Pivot - Israel-Hamas War, Search for a Speaker, and Guest Esther Perel

Episode Date: October 13, 2023

Kara and Scott discuss how the Israel-Hamas war is getting covered on social media and the influx of misinformation. Then, Republicans still can't decide on a Speaker of the House. Plus, the failed talks between SAG-AFTRA and the studios, Birkenstock's underwhelming IPO and layoffs at the Washington Post. Finally, our Friend of Pivot is psychotherapist Esther Perel, who shares wise words on grief and loneliness. Follow Esther at @estherperel, subscribe to her podcast Where Should We Begin? and be sure to check out her upcoming course, Turning Conflict Into Connection. Follow us on Instagram and Threads at @pivotpodcastofficial. Follow us on TikTok at @pivotpodcast. Send us your questions by calling us at 855-51-PIVOT, or at nymag.com/pivot. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

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

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

And I'm Scott Galloway. So a lot going on, Scott. A lot of very serious stuff. I don't quite know what to say. The news has just been relentless, largely due to the situation in Israel and Gaza. A terrible conflict happening, attacked by Hamas, who I consider terrorists, on kibbutzes and a concert and everything else. So there's going to be a lot to talk about. I don't really know what to say because it's been really upsetting to myself, but a lot of people.

It's really hit a lot of people quite hard, I think. Yeah, I have an aunt and cousins in Israel, and we immediately got on WhatsApp and created a group family chat. And my, I think she's 81-year-old, Aunt Jean, you know, we got a message saying they've sealed the door and, you know, she's living alone. They've sealed the door so no one can get in or out. And now it's up to our military. I mean, you know, just an 81-year-old woman. Yeah. And I don't even want to pretend that

begins to even describe the horror. But yeah, this is, I mean, I don't know about you. I'm so inclined to share my opinion on everything. I have not. I have tried to like, I've tried really hard. It's interesting because everyone, I got a lot of people saying, what do you think of this? I was like, I don't know enough, first of all. I'm not an expert. I'm not an expert. And you both, neither of us are. We'll talk about misinformation and things like that. But I've declined. And what I've done, it's not because I don't think this is horrific. It's that I feel like we should let people who are on the ground there talk about it, the survivors talk about it, on the ground there, talk about it, the survivors talk about it, let the media do its good work here on this, figuring out what's going on and questioning governments and figuring out what's happening. And to have these hot takes is really, to me, distasteful.

I was asked to come on a Saturday morning show and I said, they said, we'll talk about this, this in Israel. And I'm like, I'm not qualified to talk about Israel. I have had Fareed Zakaria and Ian Bremmer on my pods this week, but I'm just not that interested in what, you know, my wife's personal trainer or a DJ or an SNL cast member thinks about this. It just, it really does crowd out, and then you have this, you know, you have this fog of misinformation of which Twitter is a smoke machine right now. Yep. It really brings to bear just so much weirdness about the way we communicate information. I also think, and I'll come back to this in wins and fails, I personally think there's a lot of both sideism in the U.S. media that is abhorrent, but I'm sure a lot of people feel differently.

Well, it's hard to pull out between civilians and terrorists and, you know, and aggression. I think that's what makes it so hard is these many, many civilians caught in this terrible conflict. I 100% understand that sentiment, and this is an emotional response, but I'll make it anyways. I could not tell the difference between Hamas leadership and civilians when they were parading around a naked woman bleeding from her genitals, and there were non-leadership citizens rooting them on. I would agree. I would agree. So, yeah.

It is, and I think we've got to sort through the misinformation part of it, because it's designed to make you angrier. And people taking advantage of this, to me, is the very worst thing of all. But today, obviously, we'll talk about war in the Middle East and the disinformation on social media, something we can talk about with some knowledge. There's also a continuing chaos in the race for the House speaker. Another thing playing out all over social media, kind of interesting. We'll speak with a friend of Pivot, renowned psychotherapist Esther Perel, who's a good person to talk to right now about grief and other things. But let's talk about other news first, and then we'll get to this.

A lot of it pales in comparison, but it's still happening. The Hollywood strike news continues. Negotiations between Hollywood studios and SAG-AFTRA have been suspended. Now they're yelling at each other again. The two parties could not come to an agreement on the streaming revenue and AI. On the most recent round of discussions, SAG-AFTRA has asked for a share of the streaming revenue, and the studios say it would cost over $800 million a year and an untenable economic burden. SAG-AFTRA has been on strike since July. They're really getting up there in days. The writer's strike went on, I think, for 148 days.

This is in the 90s, I think, at some point. Any thoughts on this when it ends? It seems like they were moving forward and everyone thought everything would get wrapped up and they could start making movies again by January. Yeah, they don't realize it, but the thing that just extended the strike is a guy living in Florida named Nelson Peltz. Nelson has filed, has flipped his- Explain who he is. The Smiling Crocodile is his nickname. is he comes in, he actually has a background in business, and he'll come into a P&G and he'll say, this is where you're not only not being smart strategically, but you need to cut costs. And he's more often than not right. And he's not destructive. He doesn't start throwing Molotov cocktails. I think he's a pretty good exemplar for what it means to be a productive

activist. He was in Disney, wanted them to do a spin, cut costs. They did mostly both of those things. Stock has plummeted since then. So he's back up with an increased share stake, and he's probably going to seek two board seats. So the last thing Bob's... I mean, look at Disney's business as it relates to the strike. And market dynamics trump. We're staring at an anthill when they don't really notice the elephants walking through the camp. And the elephants are the following. This company, Disney, has several businesses.

It's Parks Business, which is totally unaffected by the strike. It's Streaming Network, which quite frankly, other than Netflix, is in the best position to endure an ongoing strike because of its unbelievably deep IP and content bank. It's broadcast networks, which are declining so severely anyways, that, okay, this doesn't help, but this is an asset that is already not adding to shareholder value. And now one of their largest shareholders is telling them they need to cut costs. So can Bob turn around and say, we need to get these good people back to work and we need to start making, you know,

I forget, I don't even know, Sheldon, Young Sheldon, whatever people watch on broadcast television, despite the fact that we're going to have to give some costs. I mean, Nelson is basically saying, don't you dare. Right.

Although interestingly, he doesn't want them necessarily to sell the networks yet. You know, he's like, just a second here. Right. Although, interestingly, he doesn't want them necessarily to sell the networks yet. You know, he's like, just a second here. We have to think about everything. He actually obviously, obviously leaked to the journal. And his son is apparently an important part of this, too, a former Goldman Sachs banker. His activist firm now has this called Tryon, has a stake of about 30 million shares in

the company. It plans to push for multiple board seats, as I said, one for Peltz. Disney's stock is at a 52-week low. Nine-year low. It's at a nine-year low. It's been a year since Baug got returned to his CEO spot and less than a year since Peltz dropped his first proxy fight. Most people think that Peltz will be getting a seat on the board, which will be interesting to see how that affects the negotiations. There are several seats. Most people don't think Iger can resist this at this point, that he has to bring him on. And he'd be smart to. As someone who's been an activist and

been on the boards of companies that were the target of activists, the smartest thing to do is to put your ego aside and say, sure, come on in. The water's fine. And then they have to shut up. They realize that their problems are much easier to diagnose from the outside than the inside, and you can get back to work. But there's a couple pieces or a couple anecdotal observations here that I think are relevant. The first is I am tangentially involved in Hollywood because I'm trying to get projects done. Original scripted shows, all my books have been optioned for different stuff. And what I've heard from writers, and I don't think they're just trying to, I don't know, stroke my ego, is that the writers are in a much worse place now. The studios

have used this pause to reduce the numbers of writers and right-size their cost structure. And while the people who didn't need this, who were making a lot of money, who were kind of in the top rung of the hierarchy, they're fine. They're back. They lost five months, but they're fine. Not all of them are fine. That's not true. I've talked to a lot of them.

They have cut a lot of what they did, what Scott's referring to, is they dumped all the deals. They had suspended them, and then they universally dumped all of them, no matter who they were. And they're, of course, going to hire people back, and some people are on longer contracts that they have to honor. But everyone is, I have talked to top writers, and they're like, I don't know. I don't know if I have a deal. Is that right?

Yeah, I think they're very nervous about, and whether these deals are coming back that way. Yes, 100%. And they're now sort of stuck because there's all kinds. I have a number of projects too. Let's say we have a number of projects, Scott and I. understand the economic squeeze for sure. And they're angry, I would say, many of them at the unions for pushing at this moment in time, and at the same time are now angry at the studios for doing what, of course, they were going to do, which is cut costs. So it's an interesting moment in that regard. Again, the media is focused on, because it's more interesting, the war between the red ants and the black ants over here, and this elephant walking through the camp that doesn't even have time to notice and doesn't care, is a company that, if it continues to grow the way it's growing, is going to be bigger than Meta by next year, and will be bigger than Alphabet in three years. And that is TikTok.

And the core audience that all of these people are trying to reach who ring the register, young males who go to movies, buy shoes, buy coffee, buy cars, they are now spending more time on TikTok than every one of these platforms combined. And can I also point out they're also spending more time on YouTube watching. I just had a friend who just, someone who is not a young person, gave up cable because it costs $400, is now on YouTube TV because it has everything

and now has local. I was like, what? This is someone who is such a cable person and just said, and it made me think, should I just get YouTube TV? 100%. Do you watch,

I only turn on the actual screen of my TV now for Premier League football. I can't figure it out. I watch this tank movie called T-34 because if you reach the age of 30 as a man, you have two choices. One is to give into World War II history, the other is smoked meats. Those are the only two things you can choose. I've chosen World War II history, and I watch Meet the Press on YouTube now. I'm not even turning on the screen in the living room anymore. Same thing with, I just was on a Frontline thing, and my son watched on. Oh, you were on that, the PBS thing. Yeah, I was on the Twitter thing. Oh, yeah, I want to watch that. Quite a bit, actually.

I don't look very good in it. Oh, I bet you were. I bet you were. You saw two little men. I bet you saw. It was me and Yoel Roth and some others. So, actually, it was great. It was well done.

I bet that was a real love fest for Elon. No, it was. No, it actually was a very fair. I actually wrote the creators. No, I said you were, oh, he has a bunch of adorable shots of him mugging for the camera. It's very fair. I would say he should love it because it was much nicer than it needed to be. Was it Michael Lewis or Walter Isaacson nice?

Oh, no, no, no, no, not that nice. We'll get into that later. Yeah, what is going on with those two? Anyways, I don't see the strike ending anytime soon. 87, 87 and a half percent of SAG-AFTRA actors, 180,000 of them, they don't even qualify for health insurance because they make less than $23,000. When there's 10 times more supply than demand, you just have absolutely no leverage. Yeah. All right. Well, one of the other places, no leverage, the Washington Post cut about 10%, is trying to cut about 10% of disaster voluntary buyouts, very generous ones. Interim CEO, Patty Stone, said need for the cuts of 240 jobs is due to overly optimistic growth

projections. The buyouts will be roughly split between editorial and other departments and eligible employees will be able to choose to accept or decline a separation package. Earlier this year, the New York Times reported that Washington Post was set to lose around $100 million by the end of the year. This would save that if you actually pencil it out. The company already did small rounds of cuts last November, and earlier this year, they're trying to avoid layoffs. Just for disclosure, my wife works at the Washington Post, so it was part of this. I should also disclose I dated Patti Stone. No, you didn't. She told me directly. I reported this out and she said, tell Scott we never dated. She literally

came up to me at an event last week and she goes, reiterate to Scott it wasn't a date. 100% a date. I felt insecure and she wanted nothing to do with me. See above date. See above date. And by the way, Kara, let's be honest, we could fill the SoFi Stadium

with people who refuse to acknowledge they have dated me. Let's be honest. She joins a long crowd of women who will not acknowledge dating me. Okay. All right. In any case,

Patty, who is well regarded, she has not thought of you once in the many years that you had dinner. Was Emily Ratajkowski asked about? Maybe not. Also, no. Also a hard no. I have to tell you, people at The Post love her and really dislike Fred Ryan, just so you know.

Almost polar opposite. She's an excellent operator. I think she herself was like, where are all the financial controls? You know, she comes from a background of doing that in all her many jobs. She's a baller. She was a big wig at Microsoft. She was. I think the employees had such a bad time with Ryan

on the last, when he, remember, he walked out of the meeting, the layoff meeting. Are you giving us a little pillow talk? No, I'm not. Is that what this is? No, I'm not. No, no, I know more than my wife about what's happening at this company.

No, no, no, no, I don't know. She's just an employee. No, I do, I do. I talk to people. So, and it. I do. I talk to people. And it's not her place to talk to them in that regard. So what do you think about this? They've got to do something. I don't know.

What do you think? What do they got to do? I think every newspaper should be owned by a trust or a benign billionaire. They don't make sense. The good work they do. or a benign billionaire. They don't make sense. The good work they do.

The story that epitomizes everything for me was when I was at a board dinner for the New York Times, William Keller, who was the managing editor, had to leave in the middle of dinner to try and go negotiate the release of a couple of journalists from the Taliban. And meanwhile,

Google is slicing and dicing our content and making billions. And it just dawned on me that this business is not economically tenable. But what would you do? Is there any, would you get bigger? Would you sell? What would you do?

I want an actual answer. They already sold. They did what they should have done. And that is they sold it to someone who's been the least bad or a good steward. And that is Bezos has kept his hands off. He supplied them with, I think, a productive and healthy combination of capital, but also fiscal discipline such that they can continue to do great work. But these businesses, I think the model, where do we go? I think the model needs

to be something like what they do here in the UK with the BBC. And that is there are certain, and I don't know if this applies to the New York Times because I think it's seen as having too much political bias, but long-form journalism does just not make for a good economic model. There are niches that'll survive, companies like POC, maybe the information, but these are not, these businesses to scale the way they want to scale. And also, a lot of journalists correctly think their work is precious. And I've been in some of these meetings. They don't respond well to what I'll call the basic notions of a profit enterprise. They don't think, there's a certain amount of, I think, quite frankly, denial that they should be subject to those forces,

because they're doing very important work, and maybe they shouldn't be. But there's a certain amount of, I think, quite frankly, denial that they should be subject to those forces because they're doing very important work and maybe they shouldn't be. But there's just no getting around it. Look at USA Today. Look at Gannett. They have good journalists. They have a good company. It's in free fall. This is a difficult, difficult business.

What do you think? I think they should either – I think Jeff Bezos should either grow it and be like the New York Times. There's room for three, maybe. Wall Street Journal, Wall Street, New York Times, and Washington Post. I think he should either grow it or else just maintain it at cost, right? At break-even. And then that's what he's got. He's helping that. And that's what she's trying to do.

And break-even means it's small, right? Or maybe make a little bit of money. she's trying to do. And break even means it's small, right? Or maybe make a little bit of money. But if he wants to really have a pretty good business like the New York Times does, not a tremendous business, because if you look at the numbers of the Times, it's not a tremendous, it just isn't. It's just, it's not that big. I think to have a decent business, he's got to buy some stuff, but he's not going to do that, or he breaks even and then keeps it going with quality. And everyone recognizes what's happening here. That's what's hard for journalists. One of the things I used to get dinged for is being so interested in the business. I was like,

this isn't going to work. This isn't going to pay for itself. And I think they have to get smart about the business and not act like it's their right to have a job. I thought the announcement by the union was okay until they went, this rich billionaire, you know, owes us. And I was like, does he? Does he owe you? Like, you know what I mean? That was the one thing that really struck me as irritating. The majority of billionaires, whether it's Sam Zell or this guy, they go and play in traffic in this world called media. They get their eyebrows and their eyelids burned off and they step away from the grill. They take enormous losses and they just get the hell out of Dodge. And they're like, okay, guys, have at it.

I think the Washington Post has become increasingly relevant since Bezos took over. I think he's been a fantastic steward. And it speaks to not only him, but just the good work. I mean, I always thought of the Post as just kind of this regional paper covering the hill. And over the last five or six years, I increasingly find they do a great job of covering business. I think their features are astonishing. They do fantastic work. Astonishing. But as a business, you don't want to invest there.

It's kind of where it should be. It has somebody who I think is a reasonable steward. Well, they could invest a little more. It could do okay. It could make a nice little profit. They could do it if they grew. It's one of these either grow or just maintain. That's really what he's doing.

Isn't that what he's doing? Kind of. I think he's just maintaining. I don't know. I think you could probably grow. I think you could pick up some stuff. He has grown the business, though, hasn't he? Yeah, I know, but I'm talking about filling the... I think what The Times has done

by filling in the gaps with their Wordle or The Athletic is the right way to go. And just a little bit. Not too crazy, but like, clean it, clean up, bring up, bring in the stuff you're missing. Like, they could do better with food. They don't have any food. Their food section is quite good, but it doesn't have a cooking app.

You know, they don't have enough subscription businesses. They don't have a podcast business to speak of. You know. Is that right? Yeah, that's the kind of stuff. They could fill in and then be a good little business of lots of different things. lots of different things. If you took the New York Times management team and creativity and their infographics team and their sales team and their leadership and their journalists, and you ported them over to any other business, this company would be worth tens of billions of

dollars. I just feel like it's just, I don't know. They could compete a little better, I would say. Anyway, lastly, Birkenstock's stock ended 12% below its IPO price on Wednesday in a disappointing Wall Street debut. People were hoping for more, I know. The poor performance marks the worst debut by a company worth more than a billion dollars in two years.

Birkenstock is all alone. The many recent IPOs have dropped below their opening trade. Almost all of them, I think. Quick rant about IPOs? Well, it's not quick, but in some, IPOs have gone from something that used to be a way for Main Street America to participate in the upside of a Google or an Amazon or a Netflix. And then the private investors, as evidenced by what

Don Valentine said in my class at Haas, that the way we screwed up was we should have held onto the stocks longer. And basically, private equity in VCs have done that. They hold onto the companies much longer. And until it's about to run out of steam or they sense it's running out of steam, then they take it public. It's kind of IPOs have kind of become the last stop on the pump and dump train. And they purposely minimize the float, restrict the float to create a sense of artificial scarcity. These things get a one, two-day pop, and then they fall below their IPO price. I mean, Allbirds and Rent the Runway, off 96%. Warby Parker, off 75%. Blue Apron, off 90%. And I'm not immune from this. I invested privately in a company called

Better Mortgage that is off from its private market last round valuation of $6 billion off 95%. And it's all the same thing, Cara, that is institutional and wealthy investors have figured out a way to crowd capital into the part of the market that grows, the private markets where they can get liquidity. And then basically the public markets are simply becoming a dumping ground where these people can fling their unicorn feces at tourists to the unicorn zoo. It's no longer a public good. Unicorn feces. Is that glittery? Rainbow feces. I love it when those gorillas throw feces at their captors. Do you? And they hand signal, I want to go back to Rwanda. Yeah, exactly. All right. So, don't be buying into these things. What's the move for an investor?

Buy index funds from Vanguard and stop pretending that you have any insight, that you can beat the market with your stock picks. And buy ETFs and index funds for low cost, low fees. The alternative investments and the whole IPO jazz hand thing is basically to provide liquidity to the private guys and trusting that you're the greatest fool in the supply chain. And do not buy when someone makes a deal with Gisele Bundchen. That's my feeling.

I was thinking about you because I started reading excerpts from, I love Michael Lewis. I do. And I love, I think Walter's arguably going to go down as the greatest buyer. But you pointed this out correctly. You said that they started one book and ended up being another. And the way I would describe it is these guys can't write a good book about a villain. They can only write books about heroes. They like the people they start to like.

They're embedded. When they get caught in the middle of the transition of hero to villain, they don't know what the fuck to do. They stay with hero. If you read Michael Lewis's things, he's just so enamored by his cute little video gaming and aw, shocks. And he just like, he was so co-opted by this guy. It's so interesting when everyone was like,

oh, he was like video, talked at video games while he was in meetings. I was like, that asshole. Of course, all the men are like, isn't that interesting? I was like, no, he's- Well, Sergey and are like, isn't that interesting? I was like, no. Well, Sergey and Larry used to do that on their BlackBerrys. I hated it. You know who wouldn't stop hitting their BlackBerry,

checking their BlackBerry when I was having lunch with them? Who? Patti Stone-Seifer. Exactly, because it wasn't a date. Because it weren't. I'm kidding. Patti was enraptured looking into my eyes. Looking into my eyes.

Oh my God, Patti. She is horrified right now. She's literally horrified. I'm going to tape her saying it wasn't a date. Join the line of people refusing to acknowledge a date with a dog. I'm literally going to have to now tape her saying, Kara, it wasn't a date, okay? And then I'm going to have her husband come around and smack you.

A lot of dogs at the park smell his butt. A lot of dogs at the park smell his butt. Not so. Anyway, let's get to our first big story. When we taped earlier today, we didn't have a speaker of the house, and we still don't. The majority of our conversation took place before the ostensible nominee, Steve Scalise, withdrew his name from contention and has been edited for clarity. Scalise stepped aside saying, quote, our conference still has to come together and we're not there. There are still some people that have their own agendas. No shit, Sherlock.

Donald Trump has endorsed Jim Jordan for speaker. I don't know if that helped. A lot of Congress people, GOP Congress people hate Donald Trump, just so you're aware, because they say so off the record. Although I think the rest, I don't know if you saw him just recently, but he seemed insane in a recent speech. How do you think it gets resolved? You know more about this than I do, but my sense is this gets resolved, that the GOP is like, this is starting, we're starting to look really- Starting? Yeah.

Well, okay. And also, people are going to soon start equating. So, a lot of people think that, or the thesis is that there's a correlation between Israel being as divided as it has been in its history, and this opportunistic infection of this terrorist attack. And then they say, well, are we putting ourselves, are we making ourselves vulnerable with this kind of self-inflicted disunity and disorganization? It's just a bad look for the Republicans. Isn't there a pretty big contingent of ABJ, anyone but Jordan? Yes, there is. And there are also, there's two things that

are speaking of the Washington Post. There's apparently quite a devastating investigative piece coming out about what happened there. And George Clooney has a documentary too. So, you know, they name him Speaker and then these two pieces of information coming out showing whether or not he was culpable in the sexual abuse of young wrestlers is, I think he's got to know that's coming. Maybe that's why he wants to pull out. I don't know. Yeah. So I'm going to go out on a limb here, but they very rarely give gold statues out to people for exonerating Republicans. Yeah. Yeah. I'm going to, I have seen that documentary before I've seen it. And that's not to say it won't be true. Right.

But I can tell you what it's going to say. I know. I think they've done reporting, Scott. I think this is... George Clooney and his journalistic integrity. But I think the Washington Post is... I think... Listen, I've seen a lot of the statements from these wrestlers.

It's not... This is not cooked by any stretch of the imagination, from what I can tell. It's not. I'm not making a value judgment on what happened or didn't happen. There is no documentary that wins an award without a smoking gun. And the incentives around Hollywood Doc and George Clooney are not. I think it's the post piece that I think they're more worried about. You remember that guy who was running and that turns out he used to try to meet young girls in the mall, that thing? I think it's that. Oh, the Georgia senator. The guy running for, no, Alabama, the guy running for senator in Alabama. Whatever, that guy. I'm just saying, I think it's that level of reporting. Oh my God. And he almost won. win that. You know, he didn't win. So, but I think it's on that level of, I think that's the worry.

I've heard that. I've heard that. And we'll see when it comes out. But I don't think, I think the Post would not print a story if it didn't have it cold on something like this. So anyway, so it's a mess. You know, it's a mess. I don't know. They have to like have a leader and just stick with the leader, essentially. The House is at a standstill, that's why, right now. And it makes the situation in Israel even worse, and also the government shutdown. They can pass, apparently, the Pledge of Allegiance. That's what they can pass. It's not doing any business. The House is not doing its business, and they're in charge, and it's not good for them politically. It's not good for the

country in general, and they have to get themselves the fuck together, right? I mean, really, that's it. That's really it. I think it's not a good look for them. And they can't blame the Democrats. They can't blame anyone but themselves for this behavior. But in that vein, they can't do anything about Israel, which we really need bipartisan work on what we're going to do there, because it's a very delicate situation, and we need as much focus by our leaders as possible on it. So let's go on a quick break. When we come back, we'll talk about social media's role in the war in Israel, and we'll speak with a friend of Pivot, Esther Perel. 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. Uncertainty. Self-doubt. Stressing about not knowing where to start. In. Plans and guides that make it easy to get home projects done. Out. Word art. Sorry, Live Laugh Lovers. In knowing what to do, when to do it, and who to hire. Start caring for your home with confidence. Download Thumbtack today.

Scott, we're back. We're going to look at how the Israel-Hamas war is playing out on social media in the days since the Hamas terror attack. we've seen a flood of propaganda, misinformation, and fake videos on X, as well as other social media platforms. Researchers have also uncovered a propaganda network of 67 accounts on X, coordinating posting false and inflammatory content. now Meta, to tackle the spread of misinformation on his platform about the conflict. It has financial, there's fees involved if they don't do it, if they violate. For years, Twitter was the place people turned to during global conflicts. It was a flood of misinformation. I don't know what to say. I used to be able to find pretty, I can still find the news. Bloomberg had a headline, Israel-Hamas conflict was a test for Elon Musk's ex and it failed. Some of the false content includes footage from a video game, video from 2015 and a fake White House memo. A lot of social media companies except for X are also trying to figure out the rules of the road, who can post, what to post, how to handle violent images. More to come, I suspect, if Hamas starts killing

hostages as they say they're going to online. Obviously, I think Biden made quite a good speech. as they say they're going to, online. Obviously, I think Biden made quite a good speech. There's only so much that he can do, too, besides support. And U.S. boats are going into the area nearby to show a thing of strength. Give me your overall thoughts, and I'll give you some more information. I'm still stuck on you saying they're sending boats over. Are you referring to the— Fleets.

The S.S. Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group? Yes, carrier strike group, yes. So just FYI. I'm not a big military person. It's there basically to discourage any group from joining the hostilities from different borders. Yes, that's correct. And these things are incredibly powerful, and I would argue worth the money. I think Biden's doing all the things you're supposed to do. I think Biden gave one of the money. Look, I don't- I think Biden's doing all the things you're supposed to do.

I think Biden gave one of the best. I think when he's remembered, and I think he will be remembered positively, I think the speech he gave on Israel three days ago was really powerful. And, you know, this, look, what do I think? I have bias here. I have family in Israel. I'm Jewish. My mother, you know, had it not been America didn't push back on anti-Semitism, it decided to push back on fascism. But had they not done that, you know, you'd be hosting this podcast with Mark Cuban because my mother's life would have ended with a train ride.

life would have ended with a train ride. And I find the level of both-sideism around this conflict where people immediately go to, yeah, it's wrong, but we need to be thoughtful about the victims and the ongoing crisis in Gaza. And we had a fraction on a per capita basis of the people murdered in 9-11. If the proportionate number of people in 9-11 as what happened at Israel were killed, it would have been about 35,000 people would have been killed in the United States. And by the way, the New York Times, which is now engaging what I would call just abhorrent both-side-ism because of their own guilt, endorsed the invasion of Iraq. And a decent proxy for the right side or the wrong side, and whenever you're in war, there's going to be massive victims in a humanitarian crisis, but a decent proxy for who's on the

right or the wrong side is to imagine what would happen if each of those sides was in control and stated in their constitution since 2007 in a group that has not been reelected, but seems to maintain power and maintain a certain level of public support, central to their Constitution is the extermination of Jews. And when they're in charge for 72 hours, we saw what they did. Now, imagine if the Israelis were in charge, and you don't need to imagine because the Israelis are in charge. The Israelis could do pretty much what they wanted. It might enter a quagmire. It might turn public sentiment against them.

But they are most definitely in charge. And the only thing we know in terms of how this will play out, the only thing we can be certain of is they will be exponentially more humane now that they are in charge than what Hamas decided to do for the 72 hours they were in charge. This Bocidism is fundamental to the anti-Semitism that continues to haunt the world in America. And that is, we want to believe that Jews are co-conspirators in their own genocide. That somehow, yeah, but aren't we, aren't Jews somehow to blame for what has happened here? I think the both-sidism in American media is just incredibly disappointing. the Israelis are doing as a news event and the toll.

They have to do that. They can't, it's not both sides of them to say, all these buildings and show these pictures and what's happened. The brutality of what Hamas did, who are terrorists, Hamas is ISIS, as far as I can tell, is a very different thing. And as they're beginning to uncover it, listen, there's a lot of controversy

over what happened to, but these Hamas went house to house and killed people, parents in front of their children. They killed children. These are people who lived on, civilians who lived on kibbutz. It's are. It's not a stack ranking thing here, but there is a very clear behavior on the part of Hamas in order. They did this for a reason and did it in this way. And it resembles so much of what happened to the Jewish people over history, right? What they were doing here.

So I agree with you. I think it'd be very difficult if I was running a newsroom how to deal with this in terms of just reporting it. And social media companies, and at least they're thinking about it, social media companies don't even know what they can do. The Washington Post quotes a Stanford law professor who says there are no good options for a platform trying to do responsible content moderation in the middle of escalating conflict and humanitarian atrocities. A number of schools in Israel and a few here in the U.S. asked parents to delete Instagram,

TikTok, and X from their kids' phones to prevent them from seeing graphic images and videos, the real ones and the fake ones. And on X, which I think is where people did go for news, they have spotty verification, propaganda accounts, bare-bones trust and safety team, even though Linda Iaccarino just canceled a Wall Street Journal event because she's working on it, which I thought was a heinous, heinous thing to say. Thank God. Linda, really, come on. Like, really. You know who, you know, a media platform when this is all, this is all over will be seen as the winner here is I think it's going to be TikTok.

Maybe so. I haven't watched watched TikTok as much, but let me just say, the EU issued a warning to Elon about X violating European rules of disinformation as well as violent and terrorist content. If he doesn't comply, he could face a fine of 6% of X's revenue or total.

You're on Twitter. What do you think? I'm not on Twitter. I'm shocked by how much misinformation is on there. Like, you have to really dig through. You know, I can get to the news people who I actually, whether you say both sides, I can get to the, you know,

Clarissa Ward on the ground, or I can get to videos of interviews with survivors. And I can get to, and those I trust, right? But it's, you have to dig through. And then besides that, you have to dig through porn and Cheech and Chong, you know, all these terrible ads. Elon, for his part, tweeted a response saying, please list the violations you allude to on

X so the public can see them. Merci beaucoup. He's such a jerk. He's such a jerk. You know, for Linda Yaccarino is also getting involved, sending a letter to you detailing what exactly X is doing to tackle this. He, of course, also boosted a terrible account that was making, anti-Semitic account, there's no other way to say it. But Zuckerberg also received a similar warning.

Again, she has decided not to appear at this Wall Street Journal event and said with the global crisis unfolding,on and her team must remain fully focused on X platform safety. With what? With like, they've got nothing to do that. Threads, of course, is around. It's actually been growing again. Casey Newton wrote on Threads for Platformer, noting that the app's purpose may be coming to focus after events in Israel. I'm getting a lot better information on Threads, I can tell you that. Although Adam Massouri continues to say Threads is not going to amplify news, but also clarified they're not anti-new threads. I can tell you that. Although Adam Massouri continues to say threads is not going to amplify news, but also clarified they're not anti-news. I don't quite, they don't want to, I know they don't want to dig into this, right?

I don't know. I don't know, Scott. I think it's hard to get, I think they're doing a terrible job. They're doing a terrible job on Twitter. I believe you. I also want to chat about the situation at Harvard, which has erupted in recent days

following a coalition of student groups putting out a statement holding Israel, quote, entirely responsible for the violence. Harvard leadership eventually put out a statement condemning Hamas's actions, but things have not quieted down. Hedge fund CEO Bill Ackman, who literally, like, he's on the right side of it, and then he ruins it, is asking Harvard to reveal the names of students who signed the letter so as to, quote, none of us inadvertently hire any of their members. Similar situations are playing out in college camps across the country.

Former Harvard president Larry Summers, who was one of the first to call out Harvard's silence after the statement, is encouraging everyone to take a breath, saying, asking for a list of names. That's the stuff of Joe McCarthy. Harvard Crimson has reported a doxing truck on campus that's showing the names and faces of the students allegedly affiliated with the group that signed the letter. Some of them say they didn't know who was in the letter. Okay, they're from Harvard. New York Times has a story

about a law firm rescinding a job offer from an NYU law student for inflammatory comments, and they really were about the Hamas attacks. Thoughts? Scott, I'm going to let you go with this one. I have never been more embarrassed to be affiliated with NYU. So first, I think universities should be provocative places. And the initial notion of placing a university outside of the city center was such that people could say really offensive things. I think she showed extraordinarily poor judgment putting the NYU logo on that statement. But I also think it's the law firm's rights of free speech or free assembly or private practice to rescind her offer. I don't want to say that's

playing out the way it should, but it'll be a life lesson. You have a lot of life lessons in college, but college students should be able to say, in my view, very offensive things. The idea of unmasking identities hits my gut as troublesome. That, okay, you want kids or students to push the boundaries of intellectual freedom and free speech. This is supposed to be the place that we're being provocative. And the idea is, I personally believe the far right have become apologists for terrorist states, and the far left have become apologists for terrorists, as far as I can tell on campus, where the far left is overrepresented. And I find it very disturbing. Having said that, if somebody is under the illusion that they're signing something as a group,

when somebody gets angry and wants to unmask them and is a powerful person, that to me feels somewhat counter to the gestalt and one of the wonderful missions of a university and that is freedom of thought and speech and that it's a bit of a safe place. You know, I smoked too much dope in college and I was forgiven.

I'm not suggesting you should be forgiven for all of your actions and speech there. But college is meant to be, I don't know, we give people a bit of a wider berth. Long-winded way of saying, and I want your thoughts, I'm uncomfortable with the notion of unmasking at the behest of powerful, wealthy alumni. Yeah, that was, I was literally like, literally it was so clear this group did the stupidest thing ever at the exactly stupidest moment, the worst moment. But Bill Ackman, sit the fuck out of these things. Just sit down. Like, you know what I mean?

Like, he couldn't pick a worse thing to say. And even Summers, who was quite vehement about Harvard silence, had to like, no, whoa, wait a minute, dude, that kind of thing. Because obviously, it ruins their entire point, which was this was a heinous thing for them to do by doing something heinous. Like, it's just, oh. But Bill was mostly right. They shouldn't hide behind the Harvard logo. They were wrong to say these things. Harvard leadership should have immediately. No, this is Larry Summers said this.

I agree. No, I know. I'm saying, I'm saying, I think most of what Bill said was correct, but then demanding as a large donor that they unmask identities when people didn't think they'd have. There's just something,

it just doesn't feel right. I'm sorry. I've been watching, speaking of watching him on Twitter, he makes a fool of himself on a weekly basis. Bill? Yeah. Yeah.

He's just, I don't know. I like Bill. I like Bill. You may, but he's an idiot on Twitter. Let me just say, he plays an idiot on Twitter. Sorry, Bill. Well, I'm not. Well, here's the thing.

You just got to get off Twitter. Come on my podcast. We'll talk about your idiot. I'm sorry. Get off Twitter and you'll like people more. Yeah, exactly. No, but literally, every time he says something, I'm like, is he that smart? Oh no, I guess not.

You know, at least Larry Summers had a good sense to say list of names. He's suffering from the same Dunning-Kruger effect that I suffer from sometimes. And that is, I think Bill's a brilliant investor. And I also really appreciate Bill's support of Ukraine. He's actually supporting a good friend of mine's efforts in Ukraine. But here's the thing. It's actually supporting a good friend of mine's efforts in Ukraine.

But here's the thing. It's like being famous and being really good at something doesn't mean we necessarily have to hear from you on everything. That is correct. Thank you. And I want to be clear. I struggle. I struggle with this. And I get called a lot.

People think because I know something about X that I should be able to speak about Y. that I should be able to speak about why. And on stuff that is this sensitive, it's not a bad idea to listen and just say, okay, I mean, the university is in a difficult place, right? But when you start throwing your money around as a wealthy alumnus- And threats. And threats.

It's like, if Bill wanted to say, I'm deeply disturbed by this, I don't think people should be hiding. Pull money. And I'm not going to give money. I think actually the CEO of Apollo handled it very well. He said, I'm just not going to give more money to an organization that doesn't immediately repudiate and disavow this type of hate speech. That's perfectly fine.

You know, like Chick-fil-A, don't eat there. Like, that's my thing. I'm like, just sit this one out, fellas. That's what I feel You know, you don't like Chick-fil-A, don't eat there. Like, that's my thing. I'm like, just sit this one out, fellas. That's what I feel like. Sit this one. This one, you sit out. You can go on and on about woke culture as much as you want, but you're really irritating and tiresome.

In any case, it's a very difficult thing, and we'll see what happens. It's going to be in the news for a while, and people have to just, like, this is a very serious thing. When people's lives have been irreparably damaged in a brutal and terrible way. And we should all just take a minute before we have an opinion about things we don't know about. Anyway, speaking of which, about how we should be our better selves, let's bring in our friend of Pivot.

in our friend of Pivot. Esther Perel is a psychotherapist and an author. For over 30 years, she has been counseling people struggling with love, infidelity, grief, and loneliness. As the host of the Vox Media podcast, Where Should We Begin?, Esther invites listeners into her office each week as she helps real couples work through conflict. Esther, we're glad to have you this week because a lot of people are struggling with what they're seeing in the news. So where does someone even start when it comes to dealing with what's happening in Israel on an emotional level? First of all, hello. Hello. Hi, Esther. To both of you. So in this moment, we are not working through anything. This is really in the immediate. People are in shock. People are emotionally numb. People are in deep, deep grief. People are frightened. There is terror.

There is counter-terror, and on all sides. But we're talking about the people who have just begun to understand that there was a massacre of epic proportions and basically an intergenerational trauma of epic proportion that is in the make as well. And the response when one is attacked and one is an animal as we are is that we try to counterattack and to go at it stronger, harder, and to defend ourselves and to not feel the helplessness, the weakness, and the terror that invades us. And all of this is deeply animalistic. And it's very important probably to not take many, many moral stances on this, especially for the

people who are far away. There is so much hatred, and it is very important that the people who are around these fighting factions not add more oil to the fire and not stew the hatred further. Hurt people hurt people and to the point that it really risks of dehumanizing us. We feel we have been dehumanized. We respond with the same, you know, we think it's going to protect us. And on occasion it does. And then sometimes it goes too far and it even destroys us. Sure. Sure. So there can be a struggle between trying to stay informed. I think a lot of people want to be and doom scrolling. How do you find that balance? If you've seen an image once, don't. If you read the story, don't go look for the image.

Don't get trapped into the, it's a nine versus a 10. It's not sure that the image is really the right image and it really tells the story that it pertains to tell. It's a total mind fog. There is, it's a little bit like 9-11. We tell people titrate. Don't just watch it over and over again. You will not sleep. You literally will not sleep. I am not sleeping. And I didn't watch much. I just talked to people and that's enough. So what you do after that, when you feel like the tide is rising inside of you and you just

feel like you don't know what to do with all of this, is the most important thing is to come together with others, to experience collective trauma collectively, to understand that this is changing something in the world, not just in the Middle East. And to read poetry, to talk about what's happened, to ask people where they are. I think allyship is extremely important in a moment like this.

And all of those who miss the allyship of extremely important in a moment like this. And all of those who miss the allyship of Black Lives Matter will understand it even more so now, that when somebody writes to you just to say, I know you have an attachment to that place, or I know you know people there, or I know, you know, you were there recently, or something that says, I know, I see you, there's nothing else for me to say. And you answer, this means a lot. You thought of me. I exist in your collective awareness.

And that is a lot. Well, let me ask you, how are you doing? I just drove up here two hours and spent one of those two hours on the phone with my friends and my family. Checking in. And, you know, you listen, you try not to judge. We all, you know, we can get into political discussions. We know what the story is. We are a bunch of informed people, but this is not the moment.

It's like people don't have much rationality. So you hold, you contain, you make them feel like you want to hear it, you can tolerate it, you care, and you create an envelope, an arms, you know, that just says, I'm holding you in your grief, in your rage. Please be careful. Please don't go and do irrational things. But, you know, nobody is deciding a lot of these things alone. What helps a lot, in general, what helps a lot is for people to get active, to do something, to not feel like you're sitting there helplessly, just taking it all in. Volunteer, send stuff, write to people, alert people, inform, read carefully and read stuff that doesn't just describe your side of where you stand. Just try at the best you can

to stay open, to understand a little bit how the other side, whichever side you're on, because there is so much and social media is not helping with that. It's like if you've said one word in this favor or to think, to say that you're thinking about this person, you get slashed. Shame on you for not thinking about that side. Shame on you, shame on you. And every side that, you know, you cannot hold a moral, this is not the time to even keep a moral balance. You must take sides. And that side basically denies everything from the other side. There's very little nuance and very little complexity. So every time you see a place where people are able to not bite at each other, but just hold each other, we are a little closer to our humanity.

It's so nice to see you, Esther. And congrats on all your success. Thank you. You're welcome. There's a crisis of loneliness. And when I think of your work, I think of advice you give around relationships in sort of the middle to the end part of the relationship. And what about on the front end? What advice would you give to one in seven men don't have a single friend, one in four can't name a best friend. A lot of women

will say they're having a really difficult time finding a viable mate. A lot of men have just given up. And what advice would you have for a young man or woman who really feels a sense of loneliness? Not only advice for them romantically, but how to address this crisis of loneliness. Yes, yes. To connect, yes. To connect. Yes. So it's very interesting that I'm talking with you now as I am giving a talk tomorrow at Bard College at a conference called Friendship and Politics. And I'm doing a whole talk on the head as I'm trying to answer you very shortly. Modern loneliness masks itself as hyper-connectivity. And so people have easily a thousand virtual friends, but no one that they can ask to feed their cat.

A lot of friends, no friendship. Yeah. And that loneliness that is really a kind of depletion of the social capital is extremely powerful. It's more to men than to women, but it's quite general. It's very broad. It comes in part, and I'm going to say that first before I say what I recommend, because I think that we didn't understand what accompanies us on that on an everyday basis. because I think that we didn't understand what accompanies us on that on an everyday basis. I've been very interested in talking about modern loneliness as it connects to the rise of the other AI, artificial intimacy. So I am looking at how the rise of artificial intimacy is, you know, cultivating a social atrophy, and with the social atrophy, a compending social and loneliness. It's these three steps. Because, and I'll tell you one question that I keep asking that I had no idea was going

to be so pertinent to what can people do. Because it's a question that I've asked, I just came back from a lecture tour in Europe. And I said, where you, as you grew up up when you were children, did you pay freely on the street? I asked it in London, in Israel, in Budapest, in Berlin, I mean, and the majority of people learned to play freely on the street. They learned social negotiation. They learned unscripted, unchoreographed, unmonitored interaction with people. They fought, they made rules, they made peace, they made friends, they broke up, they made friends again. You know, they developed social muscles.

And the majority of these very same people's children do not play freely on the street. And I think that an adult needs to play freely on the street as well. That's, for us as adults, that means talking to people in queue with you, talking to people on the subway, talking to people that you create any type of book club, movie club, this sports club, whatever interaction with, and you stay in the practice of experimentation of doubt, you know, of the paradox of people. You need people very much. Marisa Franco talks

about it. You need people, but the very people that you need are also the ones who can reject you. So people are a paradox. And we do not have the practice at this moment. Everything about predictive technologies is basically giving us a form of assisted living in which you get it all served in uncomplicated, lack of friction, no obstacles, and you no longer know how to deal with people because people are complex systems. Relationships, friendships are complex systems. They often demand that you hold two sides of an equation and not that you solve little problems with technical solutions. And that is intrinsic to the modern loneliness.

And that's where the victory is, right? That figuring out those complexities. And that's why romantic comedies are two hours and not 20 minutes, right? That's what happiness is, navigating those complexities and engaging in victory. Real friendship, real love, real sexual attraction, no? So, when I was in London now, we had almost 4,000 people at the theater, So when I was in London now, we had almost 4,000 people at the theater, loads of them, people who had come alone to the talk, which we asked them to stand up. And we asked the people who knew, who were sitting next to them to actually introduce themselves so that they wouldn't leave as the new kid in the class. Like church.

They used to do that in church. Yes. Yes. Yes. Like church. They used to do that in church. Yes, yes, yes. And what I was talking about was about part of the podcast was to bring people into listening the way that you actually know what goes on in your neighbor's life. Today, your best friend can break up and you never saw it coming. constitution, the desire to bring people to listen in on others so that they could see themselves and create these invisible connections by being a fly on the wall of another couple's session or another individual. So it's interesting you say that. I just was reading a story about a guy who was 102, and he said the reason is he introduces himself to everyone every day. And he's quite good shape. They love those 102-year-old people stories. But he kept saying, I just say hello. I make new friends all the time, which was interesting. And it was interesting because it was very analog, obviously. It was physical, face-to-face, where you're up near people to going to people? And I've taken it from him because I think it's a great thing because people just, this shock when I say that to people is fascinating because no one ever asked

them how their day is, right? And I saw him do it and I thought, huh, and you could see the response and I started to do it, which I think is, because again, whether it's someone, you know, you're going through TSA or whatever, you're buying something at the store and people you don't know. And it was really interesting. And one of the things, though, is that people do interact. Again, they're always looking at their phones. They're online. And I think this situation in Israel is made even worse because of that, right?

There's nowhere to grieve. You can't have a discussion about it. And so everyone's interacting there and not with each other because you certainly wouldn't have the same, you know, biting that you talked about in person. You just don't. Some people might, certainly, but most people don't have that biting when they're in a physical situation. Because I see your eyes, that means I have an entrance into your soul. When I am writing on social, I do not have to see the consequences of my words. I can slash you, I can hype you, I can go in every direction, but fundamentally, I am only experiencing a partial connection.

Now, some of these connections are very powerful, but I think you use the social platforms to say, tonight we are meeting at the house of so and so. Everybody bring some food. Let's sit and think. Talk together, grieve together, sing together, read poetry together, make dark jokes together, whatever it is, but be not alone with this so that we actually will sleep better. Physically, we will sleep better than if we just enter into a rumination. The platforms are useful, but they are useful in order for us to get off them. You know, I asked another

question on this tour that really spoke to the loneliness and the question you just asked. How often do you find yourself working the whole day on your laptop? Then you can't wait to close the screen. Then you go home, but you're too tired, and all you do is watch TV. Then while you watch TV, you're also scrolling on your phone. Then while you're scrolling on your phone, you lift your head and you see that the people in the room are doing the exact same thing. This is modern loneliness. This is artificial intimacy. I am there, but I am not present. And then I talk to you about something that really matters to me. And your answer goes, uh-huh. Uh-huh. And you know that the person is kind of listening, but not really.

Unable to listen anymore or not good. That's all of that is modern loneliness. It's different from the I'm alone in my room and I don't have, it's actually I'm talking. But in the experience of talking, we experience what used to be part of the experiment of the still face. You're a hundred, yeah, I know talking. But in the experience of talking, we experience what used to be part of the experiment of the still face. The mother that doesn't respond. Yeah. So there's being in the presence of strangers, there's engaging with strangers verbally. Have you thought anything about, I don't know what the right term is, non-sexual touch or affection as a means of making you feel closer to people. The reason I bring this up,

I'm trying to be more affectionate with my male friends, and I think it's very rewarding and very difficult. And I've been thinking a lot about male affection. Have you thought about, and its role it plays in trying to be less introverted and express love and cement friendships and just feel better about yourself. I've been reading this article saying it's very healthy for you. Any thoughts on non-sexual affection?

Can I bring, Sarah, let me give you some context. Scott was recently at lunch where an old lady came touching his arm, who turns out to be an incredibly famous podcaster and cook. Scott, she's very famous, just so you know. Really? She's very affectionate? She's lovely? Yes, very. What's her name? Ruthie? What's her last name? Ruthie. Someone sent me a link. I'm going to send it to you. She owns the River Cafe. I had lunch. This woman invited me to lunch. I had no idea who she was. And 20 minutes into the lunch, she started holding my hand. And it absolutely stilled me. And at first, it was uncomfortable. And then by the end of the lunch, I thought, this is the nicest thing that's happened to me all week.

You know who used to do this? My father. My father would talk to you and he would hold your arm or he would put his hand, you know, he had this, anybody, he just, you know, I want to tell you something. And he would just, and I think when I go to men's groups, when I attend weekends of men's groups, there is a tremendous amount of affectionate touch and nurturing, physical nurturing. Because we can live without sex, but we can't live without touch. And that we become irritable, we become angry, we become depressed. And so I think there is a cultural factor about male touch in the United States among white men in particular. Other cultures are much more permissive in the physical communication between men, period. In fact, often very homophobic cultures have a lot of physical touch between men.

Middle Eastern cultures are very affectionate with males, male to male. India, I mean, lots of, you know. So here it usually gets ritualized through sports. You know, there are code languages that allow you to touch without it having to be called touch. But as a whole, absolutely, absolutely. And I think that one of the ways I address it, because I'm a family therapist, is to tell the mothers and the

fathers, don't stop touching your boys. By the age of three, we touch our boys significantly less than our girls, than our daughters. I would agree. That is so important. My sons sit on my lap all the time. I'm like, they crush me, of course, but it's interesting. And one of the things that I just was thinking about when I come home, both my smaller kids hug my leg. And I don't know, it's just the most lovely, you know what I mean? Like, and of course, they're so easy to it. And I'm wondering when they unlearn it, right?

Because they're so grabby, touchy, you know, they touch you all the time, kick you and stuff like that. There's a moment where kids unlearn it. So, Naomi Way talks about it as second grade. She's actually going to be at the conference I'm at. And she talks about how the intimacy of boys, the physicality of boys, the erotization of the physicality that boys then get involved in, and to call it homoerotic rather than simply to call it, you know, love and friendship, you know, is rather than, she talks about it as second grade. By that time, the boy comes back from school and something fundamental changes in the way not only he touches other kids, but also speaks about his internal life, begins to adhere to what is now often called the male code of

stoicism, fearlessness, competitive, that whole thing. But I think that parents collude in it. It's the school, it's, you know, the child doesn't grow by itself. It grows in a context filled with spoken and unspoken messages. Yeah, yeah. I have one final question. Your parents actually met during a time of grief. They were both Holocaust survivors and you're sole survivors of their respective families. I'm just wondering how that affected you.

Speaking of parents, your father touched you a lot. He was still open to love, right? Which is an indication of that. What was the lesson you learned from them? Wow, there are many lessons, you know. And of course, I think about it a lot now in light of what is happening. But I think one of the very important things that I did learn is not to be ravaged by hatred, not to think that, and to actually embrace life. They survived and they were going to make the best of it.

They were very erotic in that sense. They cultivated aliveness, vibrancy, vitality, and, you know, curiosity. They talked to people. And in a way, they managed to separate the person from the group that the person was a part of. I think, you know, my father was an illiterate man who had gone three years to school, but he was a true humanist. My mother too, but my dad, you know, basically had a way of just engaging with anyone he would meet on the street, at the gas station, you name it, and start to talk. I think he understood long before, and he told me that

always, don't get fooled by money, don't get fooled by education. The only criteria is decency. Who respects you and treats you with dignity and decency? And he learned in the concentration camps to distinguish between those who still had an inkling of humanity and those who were purely sadistic and psychopaths. And in that sense, he basically said, look at the person, give them an opportunity and don't judge.

It's so easy to judge. Don't think that because they are from your tribe, they are definitely better or because they are from the other tribe, they are by definition evil. It's a lot more subtle and a lot more careful and judicious. And I think that if I carry that, and I really attribute that to him and to them. I'm just curious for you personally, Esther, what is your North Star here?

What is your why? You're doing, you know, your reach is expanding. If you tried to distill it down to a box, you're trying to check. What are you trying to accomplish with your different media channels? So, you know, my motto is often to say the quality of your relationships determines the quality of your life. Relationships, as I see them, are undergoing massive upheaval.

And we don't have the skills. We are really atrophied. And the pandemic only added to that. And the pandemic only added to that. And I will do anything I can via Where Should We Begin, which now has 40 episodes a year versus 15. The subscription on Apple, the live events. We're going on tour now in the U.S. to a number of different cities to help people gain confidence about their relationships. Learn to connect. Not just know that it's important, but know how to do it, careful not to put romantic love on a pedestal at the expense of many other very important relationships, friendship being one of them,

mentorship, creative partnership, like the two of you, what you do, that is a very strong bond too. And so all types of relationships at home and at work, if I can be one voice that contributes to helping people manage those better because they can cause tremendous grief, but they can also give us tremendous bliss. And I would like to be at the heart of that. You know, for a long time, dealing with relationships was fluff. It was considered feminine and feminine skills, especially in the workforce. And feminine usually means that you can idealize it in principle and then disregard it in reality. suddenly so important again, it's kind of the last thing that distinguishes for the moment from the machines. There is a real need and hunger in every sphere of society to address the subject of relationship. Sometimes it's called mental health, but what is mental health that doesn't

include relational health, that doesn't include physical, sexual, and emotional health? They all go together, for God's sakes. So I speak through relational health, but I'm a clinician, I'm a practicing clinician, and I'm basically talking about mental health in a way that is accessible without losing the complexity. Well, you're fantastic, and you're the perfect person to have on today when everyone is reeling. And I just can't quit, Scott. That's the way it goes. No, but Esther, I want to say you've helped me. And I find that the wellness industry is mislabeled.

A candle in a meditation app isn't going to make you well. It's relationships. And that's who you speak to. I think you should rebrand yourself as the wellness industry. Yes, you are the wellness. You can also use candles in meditation apps. Those are nice, too. She's always correcting me, Esther.

I'm just saying. It's true. There's nothing wrong with candles. Why would you not like candles? Passive aggressive. Candles are so, I have a candle right now. You know, when I see the two of you, I'm dying. Kara, Kara, love me, don't judge me, says Esther Perel. Tell her to love me, not judge me, Esther.

Oh, I'm going to judge you. I'm judging hard. Esther, did you know I dated Patti Stone? She did not. We're not getting into it. Don't, don't, don't. Don't ask what that is, Esther. It's a fantasy and it's starting to become stalking, don't. Don't ask what that is, Esther. It's a fantasy

and it's starting to become stalking actually at this point. Anyway, you can hear Esther every week on the Vox Media podcast Where Should We Begin?

We love her. She's one of our best friends of Pivot. I'm going to make you best friend of Pivot. And we really appreciate your... Thanks, Esther.

Everything you do. It's always a pleasure to be with you both. I'm dying to delve in and to do a little couples work that I will resist. We can have a session. We'll do that. We're bringing you back. That's the seventh ring of hell you don't want to go into. We will bring you back and you will understand the hell I go through every single week.

No, I know. I love Scott. I love Scott. So we're going to bring you back for that. You're going to do couples therapy with us. We'll do your show if you'd like. seamless when one sees you. And one doesn't know how much relationality goes into creating what the two of you do. And I think that it would be so interesting for people. Here is this man and this woman. They have their lives. They have their partners, kids, et cetera. They have their philosophies. And they don't try to harmonize all the time. They show the tension. They show

the differences. And they, at the same time They show the tension, they show the differences, and they at the same time show how much they like each other. I mean, fundamentally, that is still the thing on top. You can tolerate a lot of differences when you like the other person. So I want to have a chat with you on that. We will do it. We will do it. It's actually the heart of the show, I think. It'll be a quick episode.

I'm in it for the money. It will not. This is why people listen to us, because they like it. People say that. That's the only thing people ever say to me. I like listening to the two of you disagree. Anyway, Esther, enough about us. We will come on your show. We would love that, because we need some shrinking, especially Scott. Shrinkage is an important issue with him. All right, Esther, thank you so much, and we'll have you back soon. My pleasure. See you soon. Okay, Scott, we are totally getting shrunk by her. Don't you think that would be fun?

That doesn't sound fun to me. Sounds totally fun. That's what people talk about is our relationship. They would like to hear more about it, and I think we're going to do it. We're doing it. So my ex-wife, we went to marriage counseling, and within 15 minutes of the first session, we were getting divorced. I have been in a similar situation, but I think it would be revelatory of us talking. I mean, people want to understand. It's like doing psychedelics.

If it's not broke, don't fix it. We don't need to do it. We're totally doing it. It's working. We're doing it. We're doing it. We love her. You love her more than I love her.

I love us a girl. I'm just saying. So we'll see how that goes. Everyone knows what's going to happen. We're going to have a session. Anyway, 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. Would you like to go first? Why don't you go first? I'm going to do all the talking. Well, I want to say, I want to shout out to a lot of these women winning Nobel Prizes. There's a whole bunch of them. One woman who was sort of sidelined won one at her thing.

Harvard professor Claudia Golden just got one for economic sciences and her research on women in the labor market. Covers the causes of gender wage gap, the evolution of women's participation in the job market. She's the third woman to have won the economics Nobel, the first to have won it solo since it was established in 1969. The Washington Post's Catherine Rampell, one of my favorite writers, had a great line in a column about Golden's win,

saying, she draws on what has been, what it has become, to help imagine what could yet be. I just, congratulations. I've been following Claudia Golden for a while. She's just one of these sensible people. And interestingly enough, there's a lot of, there's a new, I think it's an Apple TV show with Brie Larson called Life in Chemistry or something about a woman, Lessons in Chemistry, which is coming up that I'm also excited about, about another woman who's sort of been pushed down, but sort of evolves as a cook, a TV chef, which it just looks great. I just am really pleased about that. Fail is a lot of these people doing hot takes on what's happening in Israel, people who are unqualified and somewhat cruel in terms of not understanding

how complex and sad this is and understanding people's feelings. I wish everyone would just sit it out, everybody who doesn't, is not doing reporting and based in fact, or our public leaders should, of course, speak. But this back and forth dunking is just really, it's fine when it's over a sports team, fine. But this is not that. And you cannot apply the dunking nature of social media to everything. It's depressing to watch. And you look like an idiot when you're doing it, everybody. And so if you don't know what you're talking about, you should keep it to yourself. So I have a couple wins and a fail. My first win is Chuck Feeney, who started a company selling cigarettes and alcohol to returning soldiers, and then ultimately turned into duty-free shops or DFS, and amassed a wealth of $8 billion. And then in 1980, decided that the

trappings of capitalism and consumption weren't for him, and he sold all of his yachts, his cars, started taking the bus, started flying coach, and started a foundation, and anonymously gave away $8 billion. And as of his death, he had less than $2 million and was living in a two-bedroom apartment with his wife. In San Francisco. That's right. And it ends up that that $350 million donation that got Cornell's tech campus and Roosevelt Island built, what do you know, it was Chuck Feeney. And I just think there's just so much, I love the saying that good people plant trees the shade of which they'll never sit under,

and exceptional people kind of do it at night when no one even notices that they're doing it. And it's just such a great role model, I think, for what it means to be a real citizen, to not want to decide I'm going to give it all away while I'm living, to show that kind of discipline, to not give into the trappings of a modern day signaling and consumption. And, you know, to do these things and not, not only not want, but refuse any recognition. I thought that was a great obituary. I had forgotten about him. I knew he was doing that.

And just a real, you know, and one of the things that I liked was he, he had a foundation, again, that they gave it away quietly. And he fired someone who was running it. He wasn't winding it down fast enough. He was spending too much money on. Creating jobs. They become their own job. Yeah, exactly. And then he gave it down fast enough, wasn't spending too much money on- Because they're creating jobs. They become their own job. Yeah, exactly. And then he gave it to someone else who managed to spend all the money,

like to give away all the money. And I just, just a really cool guy. And very, all the stuff he gave to was so sensible and smart. You know, it's instead of like discussing, someone was talking about philanthropy to me the other day. And they're like, why don't people just give money to solve the problem instead of trying to re-engineer? They were talking about tech. I think I was the head of the Rockefeller Foundation.

Instead of redoing everything, like if they need a wall, pay for a wall, right? That kind of thing. And I don't mean a wall to keep out immigrants. You know, whatever they need. If they need a schoolhouse, get them a schoolhouse. Yeah, non-sexy stuff. Yeah. Great guy.

Great one. Yeah, I love the term they use from the James Bond of philanthropy. Anyways, Charles Feeney dead at 92, a wonderful, meaningful life. My other win is I had this wonderful weekend with my 16-year-old son. We saw Arsenal, specifically Martinelli, score an incredible goal in the 89th minute to beat Man City, who has been unbeatable for so long. Stadium goes crazy. Just an amazing afternoon. But that was the second best thing we did that weekend.

The evening before Saturday night, my son and I went to go see Mike Birbiglia's The Old Man in the Pool. How'd you like it? Oh, we loved it. But you knew I was going to love it. I did. I did. It was a Scott show. Oh, my gosh.

Talking about relationships and family. And that guy is so. I love him. He's so funny. Such a good guy. Such a good guy. And it's so heartfelt. And it's like, I mean, you laugh, you cry.

Yeah. And. Oh, you cried. I'm sure you cried during that show. It was waterworks. And he was so generous and came and took a picture of my son. But anyways, my win is Mike Birbiglia and this wonderful old man in the pool that's going to NYU just penned this abhorrent tirade, anti-Semitic, bigoted, throw every other bad word at it. But that's not my fail. My fail is that when you reach, when you have anti-Semitism begets more and more bigotry and anti-Semitism.

Anti-Semitism was the epicenter for what ended up being the persecution of a lot of vulnerable groups. And we always think, oh, it was 6 million Jews that died. Yeah, but it ended up being more like 12 million people that were murdered under the auspices of kind of, you know, let's get going with this antisemitism thing and clear out gay people and dissidents and politics. and dissidents and politics. So, if you don't stop the blast zone, if you don't ring fence it, it can lead to a lot of bad places. And I saw a small example of that, and that is that Fox News reported on this NYU Law School student bar association president. But the headline, the byline when they report about it is, non-binary NYU student bar association president loses job after defending Hamas terror attack on Jews. And what I would ask Fox News is that if they do, in fact, unmask these folks at Harvard, are they going to say heterosexual president of Harvard? I mean, what they're saying is, here is, I'm going to go out on a limb here. And I think a lot of non-binary people say really stupid fucking things, and so do a lot of heterosexuals, but there's no evidence showing that there's greater proportions around either of them.

vulnerable group and try and connect it to bigotry and anti-Semitism, you're not helping. You're making things worse. You're starting to give people license to start being bigoted and persecute rings outside of the circle. So I think people should just... I think a big media organization that does a lot of responsible reporting, and I do think Fox News does a lot of responsible reporting. Jennifer Griffin has been amazing there. I think Fox News does a lot of responsible reporting. I go on Fox a lot. But what on earth does non-binary status as an NYU student have fuck all to do with this? You know why they did it.

They do it. Well, of course I do. NYU student have fuck all to do with this. You know why they did it. They do it. Well, of course I do. They want to demonize this group and start getting people, giving people cloud cover to continue to demonize this group. Scott, Scott, I think I love you.

I think. I don't know. I think I love you for the same. Esther, we're in love. We're in love. I think. I think. Anyways, this anti-Semitism and bigotry, if it's not ring-fenced, can lead to more and more unnecessary bigotry. And this is a perfect example of that. And my other loss, I just can't help it. I just think

there's terrible both-side-isms around this issue. There's going to be an enormous humanitarian crisis in Gaza, just as there was an enormous humanitarian crisis in Japan and Germany, and especially in Germany, as they brought to power a leadership and supported that power, the one of the extermination of the Jews and fascism. And I do think there is cause for concern. I agree with you that we should report on it. But there is a right side here. And I find that the far left and the media's attempt to come across as balanced or nuanced or whatever you want to call it, again, I think the far right is demonstrating really disturbing support for a terrorist state and the far left is giving, and the media, quite frankly,

is giving too much support and credibility to a terrorist organization. There is a right and a wrong here. Anyway, so some of my wins and my fails. All right. This is excellent. Our whole message is sit this one out, people. Stop. Sit this one out. This is not the moment. As Sestir said, this is not the moment, right? I think that's excellent advice from her. Anyway, Scott, those are excellent, really, truly excellent. Anyway, we want to hear from you. Send us your questions about business, tech, or whatever's on your mind. Go to nymag.com slash pivot to submit a question for the show or call 855-51-PIVOT. Scott, that's the show and a spectacular show it were on a very difficult day and a very difficult week for the whole world. And as Esther said,

you got to start talking to people and in person and look in their eyes and have hard talks, but do it together. So Scott, read us out. Today's show was produced by Lara Naiman, Zoe Marcus, and Taylor Griffin. Ernie Intertot engineered this episode. Thanks also to Drew Burrows,

Neil Saverio, and Gada McLean. Make sure you subscribe to the show wherever you listen to podcasts. Thanks for listening to Pivot from New York Magazine and Vox Media. We'll be back next week for another breakdown of all things tech and business.

Cara, have a great weekend. You too.