they kind of started a riot. And then they got surprised when people showed up. That is true. You know, with torches.

I think most companies, people show up and do their job and go home. And that's what they should do. Many. The only reason you lose a company, again, is because of real issues of abuse or screaming bosses, you know, toxic worst places, which exist. And that's, I had one where I worked for a conservative, John McLaughlin, and the work was interesting. And I'm liberal and he was conservative as a Reagan conservative at the time. And he just was an abusive fuck. And that's really why I left like right and not I didn't I never thought it would hold against me, but he was sexually harassed women. He was an asshole. He was abusive. He screamed. And that's why I left. So anyway, we'll see. Can I just add one suffix to that? I've only had one job, really, other than working at NYU and starting companies. And that was at Morgan Stanley right out of college. Very conservative, very abusive. I had a chair thrown at me. I'm not exaggerating.

An actual physical item thrown at me. Very much a testosterone filled macho, like abused children syndrome, embarrassed people in front of others. And there was a line out the door and I would do it again. And I'm glad it's changed. It should change. But I was there to learn. I was there to get into graduate school. I was there to work my ass off, make some money, and create a platform. I'm not by any way condoning it, but I think there are things that should weigh bigger in your life. I think work, no one should tolerate what people had to tolerate in the 80s, but I look back on it, and all of that stuff was present there. I was a progressive back then and, you know, constantly mocked for my political views. Yeah, I left because of it. It was crazy. It was nuts. This was a fucked up place. And so I certainly learned things, but it was a fucked up place. So it doesn't matter. the cigarette companies in that is, as Upton Sinclair said, it's difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. And this individual was

paid not to understand it. Now, because of an overdue movement and the courts wising up to this and a lot of public shaming and people's livelihoods being, in many instances, correctly threatened or canceled, you are now paid to understand when abuse is happening. Anyway, it's an interesting time. We'll see what happens. But go take the job and send us a pizza. Although that's not really good pizza.

There you go. There's other better pizzas, by the way. All right. If you've got a question of your own you'd like answered, send it our way. Go to nymag.com slash pivot to submit a question for the show or call 855-51-PIVOT. All right, Scott, one more quick break. We'll be back for wins and fails. As a Fizz member, you can look forward to free data, big savings on plans, and having your unused data roll over to the following month, every month. At Fizz,

you always get more for your money. Terms and conditions for our different programs and policies apply. Details at Fizz.ca. Okay, Scott, let's hear some wins and fails. There's so many fails. Oh, ketchup. I think the sentencing of R. Kelly and Jelaine Maxwell were good. I guess it's a win.

Maybe people don't think it's enough, but they're going to jail. So, sure, that's good. And maybe they'll get off, but that's a substantive amount of jail for both of them. It does not weigh against what they did, either of them, but substantive amount of jail. So, I'm going to call that a win. Even if people think it's a fail, it's not. They got tried, they got judged, and they got put in jail. So that's my win.

I'll say the hearings are my win. I think that they've handled them really well. I think they've been measured, thoughtful. I like the way they rolled it out. And I think I do, even if they don't have an impact on voters, I do think an indictment is coming. And I think that'll be a big deal. So that's my win. I think, and this goes more to predictions, but my fail is you're going to see a ton of funds, VC funds. There's going to be a lot of

news about failing VC funds and tech investors, because what's happened here, there's going to be a lot of news about failing VC funds and tech investors, because what's happened here, there's so many different ways to look at supply chain. Effectively, the largest investors in the world are these endowments and institutions and sovereigns, and they rebalance their investments based on how much they have in private equity and venture in public stocks. And they're all out of whack right now because the public markets have taken such a shit kicking and it continues today. All of a sudden, and because the marks lag, the valuations lag, the marks of their private investments, all of a sudden they are way overweighted in private venture backed companies. And so a lot of them are going to have to dial back their commitments,

their investments, and you're going to see a lot of like brand name funds close or put up gates. You're about to see a ton of stories in the Wall Street Journal about big names. And I'm not I'm saying big names like I don't know if it's going to happen to places like Tiger SoftBank. I mean, these places, the reckoning there, people like to think they're always insulated, that they've invested in something that's different. Oh, I'm an Apple, it's not going to get hit, right? Or I'm in privates, it's different. Actually, privates are, in terms of valuation, oftentimes are more volatile than the publics. And we're about to see a lot of private market tech investors, big names in the news for the wrong reasons. I mean, some of these companies are down 50, 60, have lost 70% of their value, and it's going to start having an impact.

They're going to put up gates, and they're going to start also, there's going to be a really active, this is getting very detailed, there's going to be, for the first time in over a decade, there's going to be a very active secondary market where funds are so desperate to raise capital, they sell the positions in the companies that are working. There'll be an active secondary market just as there was in 2008. There's a lot of that. A lot of companies. I'm just thinking Ron Johnson's Enjoy, which was kind of an interesting company, went bankrupt, a whole bunch of them. There's a lot of stuff that's kind of interesting.

And I'll say the win is, I don't mind the clearing out. Like, look, Sam Banker was going to buy Celsius. I think he agrees. don't mind the clearing out like look sam bankman was going to buy celsius though they i think he agrees a 1200 bitcoin comp bit coins not bitcoin coins is too many coins and so clearing out is not a bad thing it's not a bad thing um it creates clear clearance for what's really promising and everyone has a reset and that's good that's a good thing um but i have to say my win is thor's the thor new movie with uh with that's a great win you saw it have to say my win is Thor's, the Thor new movie with the- That's a great win.

You saw it? Oh, no, I didn't see it yet. I'm so excited. I'm so, so excited. Who's in it? Who's Thor at? Who's the Thor woman? Tessa Thompson and, oh, hello, Natalie Portman.

And they really- Natalie Portman is the new Thor? She was the girlfriend in the first one. You're not in the Marvel universe with me. Anything where they're wearing tights and capes, I just can't do it. They are so hot. And the two ladies. And he's funny, Chris Hemsworth.

It looks so very good. And worse Chris is in it. I don't have as big a problem with him as other people do. But that's Chris whatever, that other Chris. Chris Pratt or Chris Hemsworth? Pratt. Pratt is in it too. Let me guess. He's not wildly progressive? What do you mean? No, no, no. That's Chris whatever, that other Chris. Chris Pratt or Chris Hemsworth? Pratt. Pratt is in it too. Let me guess.

He's not wildly progressive? What do you mean? No, no, no. That's not it, actually. He gave a really interesting interview for GQ that you should read. No, I don't have a problem. I don't care. Whatever.

He can do whatever he wants. Look, he's an actor. I don't care. Chris Hemsworth, on the other hand, is fantastic. He's gorgeous. Not just dreamy. He's funny. He has a fantastic fitness app. Does he? Yeah. I just love him. I just love him. He's not just dreamy. He's funny. He has a fantastic fitness app.

Does he? Yeah. I just love him. I just love him. He makes me happy. He makes me happy. And I got to say, Tessa Thompson is hot. And the director, Taiko Waititi, who is also an actor, is so talented.

He did a movie you love, which is. Oh, Jojo Rabbit? Yeah. He was the director of Jojo. He's so talented. Really? He's the director of this. Really? I didn director of this really just one of these amazing talents like greta gerwig great actor great director great etc yeah and in that vein see the pictures from the barbie movie coming it looks

fantastic greta gerwig it looks fantastic looks hysterical, Scott, that's the show. We'll be back for our quarterly review. To our American listeners, enjoy the holiday. Scott, you don't get to celebrate the 4th of July anymore. I'm sorry to tell you. But I have Boxing Day. What? I have Boxing Day. I don't know what that is.

I don't know what that is. We're going to miss you, but you're not really going very far. So how can we miss you if you won't go away? Anyway, please read us out. Today's show was produced by Lara Naiman, Evan Engel, and Taylor Griffin. Ernie Indertot engineered this episode. Thanks also to Drew Brose 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 Box Media. We'll be back next week for another breakdown of all things tech and business. Who's going to cement the greatest alliance in the history of the West between the United Kingdom and America?

Who will ensure they recognize that Americans are a loving, generous and profane people? That's right. He's taking his vanilla starfish to the UK. Oh, we are going to be so at war, our next war with Britain.