Pivot - Deepfake takedowns, white supremacy on Twitter, and the companies boycotting anti-abortion states

Episode Date: May 31, 2019

Pivot takes up the internet-age-old question of Facebook's responsibilities as a media company. And, should businesses be boycotting states that are passing harsh anti-abortion laws? Also, Kara and Scott discover that both their dads were in the Navy. 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 the Vox Media Podcast Network. I'm Kara Swisher. I'm Scott Galloway. What's going on this week? This week, I wrote about the deepfake Pelosi thing. It's not really a deepfake. It was a lightfake, essentially. And I wrote a column saying it got all people all mad because they thought I was calling for the end of 230,

which removes immunity and stuff like that. I wasn't. I was talking about, like, why did Facebook do this so cloddishly? YouTube just took it down. It was interesting they didn't get any reaction. They just made a decision. I think that's what it is. I was talking about, like, why did Facebook do this so cloddishly? YouTube just took it down. It was interesting they didn't get any reaction. They just made a decision. I think that's what it is. You just make a decision, and you make a good one, and then you act in the right way.

And other people thought that Farhad Manjoo, this today, wrote, novel forms of digital misinformation still pale in comparison with Fox News' full-time Hall of Mirrors, which, like, okay. Nancy Pelosi thought they should take it down. Hillary Clinton said it wasn't even a close call. The video is sexist trash, and YouTube took it down, but Facebook kept it up. You know, up or down, they should have handled it right, whatever they did. And now Twitter's trying to decide if white supremacists belong on the platform

as a story on the motherboard. So what think you of all this, Scott Galloway? So this was an extraordinary week of lying for Facebook, even by Facebook standards. And the first lie was when the spokesperson, you know, so they're sort of in the same business. Again, this is the Trump administration of digital. And that is they hire people and they say, look, in exchange for millions of dollars, we want you to take your reputation that you've built your whole life and ruin it by lying repeatedly with a series of talking points that we'll provide to you because we're under the impression that, for the most part, Facebook just genuinely believes

that we're all fucking idiots. And so they sent a spokesperson on CNN to speak to Anderson Cooper and say things like, well, we're not in the news business, we're in the social media business. And we want consumers to decide what is the truth after acknowledging that this doctored photo that makes Nancy Pelosi look like an alcoholic or disabled is not in fact true. So it's like saying you and I are in the, I don't know, the sound engineering business,

not on the podcast or the tech business. It's just such an incredible falsehood. 40% of Americans get their news from Facebook. There has never been an organization that is a bigger news organization than Facebook. So what to do, though? What to do? Because they, like, a lot of pushback. Some loved my column on this.

So the question is, are they a media company? Are they a tech company? Are they what? And so I think one of their excuses was, like, look, we don't take them down just because they're wrong. How can we differentiate? There's lots of Trump versions of this, not quite so obviously done for propaganda. And some of them are satire. So what's the difference between satire and propaganda? It reminds me of the Supreme Court decision, I don't know, I can't define porn, but I know what it is kind of thing. Oh, I know what that is, Kara. If you ever need any help, I know what that is.

Okay. Thank you. In any case, how do you decide? What do you do if you're them? I mean, if you're going to be nice to them, you'll say this is a really difficult problem that they face. No, it's not. I'm just saying. No, it's not.

Okay. Tell me why. Okay. I'm going to be them. It's like this is a really difficult problem that we face, and we our best and we don't take down false things and we label it. They label it badly. Let me just say they labeled it badly. So what would you have them do because they'd have to like take a lot off?

I'd have them do what thousands of organizations around the world do every day with a fraction of the cash flow. And then I would imply good judgment and this incredible, the greatest human, the greatest processor in the history of mankind, the greatest artificial intelligence. It's called the brain and discretion. When you are a media company, you have a special role in our society. They don't think they're a media company. Yeah, but enough already. They are. They spend a billion dollars. There might be a new kind of media company. Okay. Does that abdicate them from responsibility? No, I don't know. I just think we have to think about it.

Billion dollars in original content. The majority of Americans now get their news from social media. They run content against their consumers and then run advertising against them. There has never been an organization in the history of mankind that is more of a media company. And they have to do what the rest of media companies do, and that is make discretionary calls. So satire is satire. So if you show Nancy Pelosi and bad plastic surgery, which media companies do all the time, okay,ire is satire. So if you show Nancy Pelosi and bad plastic surgery, which media companies do all the time, okay, that's satire. She's a public figure. She deserves and is open to being mocked. When you fool people into believing that the third most powerful person in the nation is in fact impaired or drunk, you make another judgment call and that is to take

it down. And this organization keeps defaulting to this notion of we aren't a media company. Or now they're saying we aren't a news company such that they can let chaos reign and not accept responsibility. But I'm going to actually ask the question. What about Farhad Manjoo's question of that small issues with Facebook when Fox is doing this almost all the time? Fox did a similar thing, edited a video of Nancy Pelosi to make her look crazy. all the time. Fox did a similar thing, edited a video of Nancy Pelosi to make her look crazy. So it started off the Nancy Pelosi is crazy meme on a cable network, and there were no repercussions for them. So I think it's a fair question, but I think Fox has essentially outed itself as someone that is very anti-liberal. It's a conservative network. They have a media

point of view. And the point of view of Facebook is that we want to have absolutely no input or no discretion or accept no responsibilities such that we can have more and more Chobani ads because white nationalists eat yogurt. And I don't think that works for a media company. I think you have to take a stand and be clear on your editorial stand

because I think with Fox to a certain extent, I don't want to say people expect it, but people know what's going on there the same way they know a little bit what's going on. Even if they do false videos. Oh, I don't. I think that crosses a line. And I think, again, the key to all of this is that with media, we place on top of these decisions something that requires nuance, something that requires a human. And what tech has been able to do is replace humans with technology, and they're paying the price. And what they need to do is reinvest some of that unbelievable, gargantuan, you know, supernova profitability back into that human discretion. Be good for employment. It might be bad for shareholders, but it would be good for

employment, and it would be good for society. And they refuse to make the requisite investments, despite some of the incredible harm that's taking place because they refuse to make the requisite investments despite some of the incredible harm that's taking place because they refuse to invest in that nuance that every other media company has invested in. Uh-huh. Now, it's an interesting question because then when I wrote, I used a lot of people, someone wrote Kara Swisher's wrong piece, which, and then they're just like, I'm scared to say it and started with this crazy lead about how I made him drink coffee, which was scared to say it and started with this crazy lead about how I made him drink coffee, which was okay, whatever. I don't make adults drink things.

So one of the things was that if they start making decisions, they could start doing it on religious stuff. They can start doing it on other speech. You don't want Mark in charge of this. And it damages the free and open internet if they are responsible for this, including with Section 230 and stuff. So it's got to be dealt with. And I think smart people should sit around and talk about it.

Interestingly, I was at an event last night. And us. And us. And us. I was at an event last night at this fancy house called the Meridian House Internet. It was like a gorgeous home, one of these Washington, D.C. homes. And it's some sort of organization that helps the State Department with foreign dignitaries and stuff like that.

Anyway, someone got up, someone who worked for a tech company, I'm not going to say which one, was like, how can you make all these tech people seem like villains? And I was like, they were seen as celebrities forever. Like, isn't it going to hurt innovation? Shouldn't we let them do whatever we want? Another person was like, shouldn't we let them do whatever we want so we get the benefits?

And it was really, it was fascinating for people to do that. And so that leads into Twitter trying to decide whether white supremacists belong on this platform. There's a new platform called Parlay that – or Parler or Parlay. They're deciding what to call it. People call it different things. But what do you think Twitter should do? Make a decision like that or just let it go? Yeah, I think that we have been co-opted into the notion that this is really hard or near impossible because of their scale.

And again, these guys can do it. And actually Twitter has done I think a decent job. If you report abuse on Twitter, I think they do – not a perfect job, but I think they're making a good faith effort. And I'm kind of loathe to give Twitter any credit here. But I think they do – if you do report abuse, something happens. You can block people. Not everybody. I've had problems with that. Have you? Yeah. But the amount, Facebook's power, the fact that they now are, they are now speculating or proposing an encrypted backbone such that they can fully throw up their arms and say we're not responsible and have one kind of broken sociopath decide the algorithms that go privately

and without any supervision, the algorithms to communicate to 2.7 billion people. Media just plays an incredibly important role, and the notion they can't figure it out, like every other media company has done throughout history, even if they have a bias. The Wall Street Journal has a bias. It's impossible to have humans and not have a bias. But what you also get is a certain level of discretion where you can say, okay, this is clearly false. It clearly could have negative ramifications.

We're not going to allow it. They're not the town square. They don't need to comply with the First Amendment. And yes, they have to make the same hard decisions everyone makes every day at work around close calls. So this notion that it's, again, we're not talking about the realm of the possible. We're talking about the realm of the profitable. And they've decided to communicate a narrative that said it would be impossible or all this hand-wringing or mental anguish. No, it's not.

Media companies get it wrong all the time, but they try and they get it mostly right most of the time. And Facebook needs to start getting it mostly right most of the time. And it's going to be one thing and one thing only. It's going to be expensive. And the investment and whatever hit the earnings take will be a fraction of the upside we'll get

from not having an organization that spins up violence, that communicates hate, that depresses our teens. And your article is exactly right. They should be subject to the same scrutiny as every other media company. For some reason, we've decided, oh, no. And again, the spokesperson said, we're not a news corporation. We're in the social media business. Yeah, it's interesting.

It's so hard for me to say these things. I mean that's the thing. It's like it's gone too far and you do decide what your business is. Are you going to be a business where all the mobsters go to eat or not? Are you going to have – I'd like to go there. Isn't that Luger's Steakhouse? Yes, there's several. There's severalakhouse? Yes, there's several.

There's several of them? Yeah, there's several of them. Anyway, it's fine. So lies two and three while we're on Facebook lying. Yeah. So the new narrative from Sheryl Sandberg

is that only a company of their scale can solve these problems. Yeah. And the problem is it's the scale that created the problem. And that is

this organization has so much reach and has so much commentary and so much content that it's gotten away from them. So it's not scale is going to help them solve the problem. Scale is the thing that caused the problem. And then my favorite lie that every organization switches to when they realize the regulators are catching up

to the damage they're doing, they're making the Chinese xenophobic argument. Yeah, that's what this panel was about last night. AI weaponized Chinese companies are coming for us. And guess what? eBay was able to push back on Chinese companies when they spun PayPal. You know, the telco monopoly that was AT&T was more able to push back on Vodafone and NTT when they split up into 11 companies. The notion that one big company is needed, the only argument you can make is capital.

And any of those companies, whether it's Instagram, whether it's WhatsApp that would be spun, would be more nimble, more innovative, in my view, more ethical because they'd be forced to do competition and they would not have any trouble finding the requisite capital to push back on WeChat or all the Chinese AI warriors that Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg are trying to convince us are coming for our children. It is just three lies in seven days. Facebook, you're on a roll. All right, then.

All right. Speaking of difficult social issues, Netflix and Disney this week talked about if this Georgia abortion law goes into effect, they're going to pull their investments. And a lot of people are arguing that business boycotts don't work. We're going to have Stacey Abrams at the Code Conference next week along with you. And she's like this often doesn't hit the right people. So, you know, Bob Iger literally this morning just said the same thing, like we're not going to be able to work there if this law goes into effect.

Same thing with Netflix. Others will probably say the same thing. Just today, Mark Benioff, Salesforce, has said they're not going to help companies that sell automatic weapons with their software. Really wading into all kinds of issues, the tech and media companies. Thoughts? You know, it's a tough one. I'll ask you to go first because I find this is a tough one. What do you think here?

Do you think this works? Do you think these boycotts work, business boycotts of regions? I don't know. It sends a signal. It definitely sends a signal. I think, yes, of course, it affects people. It may affect the wrong people, but people get affected. But it's sort of like anything else.

It's difficult to decide who is more. My son this week was trying to, the idea behind transgender athletes competing with women, this topic. And I was like, anywhere you go, someone gets hit, whatever choice you make. And so we were debating that and I was like, I can't even know what to decide in this case. And so what was interesting here is that if you hit the wrong people, does it matter? I think probably you do hit the wrong people more than the right people. But at the same time, it does send a signal of Disney, if Netflix, if Amazon doesn't locate there. It says, we don't want to do business

with you all. This is an important thing to us. And I think it's the same thing as you're talking about Facebook, is what kind of company do we want to be? What kind of choices do we want to make? What do we want to build? And I think that's a very legitimate, like, what do we want to put on Recode? I think it was like, I don't want to put that. I make choices like that. You know, I don't run the website anymore, but like that. And you do the same thing. Who do I want to work for?

Who do I not want to work for? And so I think it's, I think it'll probably have an impact because half the, you know, a lot of people are thrilled with this new abortion law in Georgia and they maybe won't go see Endgame or probably they won't. They love, these movies are great. But I think CEOs have to make choices. And today, I think it's impossible now not to. Yeah, we found this, you know, Indiana when they, you know, when they started talking

about, you know, when it was Pence and gay conversion therapy as a legitimate program to stem – I mean there's just been so much crazy shit from so many crazy states. And then companies say, all right, that's it. We're done. And I don't think there's any evidence it's effective. It's kind of – it's a little bit of virtue signaling from the company. I think the time to make these threats was much earlier to say, look, if this goes through. Because at the end of the day, voters don't like being told by those damn Yankees or those people in Hollywood how they should vote. And it feels to me like when you're talking about something as valuable as family planning and a woman's right to choose, this is supposedly settled law.

family planning and a woman's right to choose. This is supposedly settled law. And it means that we need to be down there in educating voters and we need to be supporting Planned Parenthood. So that's what they should be doing. Well, I don't know. I just wonder, does Netflix, does any Georgia voter really change their mind

because Netflix says they're not going to film in Georgia? Disney's a bigger thing. Disney's, as you know, it's popular among everybody. It's a really hard question it's a really difficult I do think they can't avoid it and certainly

they have to then if they do film there they have to deal with their employees who are like or you know look what

Emma Thompson did around Pixar for example I'm not going to work I'm quitting now she had a really good interview in the New York Times saying look

I know other people can't say what I can say because I can get another job. But, you know, it does – I do think it matters when people speak up and especially like a Bob Iger. It's a really interesting – I just think it says something and it puts a line in the sand for sure on this issue. And it raises awareness. For example, I was thinking about taking my 8- and 11-year-olds to what is supposed to be the world's largest and most impressive aquarium in Atlanta. And it actually gave me pause.

Should I not be taking my kids and my dollars to Georgia in this period? And you're right. It puts it into the news cycle. It's important. I don't know how effective it is. Although I will say I do think there's a shareholder reason to get much more woke. All the money is going. You just talked about this. Well, conservatives are overrepresented in government. They're controlling government. 70 of the 100 senators come from 20% of the

population, mostly in the middle of the red states. But all the money is flowing to the cities. It's flowing to young tech-enabled information workers who are college graduates. And show me those things and I'll show you blue. So, you know, part of the reason one of the problems with income inequality is around all the money's kind of aggregating to a smaller and smaller cohort. But whereas it used to be the rich people were these rich old white guy Republicans, now it's kind of young white Democrats that are gathering all of the kind of disposable income. I mean, walk into a company whose share price is up 300 percent and there's a 30-year-old who's made more than a million bucks, I'm going to share a company that's 80% plus Democrat.

So companies are finding their woke values because that's where all the money is. I think they do have to respond to employees. There's no question. Yeah, it's just changing, and companies are taking more political stands. But, you know, you and I both love Bob Iger, so right on, brother.

I think he's, like, at the point where, like, me and my cashmere ways are just going to do whatever I feel like. I wish he had run. Cashmere ways? I call him Mr. Cashmere. I like that. I like that. I call him Mr. Cashmere.

He's like, why do you keep calling me that? I'm like, well, you know, the other Mr. Cashmere was Peter who worked for Peter Ternan. He was also Mr. Cashmere. They look great in their cashmere, but they're very smart guys for sure. Laurel Piano, great brand. Yes, exactly. Bruno Cucinelli. Bruno Cucinelli.

Baby, killing baby alpaca lambs for my sexy sweater. We invited a lot of white guys in Italy to talk about. Dreamy. Whatever. Anyway, enough with Bruno. When we get back, we have to get back, but we're going to talk about McKenzie Bezos and her giving pledge. We're going to talk about billionaires and a bunch of other things when we get back after this. 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. All right, so wins and fails, Scott. Wins and fails.

You were talking about Mackenzie Bezos. She's doing the giving pledge. I like the givingledge, although I just interviewed Anand Girigadas, and he was talking about the idea of just taxing rich people and not letting them give money in this way. The Giving Pledge is a little different, I think. It depends on how they give it away, and I don't think he thinks all charity is wrong. He just thinks the way charity is done by very wealthy, especially tech people, is problematic. Essentially, they get to make money any way they want,

including damaging ways, and then they get to give it away any way they want. And so we sort of give them a pass, just like the Sacklers with opiates and things like that, and we have to rethink it. So just taxing them is his thing. But nonetheless, this is an enormous amount of money, and if it's done correctly, there could be I think there could be great benefits. But

what do you think? Well, it's hard to be critical of someone who pledges to give away money. That's the point he makes. You can't be critical. It's hard. Yeah, but it really is. I mean, there's different forms of giving. But what was most interesting about that announcement was the bigger story in the media wasn't that she had signed it.

What was the biggest story? It was that her husband had not. Yes. That's what everyone was focused on, that he hadn't done it. And Anon, I did listen to your podcast with Anon, which I thought was great. And I have a story about Anon, but I call it the Pablo Escobar effect.

And that is Pablo, after wreaking terror on a nation and killing civilians and creating a culture of violence and crime, he would build parks. And then he would fund the local soccer team. And is, in fact, philanthropy a means of kind of, you know, ointment for – is it Neosporin for the people who didn't behave appropriately to get those billions? Is it the Neosporin for bad activity where people –

you know, I think of one venture capitalist who's constantly talking about helping young girls code and talking about – barks at the moon at night and then shits in the well all day long. And it's just how do we have a series of people? Is the American way be as rapacious as possible and then try and – the ointment is philanthropy? It's really interesting. And to a certain extent, and as I mentioned last week, it was capitalism versus socialism. No joke, week on Fox.

Oh, really? Can you believe that? And spoiler alert, I think capitalism is going to win on Fox. Anyways, and I'm digressing here, but last week I went on Fox and they come on and they introduced me as a socialist. But you know what's socialism? Philanthropy is socialism because it's tax deductible. Philanthropy is consumption. I didn't know you were a socialist.

Well, I didn't know either, but according to Fox I am. Anyways, so – but okay. So what is socialist? Yeah, what is? The tax deductibility of – philanthropy Philanthropy is consumption. It should not be tax deductible. Social security, in my opinion. I'm on this thing where I have decided where every major economic activity and tax break, our entire tax system and economy is designed around one thing.

And that is to take money from every single cohort, whether it's millennials, whether it's African-Americans, whether it's women. It's to take every money from every single cohort and transfer it to baby boomers. Mortgage tax deduction, who owns homes? Baby boomers. Capital gains tax deduction, who owns homes? Baby boomers. Artificially suppressing interest rates, unsustainable social security, borrowing against the future to pay for these social programs that aren't meant to help the poor but make it such that you can upgrade from a princess cruise to a silver sea cruise because you're getting social security when you goddamn don't need it, baby boomers. Literally, Tom Brokaw talks about the greatest generation, the greediest generation, hands down in the history of mankind, U.S. baby boomers.

I love a good rant from Scott. Okay, Scott, what was a win then? What was a win for you? A win. Okay, so it's a little bit old, but both Cheddar and Quartz got sold. One for, I think, $120 million. Quartz was like 100 years ago, right? Yeah, it was a while ago.

A few weeks, I guess, in the media world. I'm slow. I'm just getting caught up. Okay, they got sold. By the way, have you seen this new show called Cheers? It's so cute. Oh, my God. It's so cute. And my my God. It's so cute.

And my latest show. Everyone loves Raymond. Anyways, these guys got sold. I like when startups get sold and they do okay and don't necessarily have to be $12 billion exits. So, look, cheers to Cheddar and to Quartz for getting sold. I think it's a good outcome. We've entered an economy where it's either usually you get beamed in the face and go down in a ball of flames or you become a unicorn and we're worth billions of dollars. I like kind of these – what I'll call these triples.

So congrats to both of them. All right. That's a good win. All right. Now, fails. I'm going to start with fails. I think this covering up of the John McCain thing, whatever. It's yet another story. It's like everyone's like, oh, it's a distraction. I'm like, now, fails. I'm going to start with fails. I think this covering up of the John McCain thing, it's yet another story. It's like everyone's like, oh, it's a distraction.

I'm like, it's awful. Explain to the fans what happened. What happened is someone in the White House sent a memo to the military to cover up that John McCain is a giant destroyer. I don't know what kind of boat it is, but it's a big boat, a big ship that the Navy has, a Navy ship.

And it's for his father, his grandfather, and him, I think. And so it has his name, and the people who would serve on it have their names on their uniforms. And the boat was in Japan where President Trump was visiting, and apparently someone from the White House said, we can't have it seen anywhere Trump is, like he doesn't want it within his vision or something like that. So they used a tarp at first, and then they gave all the McCain crew members the day off so that you wouldn't – and then some of them tried to get into the event with President Trump and they weren't allowed because they couldn't possibly see the name McCain without

going crazy. And so he's denying that he did – he never thought – said it was awful for one in this – he never apologized for it. And then he also said, well, the person who did it was well-meaning. And the fact that these minions would, you know, preemptively deal with their baby Huey tantrum of a boss was astonishing. So I thought it was, and then, of course, it got tons of, it was hard to hide. The Navy, I was like, social media exists and pictures go viral.

You need to, like, you can't hide this stuff. But the fact that the Navy was being pulled into this political ridiculousness was just sad. That is sad. Sad. That is sad. So my fail is – My dad was in the Navy, by the way. What did your dad do in the Navy?

So was mine. He's dead, but he was a lieutenant. Oh, I forget. Whatever. He was a doctor. He was a doctor. He was a doctor in the Navy. Yeah, he was,

it put him through school. He was, he wasn't, didn't have a lot of money and so it put him through college and medical school and then he served until he,

he died just after he got out in his 30s, his early 30s. So he was, he loved the Navy. He was, he looked great in the Navy. I just have a lot of,

I wanted to be in the Navy, but anyway. You wanted to be in the Navy. Yes, I did. And your father passed away in his 30s. Yes, he did. So a lot to unpack on a much longer show. Yes, thank you. We'll talk about be in the Navy. Yes, I did. And your father passed away in his 30s. Yes, he did. It's a lot to unpack.

Yes, thank you. We'll talk about that later over drinks. Anyway. My father was in the Royal Navy. He was a frogman. Really? Yeah. Wait, are you English?

Yeah. Well, I used to be a dual citizen, which explains my incredible wit and humor. And terrible design, taste, and lack of cooking skills. But anyways, both my parents are British. You know, you need to invest more in our relationship. I can't believe you didn't know that. You know what? We're going out next week.

We're going to talk about all this. You always say that. We are actually. You always say you're taking me out and you never do. I'm going to your book party. You always say that. I hate book parties. I'm going to your book party.

Oh, it's going to be awesome. I'm literally staying in New York longer to go to your book party. Yeah, I appreciate that. We will sit in the corner. I will praise you. Literally dozens and dozens of my fans are showing up. Speaking of wins, and then you can do your fail, is Scott's book is what? It's number 13 on the Apple bestsellers list?

That's great. Not number 14. Not number 14. Lucky 13. I talk about a weak flex. Algebra of happiness. It is not the calculus of happiness. It is not the calculus of happiness. It is not the trigonometry of happiness.

Those are the sequels. How many people roll through the door and say to the kids, the big dog's number 13 today. I'm number 13. Oh, man. I'm number 13. That's typically to get, you know, when I'm about to have sex. Oh, no.

You hate to talk about this. You know what I yell out to put my partner in the mood? You know what I yell out? It's time to pay the rent. All right now. Just to get everyone in the mood. Scott. Yeah.

What's your fail? This is your fail this week, but what is your other fail? My other fail. Number 13. Hearing you say that, it's like, that's what I have in my life. I'm number 13. And by the way, you know these bestseller lists? They subdivide it so many ways.

It's like hardcover nonfiction from an angry professor who eats a Chipotle. And I'm number 13. Anyways, my fail is the ARC fund. This is my new whipping boy, of course, is WeWork. They've raised $2.7 billion. You know, and about $4.5 billion of that is Saudi money, by the way. Oh, great. Couldn't happen to nicer people.

They're now buying the building that they rent the floor in. So they've started an investment fund. And it's really unusual. I'm fascinated by the WeWork model because most hedge funds go out of business because they invest long, they invest in assets that are illiquid, and then they borrow short. And that is their investors can pull out their money anytime and they end up in a mismatch. And that's what's going to happen with WeWork. And that's my prediction here is that they sign 10-year leases and they try and arbit with short-term rental rates that are greater, similar to what you do in a hotel room, where 365 days of a hotel room, and I'm parroting the article in Recode, is greater than the cost to rent a similar apartment.

But what happens when, through a recession, when people stop renting or going into these things and they look at this just horrific balance sheet, this company could literally... Someone's going to lose an eye. It's going to be ugly. And then the other thing that happened, last week when we talked about our big prediction

about Tesla coming undone, I usually, whenever I mention Tesla, the fanboys come out. Oh, man, I'm adjacent to you. It's horrible. It's so angry at you. And people are so passionate about this company. And this was the first time

where I was critical of Tesla. And the majority of the comments were, no, the stock isn't going below $100. The company's not going to get sold, which is the prediction. Yeah, that was a lot of discussion, yeah. They said,

a lot of people wrote me a very thoughtful article saying, this company's going bankrupt because it's got $11 billion in debt. And when you add in the liabilities around the warranties, that this company, if it gets into a death spiral, won't be worth the debt

and it'll come out of a pre-pack bankruptcy, which I thought was... Such a good car. It is a great car. Yeah. Great. It's really interesting. So you think it's going to go bankrupt this week?

No, I don't know. You know what? I still... No, I think there's real value here. I think even with $11 billion in debt, there's tremendous value. And I also want to $11 billion in debt, there's tremendous value. And I also want to acknowledge, Tesla has been good for the world.

It's sort of, he's checked that box. It's been a great thing for the world. But I just think economically, at the end of the day, they've been metal, terrible industry to be in, very hard for an independent player. It's like single title publishing. You can have an amazing magazine.

You can be whatever it is. Vanity Fair couldn't survive on its own right now. It just doesn't work. The industry dynamics don't work. And it's the same industry dynamics here. And I think you're going to see the Germans catch up in a big way. But my point is, I got a lot of really thoughtful feedback from people talking about the balance sheet. So thank you. Did Elon call you? I have not heard from the big E. And something tells me I'm not going to. I might. I don't know. I haven't looked at my email. Yeah.

Yeah, you know him. I do. What's he like? I don't know. I don't know. What's he like? He's fascinating. Although, you know who I want to roll with? And by the way, he does think this is a – he thinks the survival – I did a good podcast with him, but I talk to him about this a lot.

The survival of companies like Tesla, he says Tesla in particular, is critical to the planet. I think he has a – I mean people have all kinds of opinions about him, but I do think he really is, you know, it is linked in with climate change. It's linked in with a lot of things. So whatever you think of him, I think he's done something significant here. New part of, new segment on the show, Cara, before we go, and it's called Who Scott Wants to Roll With. And that is, I mentioned, no joke, about six months on this podcast that I wanted to roll with the CEO of a big tech company in Coachella. And they called my bluff and they said, you know, so-and-so wants to meet you in Coachella. And I freaked out. I just couldn't handle the pressure. Who is it? I'm not going to tell you. I just

freaked out. But so I got to aim lower. So the guy I want to roll with, and if he's out there and if anybody knows him, I'm going to take him out in New York. I think he and I would just slay in New York. Who is this? I don't even know his name. Gary from Veep. I want to roll with that guy. Oh, I know him. I think that guy is one of the best actors.

He was also in Arrested Development. That guy, let me think. What's the word, Cara? He's in those commercials. He's a gangster. That guy's a gangster. The guy who, he's a longtime actor. He's fantastic.

Yeah, he was on one of my. I think him and me and La Esquina, a few Don Julios on the rocks. And Lizzo, right? That's Gary. And who's that? Oh, that's that ugly, angry professor. Boom. No, it's the happiness.

Boom. People are going to buy us drinks. Predictions is this is not going to happen. That's my prediction. So go ahead. What is your prediction? So you're into power couples. I assume you heard that Stuart Butterfield of Slack and Jen Rubio, the co-founder of Away, are getting married.

I wrote him a lovely note about it. Whoa, whoa, whoa. Hold on. What? Yes. Stuart and Jen are getting married. Getting married. They did a whole thing.

Wait, hold on. The CEO of Slack and the CEO of Away are getting married? Yeah. Oh, God. That's awful. Jesus Christ. Why? They're getting married? Oh, God, that's awful. Jesus Christ. They're lovely people. Oh, my God. I don't know them, and I hope it just implodes.

No, it's not. They're lovely people. People that successful should not have children. In any case, that's what's happening. That's awful. Yeah. I told you, the finer people just procreate, what do we say? All right, what's your prediction? What's my prediction? En envy with a side of bitter.

So my prediction is a breakout show. And this is a, you know, I love television. I have a new breakout show. Okay. So I spotted Killing Eve. I said Killing Eve was going to be huge. It's the next big thing is this amazing show called Fleabag. Oh, right.

You love that show. It's a great show. Next big thing. All right. Fleabag. You like Killing Eve. Turns out they're lesb Oh, right. You love that show. It's a great show. Next big thing. All right, Fleabag. You like killing apes. Turns out they're lesbians, right? That's all things. Whatever.

You say that like it's a bad thing. It's not. I'm just saying. Everyone knew where that was going. I'm totally into lesbians. You know what kind of person is really into lesbians? Lesbians. Men. Men.

I got a lot of questions, Kara. That's an entirely different show, but I got a lot of questions. Yes, you're going to meet my lovely girlfriend at your book party. I'm bringing her. You have to be nice. You are? Yes, I'm going to bring her. You're going to be really nice.

I think I met her at South by Southwest, didn't I? Yes, I think so, and you're going to meet her again. You'll see. Yeah, she seemed very nice. She's lovely. You can talk to her about lesbianism if you want, if you feel like it. I'm in. I got a lot of questions. Few drinks, open bar. This could get

interesting. We have no answers for you, just so you know. This could get interesting. No, it doesn't get interesting. It gets dull to lesbians because they have to endure it so much. Anyhow, we'll try our hardest to try to talk to you. Cinemax has taught me different. Cinemax makes it seem very interesting. Every time you go to a good place, you go to a bad place.

It's just like super. You can't help it. I am who I am. Okay. All right. Love me. Don't judge me, Kara. We're going to go now.

All right. Have a great week. Have fun at your son's poetry reading. Poetry reading. And then my son's going to prom. My other one's going to prom next week. There's all kinds of end of school things. Yeah.

So it's very exciting. Just talk to me about prom. Does he have a date? Do they take dates still to prom? He did a history presentation. We had to practice that. I've been deep into end of school stuff. Does he have a date for prom or do they not do that now?

Of course he does. They have a bus. They have a bus that goes. And we have a picture taking a bus and they stay over one of the parents' houses. And they all stay together. That's nice. So they don't drive and drink or whatever the heck they do. Anyway, he's very excited.

He has a beautiful jacket. And I got my other son a beautiful jacket for his eighth grade graduation. So I am deep into moments with my sons. Anyway. These are the moments. These are the moments. These are the days of our lives. Good morning yesterday.

You wake up and time has slipped away. I'm doing a Kodak commercial that I love. We're still a grain of sand on the blink in the cosmic universe, but this blink matters. Prom matters, Gara. Okay, all right. I'll make We're still a grain of sand on the blink in the cosmic universe, but this blink matters. Prom matters, Gara. Okay, all right. I'll make sure I take a lot of pictures for you. Anyway, Camila Salazar directed Pivot this week.

She's new to us. Welcome, Camila. Nishat Kerwa is the show's executive producer. Thanks also to Eric Johnson. Thanks for listening to Pivot from Vox Media. We'll be back next week for another breakdown of all things tech and business. Please write to us on Twitter. Scott loves it.

You do. Anyway, Scott, thank you so much for coming, and I'll see you next week. I'm very excited for our lunch and your party, and I promise I will wear clothes and everything. It'll be great. Do you feel like your leads never lead anywhere? And you're making content that no one sees, and it takes forever to build a campaign? Well, that's why we built HubSpot. It's an AI-powered customer platform that builds campaigns for you,

tells you which leads are worth knowing, and makes writing blogs, creating videos, and posting on social a breeze. So now, it's easier than ever to be a marketer. Get started at HubSpot.com slash marketers.